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

I Just Watched...


speedracer5
 Share

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Sepiatone said:

. . . What I didn't care for about "social media" was that by the time I gave it a try (and a short one at that)  I had been out of the eighth grade for 50 years and had no desire to go back.  It was even worse.  

And the anonymity frees one to post anything they wish about anybody they please without the possibility of getting smacked in the face . . .

Ummm. Don't The TCM Message Boards qualify as "social media"?

Do you feel the urge to smack someone in the face after reading something that upsets you?

The (for some folks, unfortunate) freedom of anonymity on the Web is one of the reasons that social media is wildly popular.  Personally, I don't get upset by cyberspace rudeness, insults, and "hostility" directed at me because:

  • "Attackers" do not even know me, and have absolutely zero meaning and impact on me and my life.
     
  • I grew up in a household with a family dynamic that could be described as a blend of Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? and The War of the Roses (with a delightful soupcon of King Kong vs. Godzilla). My parents spewed vicious abuse upon one another -- not sparing us chillun -- with careless abandon and carefree insensitivity . . . and then wake the next day as though blood had never been spilled, souls had never been torn asunder.

Consequently, I've got -- perhaps -- a harder bark (to borrow a colorful phrase from Cicero Grimes in Hombre) than, I daresay, most people -- definitely a harder bark than have some fragile dandelions on the TCM Message Boards.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sepiatone said:

Don't like or approve of the clothes I'm wearing?  Fine. 

I'm just grateful you're wearing clothes at all.  :P

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Eucalpytus P. Millstone said:

I grew up in a household with a family dynamic that could be described as a blend of Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? and The War of the Roses (with a delightful soupcon of King Kong vs. Godzilla).

Really?  Which one was Mr. Tako?  😛

053639184419ed4ed3bb457c8b2f9fdf.gif

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Wendy-Hiller-Eliza-Doolittle-Henry-Higgi

Pygmalion from 1938 with Wendy Hiller, Leslie Howard and Scott Sunderland

 
 
I stayed away from Pygmalion because I was turned off a bit by My Fair LadyPygmalion's 1964 musical remake with Rex Harrison and Audrey Hepburn. That's a shame as 1938's Pygmalion is smart, witty and charming in all the ways that the remake, often, isn't.
 
In early 1900s London, a professor of linguistics, played by Leslie Howard, bets a friend he can take a "low-class" cockneyed "flower girl" (she crudely hawks flowers on the street), played by Wendy Hiller, and, with three months of training, pass her off as a well-bred society lady. 
 
Howard blithely and snobbishly treats Hiller like a lab rat as he takes her into his townhouse and puts her through an intense training in diction and etiquette. The early fun in this one is watching these two worlds smashing into each: Howard's intellectual aloofness trying to reason with Hiller's brassy defensiveness.
 
Also fun is a pitch-perfect scene when Hiller's crude but street-smart father tries to bargain some money out of the refined and condescending Howard over who gets to "keep" Hiller. They both know they're playing and being played and they're both enjoying it. Hiller's father has none of Howard's education, but he knows how to negotiate a deal as well as Howard does.
 
The story really hits its stride later when a partially trained Hiller is taken for a dry run at Howard's mother's very proper society tea. Here, a nervous Hiller, in over-studied diction, utters memorized expressions at just slightly the wrong point in the conversation. It leaves everyone confused, but too polite to say anything. 
 
In moments like that, Pygmalion is Hiller's movie, as her transformation is joyous but very believable because a bit of "the street" stays with her. She's an actress who completely understands, and is having fun playing her character.
 
Then Howard takes control of a scene as her mentor with his bemused detachment from real life and you quickly realize no one owns this movie as each performer gives that extra something talented actors bring to those special roles. Howard and Hiller, perfectly matched antagonists, are having a hoot playing opposite each other. 
 
After the piquant tea and, now, back at Howard's townhouse, Hiller and he prepare for the night of the big test - a diplomatic reception. After a few close calls, Hiller sails through the night leaving Howard high on success when they get home. Hiller, though now secretly in love with Howard, is depressed knowing he no longer has any use for her. 
 
