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

Steve McQueen in The Blob


Recommended Posts

In his introduction to The Blob tonight, Mr. Osborn asked the (rather snobbish) question, if McQueen had known that stardom was just around the corner, would he have done this film? I think the more valid question is, would stardom have been just around the corner if McQueen had NOT done this film? The film was extremely popular, and it provided McQueen with a fan base that he carried with him into subsequent projects, a fan base that could have tipped the scales between his success or failure in those projects.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, people seem to love Robert Osborne around here (and I admit, he's better than Peter B. and Ben M. - who's even more condescending and downright insulting when he introduces movies on the weekends) - but I've found Robert Osborne snobbish before. For instance when Alfred Uhry, the guest programmer for November, selected "A Date With Judy", Osborne made some comments to the effect of "so, why'd you choose such a lightweight, fluffy MUSICAL?" Like every film has to be serious and full of lofty ambitions....hmmph.

 

I think TCM is biased against musicals, since I don't see that genre represented as often or as regularly in the schedule as certain other genres (like westerns for example). But that's a whole other rant. :P At least TCM runs a fair number of sci-fi movies, even if that may be another genre they look down on.

 

All I can say is...geez, you'd think TCM would be the ONE place we could turn to, without our favorite movies being made fun of. There are enough ignorant people in everyday life who mock and dismiss "old" movies. Y'know? And it seems foolish to denigrate the movies on your own station... 'cause when Ben M. called "The Greatest Story Ever Told" a flop and said it certainly wasn't the greatest film or whatever he said, it only makes me wonder: sooo...why are you running it then? If you think it's crap, why'd you program it for Christmas day? Shouldn't you provide us with quality movies? If you insult the movie - you insult the people who bothered to tune in for it. You make us feel like we wasted our time.

 

'Kay sorry I got a bit off-topic. "The Blob" was fun. And it made me crave raspberry jello. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

you know, the older I get, the less I read reviews or care for almost anybody's opinions of things I like. I find myself just hitting mute during those intros and putting the sound back on when I see the rating.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Get serious! I think you're stepping on a lot of toes when you start criticizing Robert Osbourne. I saw that intro and don't see where you get snobbish from it. I think you're taking a lot of things way too seriously and even out of context. When Ben Mankowietz called The Greatest Story Ever Told a flop (or whatever word he used that you didn't like), I think he was referring to the box office receipts at the time. I'm sure he wasn't voicing a personal opinion. I saw that, too, and sure don't remember him being cocky about it. Why don't you look at all the great things about TCM instead of picking it apart. Especially the person who is in BC. Do you realize how lucky you are to HAVE TCM? Canada couldn't get it for so long, I would think you would still be bathing in it's glory. The first YEAR I had TCM, I thought I'd died and gone to heaven. What are you comparing it to . . . the CBC?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Crispy -

Forgive me, but I think you read far too much into Osborne's or Mankiewicz' comments vis-?-vis how much personal investment they are putting into the intro's/outro's.

 

While I don't LOVE Osborne nor Mankiewicz (for I don't put that much vested interest into their personas), I do regard the former as personable, professional, never 'snobbish,' and often informative about behind-the-scenes aspects of the presented film. And I regard the latter as a nice addition to TCM, being playful yet also professional and informative. I also like how Mankiewicz can be self-mocking from time to time, thereby effectively playing down how serious he should be taken.

 

The only thing that I find disagreeable about the Intro's is when an element of the plot is revealed aforehand.

 

And Mankiewicz' comment on TGSET being a flop was a reference to reality - when it was released it did poorly at the boxoffice and did not make a return - not to literally be taken to mean that it flops around on the floor. Unless he actually says "the following film is crap," I don't think you should read that into his descriptive comments. There's nothing insulting about whimsically comparing the title of TGSET to its actual production which is a bit blas? in spots. I can still nevertheless enjoy watching it despite acknowledging that fact.

 

If you are hearing these wonderful films being made fun of, then you are hearing something that is far from apparent to me.

