Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, speedracer5 said:

Ooh. Little Darlings about two girls from different backgrounds (Tatum O'Neal and Kristy McNichol) attend a summer camp together.  They compete to see who will lose their virginity first.   It seems like something scandalous should happen with that premise, but for me it wasn't nearly as scandalous as another teen film, Fast Times at Ridgemont High.

i WOULD ACTUALLY (oops, caps lock) say that even though there is no nudity, FOXES is a little raunchier than FAST TIMES. (Of course, some might disagree.)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw Hopscotch last night (which for some unfathomable reason was rated R) and in the outro

Ben said the movie Times Square (1980) was coming up next on TCM Underground. It's about

two runaways who go to NYC. Like most teen runaways they form a punk rock band. According

to my DirecTV on screen schedule Foxes would be next. So Ben or someone else screwed up

because Foxes it was.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

i WOULD ACTUALLY (oops, caps lock) say that even though there is no nudity, FOXES is a little raunchier than FAST TIMES. (Of course, some might disagree.)

Ooh color me intrigued.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Vautrin said:

I saw Hopscotch last night (which for some unfathomable reason was rated R) and in the outro

Ben said the movie Times Square (1980) was coming up next on TCM Underground. It's about

two runaways who go to NYC. Like most teen runaways they form a punk rock band. According

to my DirecTV on screen schedule Foxes would be next. So Ben or someone else screwed up

because Foxes it was.

Believe one F-Bomb in those days was pretty guaranteed to get you an automatic R rating, wasn't it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Vautrin said:

I saw Hopscotch last night (which for some unfathomable reason was rated R) and in the outro

Ben said the movie Times Square (1980) was coming up next on TCM Underground. It's about

two runaways who go to NYC. Like most teen runaways they form a punk rock band. According

to my DirecTV on screen schedule Foxes would be next. So Ben or someone else screwed up

because Foxes it was.

TCM Underground was originally scheduled to show Times Square (1980) followed by Foxes (1980).  That was later changed to be Foxes (1980) followed by Rafferty and the Gold Dust Twins (1975).  So as you noted, the outro with Ben for the previous movie was not corrected for the new schedule.  Unfortunately these schedule changes happen all the time and TCM is not always able to make everything consistent.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, txfilmfan said:

Believe one F-Bomb in those days was pretty guaranteed to get you an automatic R rating, wasn't it?

That was the only reason I could think of for the R rating. It certainly wasn't for sex or violence.

Ned Beatty did drop a number of F bombs, though nowhere near Joe Pesci level. I guess he did

it enough to warrant an R rating, though that still seems excessive, but it was forty years ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cmovieviewer said:

TCM Underground was originally scheduled to show Times Square (1980) followed by Foxes (1980).  That was later changed to be Foxes (1980) followed by Rafferty and the Gold Dust Twins (1975).  So as you noted, the outro with Ben for the previous movie was not corrected for the new schedule.  Unfortunately these schedule changes happen all the time and TCM is not always able to make everything consistent.

That explains it, though it was kind of funny. I waited until the movie started and it was Foxes, which I had little

interest in seeing. Of the two, Times Square sounded the right note of the bizarre for an TCM Underground flick.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, cmovieviewer said:

TCM Underground was originally scheduled to show Times Square (1980) followed by Foxes (1980).  That was later changed to be Foxes (1980) followed by Rafferty and the Gold Dust Twins (1975).  So as you noted, the outro with Ben for the previous movie was not corrected for the new schedule.  Unfortunately these schedule changes happen all the time and TCM is not always able to make everything consistent.

the funny thing is, (as I recall the movie) there was really nothing in FOXES that would preclude TCM showing it in primetime...daytime maybe not, but genuinely, it would make an interesting double viewing with any of the 27 versions of LITTLE WOMEN out there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm very very sorry, but I need to talk about that half-hour's worth of TELL ME...JUNIE MOON that I saw some more.

WARNING: I am going to speak in broad stereotypes here, but please know that I know of what I speak.

So, I gather the reason for LIZA being all "PHANTOM OF THE OPERA" in the movie was that she went to the prom with a repressed homosexual whom she attempted to seduce. He couldn't "see it through" and, out of his twisted shame born of his repressed homosexuality, he KNOCKS HER OUT, takes her to a junkyard, removes the battery from a car, takes about 2 minutes to crack said car battery like an ostrich egg on the side of the car while LIZA is laying unconscious on the gravel, he then dumps the battery acid on her face.