From here, the movie slips into basic rom-com mode where it takes Hiller leaving and dating another man for Howard to realize his true feelings for her. The climax pivots on whether Howard can now act in time to get Hiller back.
 
Despite the slapped-on Hollywood ending, Pygmalion is a fun twist on the opposites-attracts story as these two "opposites," effectively teach the other to be less opposite and more human. 
 
Pygmalion is also a subversive commentary on the British class system as it says anyone can be a lady or gentleman with training. America's meritocracy is even referenced as a counterpoint to England's early-1900s rigid social-and-class structure. To truly appreciate Pygmalion, though, it's better to let that high-brow philosophy stuff float by and just enjoy the fun story and charming characters. 
  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was surprised when perusing TCM ON HULU to see DAISY KENYON (1947) among the offerings...it is a FOX FILM, and as such, has not been on TCM (maybe ever, definitely for a long time)- it is definitely the least aired of THE CRAWFORD DEATH MASK YEARS, (aka post MILDRED PIERCE)

Daisy Kenyon (1947) • She Blogged By Night

it is also a rarity for THAT ERA OF JOAN that she worked ON LOAN OUT(!) and with not just one, but two BIG NAME STARS- DANA ANDREWS and HENRY FONDA. it's also rare to see JOAN in a FOX FILM- films from 20TH CENTURY FOX of that era usually have less VAST SETS than MGM AND WB, they don't tend to have the MASSIVE DOORWAYS and GRAND STAIRCASES, and it's fun to see JOAN WITH HER 36 INCH SHOULDER PADS navigate through the CENTURY CITY SOUNDSTAGES.

ALL IN ALL, with its TRIO OF TAUTLY VISAGED STARS, this film is not at all unlike watching an American rendition of A JAPANESE NOH PLAY with the characters in FULL MASK throughout. I've seen it before, on DVD, it got a GREAT DVD RELEASE with a really good making-of doc attached with some juicy details- they even interviewed ROBERT OSBORNE- who is very giddy and unlike his TCM persona- who takes the time to raise an eyebrow at JOAN'S PETER PAN COLLARS, which I love.

it's not a great film, but it's interesting. it's a love triangle that manages to work in depictions of CHILD ABUSE, INFIDELITY, POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER (which is strangely meta in that HENRY FONDA is chosen to depict them [he had just gotten back from WWII]) MOST STUNNING OF ALL is a scene where DANA ANDREWS attempts to rape JOAN CRAWFORD'S character, and yes- you read that right. in a film in 1947 a MAJOR LEADING MAN attempts to rape A MAJOR LEADING LADY- it's really something and I have NO IDEA how they got away with it.

there is also some valid discussion to be had about whether or not there is a LESBIAN SUBTEXT to this film as CRAWFORD has a female "artist's model"/roommate who verges on being something else- sort of the EVE ARDEN role, but not witty and done as a lipstick lesbian/stray cat.

this is also a fun film to watch for the lighting and some of the sets later on- which depict a NEW ENGLAND COUNTRYSIDE IN WINTER on a FOX LOT IN BEVERLY HILLS quite quite well.

the Score is by DAVID RAKSIN and I'm sure they told him to write another theme from Laura, but he ends up coughing up a variation on Let's Fall in Love that is serviceable.  

There are genuinely clever moments mixed in with some terrible dialogue, and- while I am a fan of CRAWFORD- JOAN'S work here is a somewhat mixed bag.

it's surprising that DANA ANDREWS gives a startlingly lively and thoroughly offbeat performance in a really unusual role.

anyhow, DAISY KENYON is ON TCM DEMAND insofar as I know, so check it out if you can- there's not much to it, but then again, there is AND ALSO you see CRAWFORD wear A MINK WITH YARD-WIDE SHOULDERS, she's like a MORE BUTCH JOE NAMATH.