 

Moreover (although perhaps programming on TCM-Canada differs?), I am astonished that you think TCM is biased against musicals. It runs a plethora of musicals (some far more repetitively than I would wish for). Why today's very schedule, midday, was all musicals! And some obscurer ones to boot.

 

You have to understand that TCM does not own the rights to every single film ever made (e.g. I have never seen TCM run a classic movie from 20th Century Fox's golden age, so I suspect those moneygrubbing dimwits at FOX refuse to license them out to Turner).

 

And 'A Date With Judy' is lightweight and fluffy; those are accurate adjectives. So? Where does one read "worthless" or "unambitious" into that? It is a lightweight and fluffy film, and that is what is so classic and entertaining about it.

 

Just a suggestion, but you might want to consider not getting quite so defensive against Osborne and Mankiewicz on behalf of the classic movies on TCM, and recognise that the hosts are friends not enemies to classic film.

 

Was that the 9 o'clock gun going off? - Gotta go!

B-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just waiting for it... I *knew* that nobody could dare criticize Robert Osborne on this forum without retaliation. ;)

 

> While I don't LOVE Osborne nor Mankiewicz (for

> I don't put that much vested interest into their

> personas), I do regard the former as personable,

> professional, never 'snobbish,' and often informative

> about behind-the-scenes aspects of the presented

> film. And I regard the latter as a nice addition to

> TCM, being playful yet also professional and

> informative. I also like how Mankiewicz can be

> self-mocking from time to time, thereby effectively

> playing down how serious he should be taken.

 

Well, you're entitled to your opinion, as I am to mine. :)

 

> The only thing that I find disagreeable about the

> Intro's is when an element of the plot is revealed

> aforehand.

 

Yes indeed. Speaking of the mute button, I've started using it too. 'Cause the hosts tend to give away too much about the movie. Osborne particularly loves to tell us to keep an eye out for cameo appearances by.... and then list all the actors! Seems he doesn't realize the whole point of surprise cameos is for us to be...surprised... and have fun spotting/identifying the actors ourselves. Sheesh. :P If the purpose of this is to hook viewers to stay tuned for the upcoming movie 'cause now they know their favorite celebrities did a cameo in it, well that's rather silly... since the people who tuned in for the intro are obviously already planning to watch the movie! (Or does TCM think their hosts are such hot celebrities themselves that we tune in just to watch *them* and hear what they have to say?!)

 

> And Mankiewicz' comment on TGSET being a flop was a

> reference to reality - when it was released it did

> poorly at the boxoffice and did not make a return -

> not to literally be taken to mean that it flops

> around on the floor.

 

Well, there are more tactful ways to say so, without calling it "far from the greatest film ever made", (which isn't even a *clever* joke), thus insulting not only the fans who happen to think it is a great film, but also pooping all over the work done by the many people involved in making the movie (can you imagine how any of them, or their relatives, would feel if they tuned into TCM, regarding the film with pride, only to see the host sneer at it? On CHRISTMAS, no less?)

 

> Unless he actually says "the

> following film is crap," I don't think you should

> read that into his descriptive comments.

 

I beg to differ. Ben M.'s comments *strongly* implied that "The Greatest Story Ever Told" was crap. Just 'cause he doesn't say it in those exact words ...so what? I don't think we should *stop* reading into things, 'cause there are always layers of meaning and subtext, and what a sad, shallow world it would be if we only looked at things on the surface!

 

> Moreover (although perhaps programming on TCM-Canada

> differs?), I am astonished that you think TCM is

> biased against musicals. It runs a plethora of

> musicals (some far more repetitively than I would

> wish for). Why today's very schedule, midday, was

> all musicals! And some obscurer ones to boot.