THIS BOTHERED ME VERY, VERY MUCH BECAUSE:

1. Any homosexual, repressed or not, knows that it is in the CONTRACT: if LIZA MINELLI tries to seduce you, YOU CLOSE YOUR EYES, YOU THINK OF JUDY AND YOU SAY "YES."

2. The car battery acid plot point would be MUCH MORE BELIEVABLE of lesbians; I  find it extremely hard to believe that any gay man who actually knew where the battery was in a car- or that cars even have batteries that had acid in them- would then take the two meticulous, EFFORT-FILLED minutes to extract said acid when it would definitely involve ruining a manicure.

i PERSONALLY FELT LIKE THEY WOULD BOTH MOVE BEYOND THE INCIDENT AND SPEND THE REST OF THE NIGHT LAUGHING AND CRYING AND BRAIDING ONE ANOTHER'S HAIR.

 

in conclusion: stereotypes: the language of hate, sometimes yes, but sometimes a useful tool for life!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

The car battery acid plot point would be MUCH MORE BELIEVABLE of lesbians; I  find it extremely hard to believe that any gay man who actually knew where the battery was in a car- or that cars even have batteries that had acid in them- would then take the two meticulous, EFFORT-FILLED minutes to extract said acid when it would definitely involve ruining a manicure.

I am surprised by these remarks.  Not funny, not nice. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

2. The car battery acid plot point would be MUCH MORE BELIEVABLE of lesbians; I  find it extremely hard to believe that any gay man who actually knew where the battery was in a car- or that cars even have batteries that had acid in them- would then take the two meticulous, EFFORT-FILLED minutes to extract said acid when it would definitely involve ruining a manicure.

A well reasoned assessment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Thief  1952 directed by Russell Rouse  with Ray Milland  At long last i finally watched this film :a Cold War -Film Noir movie . Highly unusual for the time-even now- not a single word of dialogue a great thriller with Milland at the top of his game.I wanted to see this film since i was a teenager my father saw it as a teenager himself and mentionned this film as one of the best by Milland and a very special one.The sultry Rita Gam makes her very sexy film debut, she had a Golden Globe nomination as most promising newcomer and what a great figure... The important musical score got an Academy Award nominationThe film would fit in Noir Alley and on a SUTS day for Milland well he had one ONE in 2017 compared to others...I do not remember if he was ever a Star of The Month.I have never seen this film on TCM  and it is very hard to find.7.5/10

thief.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, nakano said:

The Thief  1952The film would fit in Noir Alley and on a SUTS day for Milland well he had one ONE in 2017 compared to others...I do not remember if he was ever a Star of The Month.I have never seen this film on TCM  and it is very hard to find.7.5/10

 

I don't know why I remember this, but RAY MILLAND has been a STAR OF THE MONTH on TCM, don't remember when, but for some reason I remember it was May.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

I don't know why I remember this, but RAY MILLAND has been a STAR OF THE MONTH on TCM, don't remember when, but for some reason I remember it was May.

An impressive memory!

According to an old lzcutter post, Ray Milland was SOTM for April, 2011.

🙂

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Vautrin said:

That was the only reason I could think of for the R rating. It certainly wasn't for sex or violence.

Ned Beatty did drop a number of F bombs, though nowhere near Joe Pesci level. I guess he did

it enough to warrant an R rating, though that still seems excessive, but it was forty years ago.

That was the reason. In the early 80s it was  mostly mandatory for most films that used the word even once to receive an R rating unless you successfully won an appeal (This would change when the  word was allowed in the new PG-13 rating late in 1984). A few won PGs on appeal: The Landlord, All the President's Men, The Last Tycoon, The Front, A Bridge Too Far, The Brinks Job, A Hero Ain't nothing but a Sandwich, The Last Waltz, Same Time Next Year, Stevie, Meteor, Inside Moves, Reds, Carbon Copy, Mommie Dearest, Tootsie, Missing, Terms of Endearment, Educating Rita, Lone Wolf McQuade, Phar Lap, The Right Stuff, Tank,  Harry and Son, Old Enough, A Soldier's Story, The Stone Boy, Careful He Might Hear You,  and Sixteen Candles.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, cmovieviewer said:

An impressive memory!