See the source image

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re:  Pygmalion - I think Leslie Howard and Wendy Hiller were much better than Rex H. and Audrey H. (even though I am a huge fan of hers).  When Hiller as Eliza says there is no place for her anymore - too sophisticated yet a flower girl at heart, it is heart-rendering (at least for me).  Wendy Hiller (side note) finally got a well-deserved Supporting Actress Oscar for Separate Tables (an excellent movie and I believe Burt Lancaster fought for her to be in the film).

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, chaya bat woof woof said:

Re:  Pygmalion - I think Leslie Howard and Wendy Hiller were much better than Rex H. and Audrey H. (even though I am a huge fan of hers).  When Hiller as Eliza says there is no place for her anymore - too sophisticated yet a flower girl at heart, it is heart-rendering (at least for me).  Wendy Hiller (side note) finally got a well-deserved Supporting Actress Oscar for Separate Tables (an excellent movie and I believe Burt Lancaster fought for her to be in the film).

I agree with all that you said. I love "Separate Tables" with Hiller's a standout performance amongst many in that picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/19/2022 at 12:06 PM, Eucalpytus P. Millstone said:

I don't see "the breakdown of shared interests" as a negative, bad thing.

Everyone sharing the same interests, watching the same films and TV shows, reading the same books, listening to the same music is not my idea of Heaven, Paradise, or Utopia. On the contrary, to me, that kind of Orwellian, Groupthink conformity is Hell!

Three cheers for Individualism, say I!

 

 

I'll probably regret wading in here, but here goes.

I don't think CinemaInternational was saying he wished everyone was the same,  that everyone liked the same things in the same way.  He was just speaking of a time, pre-internet,  when, because  there was no internet,  the options for listening to music, watching films,  and socializing  were more limited.  No, "limited" is the wrong word, sounds negative.

What I mean is,  the internet and social media have created "silos", in which a person can pursue their own preferred music, entertainment, and political ideas, and ignore anything else they're not interested in.  Before all that,  there was indeed a wide range of music, movies, etc. to choose from, but everyone had to consume / experience it in the same way.  For example,  when a movie like "The Godfather" came out  ( just picked that one at random),   many people would go to see it and experience it together in a movie theatre.  Everyone would be talking about it.

That doesn't mean everyone liked it.  Part of the fun of a shared culture like that was people discussing a movie they'd all seen but perhaps disagreed about. I don't believe CinemaInternational was saying he wished for a culture where everyone likes the same things and there's no variety of opinion. On the contrary,  I remember very well what society and culture was like, pre-internet.  People would sometimes get into heated arguments about which bands were better than others, which films were bad, which were good,  what books they liked or didn't, and why,  etc.

There was no bland uniformity of opinion, as you seem to be suggesting.  But people as a whole would be aware of whatever film, music group, song, etc. was popular at the time.  There was a common frame of reference that doesn't seem to exist now.  

I don't know how old you are  ( I suspect of a certain age, though),  but if you are old enough to remember the world before the internet and social media profoundly altered our lives,  surely you don't remember that time as one of "Orwellian Groupthink".    It just wasn't, and it's absurd to suggest it was.  If anything,  there seems to be more "Orwellian Groupthink" now.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LornaHansonForbes said:

I was surprised when perusing TCM ON HULU to see DAISY KENYON (1947) among the offerings...it is a FOX FILM, and as such, has not been on TCM (maybe ever, definitely for a long time)- it is definitely the least aired of THE CRAWFORD DEATH MASK YEARS, (aka post MILDRED PIERCE)

Daisy Kenyon (1947) • She Blogged By Night

it is also a rarity for THAT ERA OF JOAN that she worked ON LOAN OUT(!) and with not just one, but two BIG NAME STARS- DANA ANDREWS and HENRY FONDA. it's also rare to see JOAN in a FOX FILM- films from 20TH CENTURY FOX of that era usually have less VAST SETS than MGM AND WB, they don't tend to have the MASSIVE DOORWAYS and GRAND STAIRCASES, and it's fun to see JOAN WITH HER 36 INCH SHOULDER PADS navigate through the CENTURY CITY SOUNDSTAGES.