 

Oh I realize TCM has their blocks of musical programming - but I still maintain that you don't see them programmed as regularly as, say, westerns, or dramas. And how often do you see trailers/ads/interviews for the musical films they air, compared to how often TCM promotes other, "cooler" genres? Why, I can only recall seeing one musical trailer (since Canada got TCM in November), for "A Date With Judy", and I assume that was only because it was slightly more "important" as a tie-in for the guest programmer of the month feature.

 

 

> You have to understand that TCM does not own the

> rights to every single film ever made

 

I do understand. But they own all the MGM musicals, correct? When you think of how many musicals MGM made... they really haven't aired a lot. There are so many obscure ones I'd like to see. Seems they usually air the most famous musicals, which are available on DVD (likely to advertise the fact and increase sales) - and you're right, SamTherapy, they repeat the same few, far too often.

 

> And 'A Date With Judy' is lightweight and

> fluffy; those are accurate adjectives. So? Where does

> one read "worthless" or "unambitious" into that? It

> is a lightweight and fluffy film, and that is

> what is so classic and entertaining about it.

 

Well, Osborne's tone of voice and facial expression seemed to indicate bemused condescension during the interview, when he asked why Alfred chose it. I got the vibe that he was surprised at the choice because the movie is "lightweight" and therefore not worthy of being selected by the guest programmer and given such attention. The implication being that this distinguished guest should choose more "important", universally critically acclaimed films. If that's not an example of Robert Osborne's (or TCM's in general) snobbishness and bias against musicals, I don't know what is. Then Alfred hastened to "justify" his choice by explaining that Liz Taylor kickstarted his hormones...which of course makes it "okay" to like this movie. You don't know how elated I was that Alfred chose "A Date With Judy", and I was looking forward to a more intelligent analysis of what makes this film great. So I was really **** off by the whole thing.

 

One last thing... scarlett, I don't need you to tell me how lucky I am and I don't appreciate your attempt to shame me. I *am* grateful that TCM is available here in Canada - although it took bloody long enough. But the joy that this station brings me does not blind me to it's flaws. In fact the wonderful aspects of TCM only makes me more acutely aware of the negative aspects (whether they be in hosting, programming, promotion or web design), if you know what I mean. The problems are more noticeable.... just as flaws in a film's story or acting hurt and sadden you more when the film has great potential. In that case, relatively minor problems can upset you and affect your enjoyment more than *major* problems in another, lesser movie. Well, in the same way, I realize that TCM is much better than any other station I've seen, but that doesn't mean I can give it a free pass. I can ignore the other stations 'cause they don't matter - and they're hopeless lost causes. But I love the idea of TCM and so I nag and **** and criticize and want to push it to be even better. If some wish to interpret that as ingratitude, so be it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just wanted to add that TCM does show a lot of musicals on a regular basis. But since you've only had TCM for 2 months you haven't seen a lot of them yet. But I think during December when Bing Crosby was STOM they did show a lot of his musicals from the early days. And TCM shows Singin in the Rain and 7 Brides for 7 Brothers all the time. You won't be disappointed if you stay tune much longer and don't give up on them. But this has not really been a vindicative message board until recently, so this "retaliation" business is all very new stuff. But a lot of long time posters have quit posting (I guess due to the website changes) and there were a lot of great fans here with a love of classic movies and most everyone got along pretty well (although I admit to having little patience with some of the negative folks around here and maybe got into scraps I regretted later.) Anyway, crispy, you'll get your musicals if you just stick around awhile. And you might see movies, other than musicals, that you'll like. It's a shame you don't like Mr. Osborne or Ben, but that is your right. I like their comments before the films, but I've had TCM since the inception so I pretty much know what the movie is before I watch it. Sometimes, I'll tune in for the commments and not watch the movie. But to each his own and of course you're entitled to your opinion. Just don't be offended when others don't agree. I have a hard time with that myself, but I'm learning. Glad to have to aboard even though you don't seem all that happy about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> But I think during December when Bing Crosby was

> STOM they did show a lot of his musicals from the

> early days.