According to an old lzcutter post, Ray Milland was SOTM for April, 2011.

🙂

well, not that impressive. I did get the wrong month.

Although April and May are a lot alike.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/15/2021 at 1:32 PM, LornaHansonForbes said:

 One of the four girls (the Meg of the group I guess) starts dating RANDY QUAID, a guy in his 30's [she's 15 or 16; also HE'S RANDY QUAID!!!!!]. The relationship is presented as one of the only healthy ones in this film and it even ends with them getting married...i would be offended if the actress playing the 15 year old was not OBVIOUSLY NEARLY 30.

I noticed that too. Would not be allowed these days for sure, but its also pretty clear the actress is not a teenager. I have an internet friend who said when he turned 30: "I'm now officially old enough to play a high school senior in a Hollywood film"

Incidentally, there was another questionable scene in the other Sally Kellerman Underground title, Rafferty and the Gold Dust Twins, where MacKenzie Phillips (around 16 at the time) pretends that she is going to sleep with Charles Martin Smith when she's really after the money in his pants pocket. She gets the money, and he ends up in only his boxer shorts in a closet. (as opposed to his later screen appearance in Never Cry Wolf, where all of his bits were seen for a frame or two in extreme closeup.... and in a PG rated Disney film to boot!)

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CinemaInternational said:

Incidentally, there was another questionable scene in the other Sally Kellerman Underground title, Rafferty and the Gold Dust Twins, where MacKenzie Phillips (around 16 at the time)

I have to admit I avoided that one because neither actress holds much interest for me.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LornaHansonForbes said:

I have to admit I avoided that one because neither actress holds much interest for me.

The film was a bit oddball and not really very cohesive with a bummer of an ending. It was mostly painless though, in large part to the real feel for the landscapes and communities of the west that have mostly vanished from films today.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CinemaInternational said:

The film was a bit oddball and not really very cohesive with a bummer of an ending. It was mostly painless though, in large part to the real feel for the landscapes and communities of the west that have mostly vanished from films today.

it doesn't seem like a good film for UNDERGOUND, to be honest, neither was FOXES.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LornaHansonForbes said:

it doesn't seem like a good film for UNDERGOUND, to be honest, neither was FOXES.

Yes, they were both major studio films (United Artists and Warner Bros) with big Oscar-winning names in both. But then again Grease 2, last week's underground title, was about as mainstream oriented as they got on its first release (Paramount thought it would be  a box office bonanza). Underground is typically more associated with the type of films that used to proliferate at AIP and Cannon, but maybe they are branching out to these other types of films because they have run out of the others to show.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also watched PEEPING TOM (1960) for the third or fourth time...

would make a good companion film with RYAN'S DAUGHTER (1970)- both films are preceded by their reputations as being CRITICALLY REVILED (at the time at least) and ending (for a while in one case, permanently in another(?)) the careers of their respective British directors whose reputations theretofore were pristine.

the story of its slow appreciation over time has led to a lot of critical praise- and don't get me wrong, it's a very good film- but I think it could be better. 

I think it's a mistake to reveal everything about the protagonist right at the start. I would have preferred a second act reveal- maybe even after he screens his home movie horrors for ANNA MASSEY. And I would focus the first act more on ANNA and HER MOTHER- to me, THE MOST ELECTRIC MOMENT in the film occurs between THE PEEPING TOM and THE BLIND MOTHER OF OUR HEROINE, I wish the rest of the film could have that level of thrill.

as it is, we spend too much time with a PROTAGONIST who is not terribly compelling to be perfectly honest, although he isn't supposed to be, (POWELL doesn't want anyone outshining his direction, and I get that. He was a good enough Director, he had earned that right by then.)

See the source image

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, CinemaInternational said:

Yes, they were both major studio films (United Artists and Warner Bros) with big Oscar-winning names in both. But then again Grease 2, last week's underground title, was about as mainstream oriented as they got on its first release (Paramount thought it would be  a box office bonanza). Underground is typically more associated with the type of films that used to proliferate at AIP and Cannon, but maybe they are branching out to these other types of films because they have run out of the others to show.

Holden was so happy though. It was exciting to see that kind of barenaked enthusiasm.

ps- I also can't get that ***ING "COOL RIDER" SONG OUT OF MY HEAD!!!!!!!!!!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...