ALL IN ALL, with its TRIO OF TAUTLY VISAGED STARS, this film is not at all unlike watching an American rendition of A JAPANESE NOH PLAY with the characters in FULL MASK throughout. I've seen it before, on DVD, it got a GREAT DVD RELEASE with a really good making-of doc attached with some juicy details- they even interviewed ROBERT OSBORNE- who is very giddy and unlike his TCM persona- who takes the time to raise an eyebrow at JOAN'S PETER PAN COLLARS, which I love.

it's not a great film, but it's interesting. it's a love triangle that manages to work in depictions of CHILD ABUSE, INFIDELITY, POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER (which is strangely meta in that HENRY FONDA is chosen to depict them [he had just gotten back from WWII]) MOST STUNNING OF ALL is a scene where DANA ANDREWS attempts to rape JOAN CRAWFORD'S character, and yes- you read that right. in a film in 1947 a MAJOR LEADING MAN attempts to rape A MAJOR LEADING LADY- it's really something and I have NO IDEA how they got away with it.

there is also some valid discussion to be had about whether or not there is a LESBIAN SUBTEXT to this film as CRAWFORD has a female "artist's model"/roommate who verges on being something else- sort of the EVE ARDEN role, but not witty and done as a lipstick lesbian/stray cat.

this is also a fun film to watch for the lighting and some of the sets later on- which depict a NEW ENGLAND COUNTRYSIDE IN WINTER on a FOX LOT IN BEVERLY HILLS quite quite well.

the Score is by DAVID RAKSIN and I'm sure they told him to write another theme from Laura, but he ends up coughing up a variation on Let's Fall in Love that is serviceable.  

There are genuinely clever moments mixed in with some terrible dialogue, and- while I am a fan of CRAWFORD- JOAN'S work here is a somewhat mixed bag.

it's surprising that DANA ANDREWS gives a startlingly lively and thoroughly offbeat performance in a really unusual role.

anyhow, DAISY KENYON is ON TCM DEMAND insofar as I know, so check it out if you can- there's not much to it, but then again, there is AND ALSO you see CRAWFORD wear A MINK WITH YARD-WIDE SHOULDERS, she's like a MORE BUTCH JOE NAMATH.

See the source image

Lorna, once again you have made my day. I will keep enjoying the thought of Joan as a more butch Joe Namath.

Notice that Dana Andrews is billed above Henry Fonda. Fonda had been away in the war, and Dana had made The Best Years of Our Lives the previous year and was at the height of his stardom.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Twelve O'Clock High (1949) After finishing a Steinbeck piece on a bomber squad, wanted to watch a WWII film about them.  Want to watch Memphis Belle since it's been decades since i've last seen it and can barely remember it, but Criterion had this Gregory Peck film.  I liked it but, for as long as it is, there's only one actual segment that follows the bomber squadron in the air and fighting in battle.  The gimmick is that it features actual war footage of fighting,  which is cool, but for me this film needs a bit more meat- and that's coming from a vegetarian.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, misswonderly3 said:

  If anything,  there seems to be more "Orwellian Groupthink" now.

All well stated MissW(as usual)  But as to this part I do believe I addressed it somewhere in mentioning the "cliques" people got into at school.  Each clique thinking themselves better than the others, and all agreeing that any members of any clique  were better than the ones who refused to be involved in ANY of them.  And those cliques were good examples of "Orwellian Groupthink".  But back then it was limited to one's particular school or community.  Now, thanks to the internet, it's nation/worldwide.    An amusing(somewhat) memory for me in all this.....

Sure, at first I tried "fitting in" to one or two particular "cliques",  but as clothing was a large part of it I found it difficult to obtain the proper "uniforms" as my parents disapproved of much of the fashions required and would admonish me to instead, "be yourself" and not let others apply peer pressure to make me be somebody I'm not. Be true to myself and all that.