 

Did they? "Going Hollywood" was an early musical.. and I was thrilled to see it, as it's a rarity, but I was disappointed that mostly TCM ran lotsa Road pictures with Bob Hope and other movies that are easily available on DVD. And running That's Entertainment I and II in the allotted Bing slots was a bit of a cheat, I thought, since he's barely in them.

 

> And TCM shows Singin in the Rain and 7

> Brides for 7 Brothers all the time.

 

Ahem, yes, aaaall the time. Already own 'em. Love 'em. Excellent movies. But programming them so often...that's easy and unimaginative. There are other movies they never run, or only run once every few years (so I've read at IMDB) - so maybe such repetition of the famous (and on DVD) musicals isn't the best idea...Unless their only purpose is to sell more DVDs.

 

> Anyway, crispy, you'll get your

> musicals if you just stick around awhile. And you

> might see movies, other than musicals, that you'll

> like.

 

Already have. :) I've been exposed to many enjoyable movies and actors I'd never really had a chance to see before (Walter Pidgeon, Barbara Stanwyck, Joan Blondell, etc) - and I'm glad. Now I'd like to see fans of those actors, who don't normally watch musicals, exposed to some of my favorites - Deanna Durbin, Kathryn Grayson, Jane Powell.... ;)

 

> It's a shame you don't like Mr. Osborne or Ben,

> but that is your right. I like their comments before

> the films, but I've had TCM since the inception so I

> pretty much know what the movie is before I watch it.

 

Aahh.. see, that bothers me, that TCM seems to have this attitude (in their intros/promos/schedule summaries, etc) where they expect their audience to already be familiar with the movies they're airing. They say they want to attract new, younger viewers - but they seem to forget that if they succeed...these newbies should remain unspoiled. It sucks to have the climax of a movie revealed in an ad (seeing a certain person get shot in "Deception", comes to mind), or to hear too much in advance. I'm in my 20's and I've been watching old movies for as long as I can remember, but there are still many films I'm ignorant of, and I'd like to remain that way until I can experience them properly.

 

> Just don't be offended when others don't agree.

 

Do I sound offended about that? I expect people to disagree with me. :) Judging from some replies to my posts, *I've* offended others though. Thanks for the welcome anyway!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Crispy -

Am not trying to contradict you as much as encourage you to see the "plethora of musicals" (to quote my self) that TCM provides . . .

 

In this month, which does not have a musicals-oriented STOM, I count 41 'musicals' being run (out of the fourteen genres recognised by TCM in the NowPlaying guide).

 

Today, in fact, featured a musical.

 

Plus, with classic film, you often can't flick a butt without it landing on the stage of a musical number in a film which isn't considered in the 'Musical' catagory (e.g. in Saratoga [which is running ma?ana in the wee hours of the morning, incidentally], and in some of the Thin Man films).

 

Food for thought out of Carmen Miranda's headpiece.

 

In fact, isn't there a musical moment in The Blob? ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I had to jump in on this. I think TCM should be running more musicals, especially the obscure ones. It's a sadly neglected genre.

 

Sam, I'm impressed that you counted all the musicals this month. A plethora of them, right? Well, I counted *all* the films out of the 400 running, and if only 41 are musicals, that's about 10%. Hardly a plethora.

 

"In fact, isn't there a musical moment in The Blob?"

 

Um...joke, right? I guess I missed the scene were Steve does a timestep on the roof of his car, singing the virtues of drag racing. The only music I recalled was the cool theme song (the best part of the movie).

 

In that case, let's count "Voyage to The Bottom Of the Sea" as a musical, because of the dreamy theme song, and Frankie Avalon pretending to play a trumpet while Barbara Eden wiggles her butt in the camera, pretending to dance. Oh wait, that was a horror...

Link to post
Share on other sites

//Sorry, I had to jump in on this.//

Please do. :-)

 

//Well, I counted *all* the films out of the 400 running, and if only 41 are musicals, that's about 10%.//

Shall I task you further? ;-)

What is the individual percentage of each of the other thirteen genres, this month?