So, after giving up on it and finding out what's "required" to wear changes too fast for me to be able to keep up and decided to follow my parent's advice.  But, once out at summer's end to do some back-to-school clothes shopping I pulled a shirt off the rack that I found interesting.  It was unlike anything I saw anyone else wearing, but my dad dismissed it saying, "What makes you think we'd let you go out in public in that ridiculous shirt? "  Then added the "mixed message"-- ;) 

"You don't see ANYONE ELSE wearing sh*t like that, do you?"  :rolleyes:  I did mumble something about, "I'm just trying to be myself, like you keep telling me..."  and was told not to get smart!  ;) 

Sepiatone

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Eucalpytus P. Millstone said:


 

I grew up in a household with a family dynamic that could be described as a blend of Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? and The War of the Roses (with a delightful soupcon of King Kong vs. Godzilla). My parents spewed vicious abuse upon one another -- not sparing us chillun -- with careless abandon and carefree insensitivity . . . and then wake the next day as though blood had never been spilled, souls had never been torn asunder.

Consequently, I've got -- perhaps -- a harder bark (to borrow a colorful phrase from Cicero Grimes in Hombre) than, I daresay, most people -- definitely a harder bark than have some fragile dandelions on the TCM Message Boards.

Much as the household I grew up in.  And we knew it was all good natured jabbing.  No real offense meant.  And my daughters and I still have that kind of vibe.  Their Mother wasn't much into it, and they were kind of delighted when they learned(through incidental jousting) that their stepmother was second to nobody when it came to that sort of thing.  ;) 

And I don't really consider this or other type forums to be "social media"  since they existed long before the advent of MySpace,  FaceBook and all similar venues and involved people with partiular interests.  Like "classic" movies, or Jamesjazzguitar's Jazz guitar forum and the few music and guitar forums I belong to.  But even some of them are changing, going in for the "social media" vibe of nobody poking fun of anyone, using psycho-babble like "passive-aggressive"  to insist what's not allowed on the site.  And what your family and mine have done all those years would be considered "passive-aggressive" insulting, and a "social media" taboo.  :rolleyes:

Whitefang

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GARDENS OF STONE (1987)

image.png.d6d36d1ca9bb286209e2efb57c87eb49.png

With the recent passing of James Caan, I saw this movie referenced several times in his obituaries as his comeback attempt after a hiatus in the 1980's. In addition, my wife and I live near Fort Meyers in Arlington, VA where the film was shot and story took place. We plucked it off Amazon for $2.99. If not for these three things, I wouldn't have given this film the time of day. Mediocre, at best.

Despite an excellent cast of Caan, James Earl Jones, Angelica Huston, D.B. Sweeney, Dean Stockwell, Larry Fishburne, Mary Stuart Masterson, Lonette McKee and Sam Bottoms it suffered from a stolid, hackneyed, cliche' ridden screenplay by Ron Bass. 

This was Bass' 3rd screenplay before he wrote RAIN MAN (1988), SLEEPING WITH THE ENEMY (1991), WAITING TO EXHALE (1995) and HOW STELLA GOT HER GROOVE BACK (1998). You wouldn't have seen these better films coming if all you had to go on was GARDENS OF STONE.

Francis Ford Coppola produced and directed. I understand his son had recently died and, later, it was an excuse given to explain the lackluster production. It appeared Coppola was trying to give his friend, Caan, a vehicle to get back on his feet. Caan had not appeared on screen in 5 years. In addition, Fishburne and Bottoms, both boatmates to Martin Sheen's, Captain Willard, in Coppola's epic, APOCALYPSE NOW (1979), had not distinguished themselves all much since and appeared to be given minor, nearly cameo-like roles in GARDENS OF STONE. They're barely noticeable here. When the credits rolled and I saw Bottom's name show up I went, "Wha, Sam Bottoms was in this? Who was he?"

Angelica Huston is a tough, gritty actress and her role here, a Washington Post reporter who falls in love with Caan's army sergeant, was the antithesis almost anything else I've seen her do. 

Basically, the story revolves around career staff sergeant (Korean and Viet Nam vet), Caan, who is assigned to the Honor Guard at Arlington National Cemetery instead of his preference for training officer at Fort Bragg where they prepare soldiers for Viet Nam. He considers the Arlington post a place for toy soldiers. I've been on the Fort Meyers base and attended the "Twilight Tatoo" that they depict about 1/3 into the movie. I give the film some points for how they depicted the base, soldiers and Arlington National Cemetery. I will say, however, they maintain the grounds much better today than they did back in the 80's when this movie was filmed. The grass is actually quite lush and green now. They cut it meticulously. 

Sweeney shows up as the son of one of Caan's former Korean buddies. He wants to serve "on the front lines" in Viet Nam, to which Caan and Jones quickly reply, "There are no front lines in Viet Nam." After Sweeney's dad dies, Caan takes on a surrogate father role and mentors him onto OCS. Sweeney excels, becomes a 2nd Lieutenant and gets shipped off to Nam...but not before he marries the privileged, Army brat, Mary Stuart Masterson who delivers some of the most flat, predictable, vapid lines in recent cinematic history. Ron Bass...I curse you!

You can see where this ends after the 1st 5 minutes. No spoiler alerts necessary. 

The romance between Caan and Huston is silly. Yeah, sure. A Washington Post reporter, around the time of the Watergate scandal and at the height of the Viet Nam war falls for a brush cut sporting, cynical, foul mouthed U.S. Army sergeant. Why not? Both actors give credible performances with what they are given...after all, they're good at what they do, but the premise of their relationship is ridiculous...even if viewed in the context of the times. I don't know. After APOCALYPSE NOW and PLATOON, both of which came out before GOS, I wonder if this wasn't a cheap, poor man's attempt to elevate the military the way the controversial, John Wayne Viet Nam opus, THE GREEN BERETS (1968) tried...and failed to do.

Dean Stockwell plays the cigar chomping commander of Fort Meyers. Was he there for comic relief? I don't know, but he came off as a cartoon character. A wasted performance but I assume he got paid.

The only notable performance, and it wasn't a big or particularly important role, was given by James Earl Jones. Perhaps it was because Caan had been out of work for a while and was rusty and Huston knew her character was a dud, but Jones had some resonance. He didn't ham it up like Stockwell. He didn't go all stereotypical, like Caan. He didn't have a ton of screen time, but he came across authentically. A couple times he was stern and serious and a few he delivered a clever turn of phrase despite the very....and I repeat...VERY ORDINARY dialog. It was a typical, cut above, James Earl Jones performance. Has he received a lifetime achievement award from the Academy? He definitely made a little lemonade here. 

I would recommend GARDENS OF STONE only for those, like myself, who loved James Caan almost every time and want to see this transitional performance. As I posted in his obituary thread, I never miss ROLLERBALL when it shows up. GARDENS OF STONE is not very good. In the catalog of James Caan performances this would rank towards the bottom, but I think it shows where he was at the time as an actor and before he re-emerged in Hollywood with MISERY (1990). RIP James Caan.

This is also worth a little of one's time just to see that Francis Ford Coppola is not infallible. I can forgive him if, in fact, his son's death interfered with his judgement. Coppola appears to be giving a leg up to some of his friends, Caan, Fishburne and Bottoms. GARDENS OF STONE is the APOCALYPSE NOW from the far side of the sun. What's up is down. What's right is wrong.  In the end, I would be surprised if any of the principals, despite their respective track records, thought they were making a worthwhile film.

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I just looked it up. James Earl Jones received a Lifetime Achievement Award in 2011, 5 years before Jackie Chan!!!???

In addition, I looked up the story of Coppola's son's death. I remember this now. Gian-Carlo Coppola was Francis Ford's oldest child and died in an accident in a boat piloted by the son of Ryan O'Neal, Griffin O'Neal. Gian-Carlo was 22 years old. O'Neal appears to have driven the boat recklessly between 2 boats that were connected by a tow line. The tow line hit Coppola in the head killing him. O'Neal was fined and given probation.

Interestingly, Griffin O'Neal had a role in GARDENS OF STONE but was replaced. I wonder why? It does not say what role. Griffin O'Neal is a piece of work.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, misswonderly3 said:

. . . the internet and social media have created "silos", in which a person can pursue their own preferred music, entertainment, and political ideas, and ignore anything else they're not interested in. Before all that,  there was indeed a wide range of music, movies, etc. to choose from, but everyone had to consume / experience it in the same way

. . . Part of the fun of a shared culture like that was people discussing a movie they'd all seen but perhaps disagreed about . . .

. . . But people as a whole would be aware of whatever film, music group, song, etc. was popular at the time.  There was a common frame of reference that doesn't seem to exist now. 

Subcultural "silos" existed waaaaayyy before the arrivals of the Internet and social media -- e.g., the "cliques" mentioned by Sepiatone.

Pardon my obtuseness (or don't), but I'm not getting that "a shared culture" (or "communal experience," to use a two-bit phrase employed by sophistic, collectivist extroverts) -- concerning the consumption of music and entertainment -- has been replaced -- or dramatically and detrimentally changed -- by modern technology*. Folks still go the movies and concerts, and still engage in discussions and debates offline. Folks still socialize . . . in person. There are still real-life (as opposed to virtual) movie clubs for movie buffs (and also, I presume, coteries for music lovers) offering the (for me, unnecessary) experience of a "common frame of reference." I saw Hereditary in a movie theatre with a "meetup" group of horror film fans.

People always have formed, and always will form, "tribes" based on shared interests. The ways and means may have changed (expanded). Social interaction may have changed (YMMV re the effects of change). But, the inveterate human urge to bond and incurable human impulse to share have not.

* The transformation (transmogrification) of political associations by modern technology, OTOH, is a different story.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, King Rat said:

in re: DAISY KENYON (1947)

Notice that Dana Andrews is billed above Henry Fonda. Fonda had been away in the war, and Dana had made The Best Years of Our Lives the previous year and was at the height of his stardom.

one thing that worked amid all the oddness of DAISY KENYON was the interraction between FONDA AND ANDREWS- two VERY different characters (ANDREWS's is very much out of type for him) played by two VERY different men and VERY different actors (at least persona wise) and who had had- as you mention- very different paths in life in the years since they briefly shared the screen in THE OX-BOW INCIDENT

I have no idea how well they got along, in the documentary on the DAISY KENYON DVD it is suggested CRAWFORD AND FONDA had an affair and RUTH WARRICK claims via a quote that she found CRAWFORD "terrifying" and FONDA "ice cold."

Nonetheless, there comes a part in DAISY KENYON early on where DANA AND HANK kinda push JOAN aside and decide to work like BETTE DAVIS and MARY ASTOR on THE GREAT LIE to make their own more interesting little film amid the bigger, less interesting film that the director is making- and they succeed, one strong thing about the movie is the contrast between the last scene between DANA ANDREWS and HENRY FONDA and the first, in both instances constructed around the age-old movie issue of getting a cab.

See the source image

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sepiatone said:

Much as the household I grew up in.  And we knew it was all good natured jabbing.  No real offense meant . . . And what your family and mine have done all those years would be considered "passive-aggressive" insulting, and a "social media" taboo.  :rolleyes:

With all due respect, you didn't know my parents. "Good natured jabbing" doesn't describe -- nor apply to -- the emotional and psychological bloodbath between Dear Old Mom 'n Dad.

Nothing passive about their aggression, which occasionally erupted into physical violence.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched Daisy Kenyon a while back and thought it was surprising in lots of good ways.  Daisy was making her own decisions, Henry Fonda proved that drunks can be adorable, the rape scene Lorna mentioned, and that Joe Namath coat which was the most outrageous piece of meant-to-be-normal clothing I've seen on screen.  It's rivaled only by another Joan Crawford garment, her dress with white braids everywhere in, "Susan and God."

I also agree with everyone who loves Wendy Hiller.  My favorite of hers is "I Know Where I'm Going."

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, AndreaDoria said:

I watched Daisy Kenyon a while back and thought it was surprising in lots of good ways.  Daisy was making her own decisions, Henry Fonda proved that drunks can be adorable, the rape scene Lorna mentioned, and that Joe Namath coat which was the most outrageous piece of meant-to-be-normal clothing I've seen on screen.  It's rivaled only by another Joan Crawford garment, her dress with white braids everywhere in, "Susan and God."

I also agree with everyone who loves Wendy Hiller.  My favorite of hers is "I Know Where I'm Going."

Joan Crawford 1940 | © Pleasurephoto Room

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rosebud (1975)

Otto Preminger's penultimate film, Rosebud never ceased getting scathing critical notices in 1975. It's not as bad as those reviews would let on, but it is ultimately muddled and confusing . I assume that it was meant at the time to be a story that would include many of the hot button issues: the ongoing cold war between the Jewish and Arab peoples, the PLO, radical politics, international power players, etc. It results in a bit too much baggage, and it leaves what is supposed to be the central thread (the PLO kidnapping of five teenage girls, all of whom have powerful businessmen parents) neglected for long sections of the film. 

Top billed Peter O'Toole does not appear until nearly a half-hour in; second billed Richard Attenborough (as a villain) does not turn up until 83 minutes in. Everybody except for O'Toole seems to be jostling for scraps of screentime.

Even with all of this, its not a complete wash; O'Toole is good as ever, Isabelle Huppert, Cliff Gorman, and Claude Dauphin do well with the screentime they have (a young Kim Cattrell is also in this briefly). The film has good photography, and even if the script is a mash, Preminger still knows how to direct a scene, and the film has that type of clear cut , unhurried style that was so fascinating in the films of the early 70s. Not the best film, but far from being the complete trainwreck the reviews indicated. 

ABBA: The Movie (1977) A concert film with a little bitty plot to tie it all together (involving a hapless DJ trying to get an interview with the group), this exists solely to showcase the band and their music. On that front it is a success, even if its a bit loose. Also sort of interesting to see the pull the group's music had on Australia years before the release of several films from there in the 90s that were filled with the group's music

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rosebud (1975)

Otto Preminger's penultimate film, Rosebud never ceased getting scathing critical notices in 1975. It's not as bad as those reviews would let on, but it is ultimately muddled and confusing . I assume that it was meant at the time to be a story that would include many of the hot button issues: the ongoing cold war between the Jewish and Arab peoples, the PLO, radical politics, international power players, etc. It results in a bit too much baggage, and it leaves what is supposed to be the central thread (the PLO kidnapping of five teenage girls, all of whom have powerful businessmen parents) neglected for long sections of the film. 

Top billed Peter O'Toole does not appear until nearly a half-hour in; second billed Richard Attenborough (as a villain) does not turn up until 83 minutes in. Everybody except for O'Toole seems to be jostling for scraps of screentime.

Even with all of this, its not a complete wash; O'Toole is good as ever, Isabelle Huppert, Cliff Gorman, and Claude Dauphin do well with the screentime they have (a young Kim Cattrell is also in this briefly). The film has good photography, and even if the script is a mash, Preminger still knows how to direct a scene, and the film has that type of clear cut , unhurried style that was so fascinating in the films of the early 70s. Not the best film, but far from being the complete trainwreck the reviews indicated. 

ABBA: The Movie (1977) A concert film with a little bitty plot to tie it all together (involving a hapless DJ trying to get an interview with the group), this exists solely to showcase the band and their music. On that front it is a success, even if its a bit loose. Also sort of interesting to see the pull the group's music had on Australia years before the release of several films from there in the 90s that were filled with the group's music

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/19/2022 at 3:06 PM, Eucalpytus P. Millstone said:

Consequently, I've got -- perhaps -- a harder bark (to borrow a colorful phrase from Cicero Grimes in Hombre) than, I daresay, most people -- definitely a harder bark than have some fragile dandelions on the TCM Message Boards.

Dandelions are actually not fragile, they are quite hardy and can withstand more trauma than many delicate flowers.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Swithin said:

Dandelions are actually not fragile, they are quite hardy and can withstand more trauma than many delicate flowers.

 

121653364_10158806117209489_636926629929

And the greens make a delicious, nutritious pizza!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
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
 Share

© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...