 

And further - what is the percentage of all classic films which are musicals?

Peradventure only 10% of all classic films ever made are musicals - it wouldn't surprise me if that were the case. Even if it were 15% or 20%, then I think 10% of all films show in a month is pretty equitable.

 

And you are not counting films which include one or more musical sequences, are you?

 

Yes I was jesting about The Blob, noting the tangent taken from the subject of the original post (although actually I wasn't sure if indeed there was some lingering, unnecessary-to-the-plot, Grease-like scene of the yewts shuckin'-and-jivin' to some stacks-o-wax on the radio dial; I couldn't recall but thought the chances were good). But regarding Voyage, actually, in a tertiary way, the opening titles are rather bad-musical-like since the song is so utterly unrelated and incongruous to the film.

 

But seriously, I am serious in pointing out that many non-musical films feature one (or more) musical sequences (for good or bad). Again, example-given: three (if memory serves) Thin Man movies feature very long muscial interludes, one of which is quite an excellent sequence of two non-caucasians in a club which Nick and Nora are in, doing this incredible rotating/sliding erotic number. And what about Harlow belting out "Saratoga!!! Saratoga!!!. And don't lets forget Dietrich's Voodoo Love.

 

And numerous others "non-musical" films feature significant musical numbers.

 

Anyway, I still maintain that TCM presents music-in-film a-plenty.

One might even say "a plethora." ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny how everybody's harping on the musicals thing. That wasn't really the meat and potatoes of my rant...just a side dish. But do keep in mind that when debating TCM's alleged bias against musicals (remember? my original point?), one must examine all the evidence (see my earlier posts for more examples) - apart from merely counting the number of musicals TCM airs.

 

Don't suppose anyone would care to comment on anything *else* I mentioned in my lengthy essays below? Alas, I fear I posted in the wrong thread and those who aren't interested in reading about Steve McQueen in The Blob are steering clear. :P

 

Either that or SamTherapy's scaring 'em all away with his big words and percentages. Don't be intimidated folks! Sam's just putting on his pompous schoolteacher mask for laughs! I'm sure he's not really like that... ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to admit I was incredulous when I read the "TCM neglects musicals" comment, because from my perspective they seem to saturate the schedule with musicals! "MGM" and "musicals" went hand in hand, so it's only natural.

 

And SamTherapy is right about other movies featuring musical moments, though I think you're actually selling it short - it's not just MANY old (30s, 40s) non-musical movies that have musical moments, it's MOST. It's become a running joke in my household when watching an old movie - we're just waiting for the musical bit, finger poised over the fast-forward button. :)

 

Oh, and, I don't think Osborne's comment about McQueen was snobbish at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Either that or SamTherapy's scaring 'em all away with his big words and percentages."

 

Crispy, you really are a HUGE laugh. :-)

 

"Either that . . ." or YOU are scaring people away by your continual bitching, nagging, complaining and rudeness. It's been a long time, I'm happy to say, since I've come across someone as full of themselves, and their opinions, as you are. However, you aren't worth the energy for me to get upset, instead I find you a real joke! Do you have ONE decent comment to make TO anyone or ABOUT anyone? Even your user name "crispy"comment indicates that you thrive on your brittle, snappy, argumentative opinions. You continually make snide, sarcastic, condensending comments to other members of this forum, seemingly to make yourself look wise and clever - but instead people are beginning to see right through you - and you're looking pretty foolish and immature.

 

I'm sure you'll have something very intelligent and stimulating to say to me - after all, it certainly looks like this is what you've been waiting for - someone to call you on your ****. So, flap away . . . maybe someone will be interested, but most of us could really care less. All your negative comments about me will just put me in the same category with other people on this list that you have been ignorant to . . . you sure are fast to judge people you barely know. If there was a way to block your comments from showing up on my computer, I'd do that immediately. I, like most of us here, come to this message board to discuss classic movies, great actors and actresses and the wonderful TCM. I don't have the time or the inclination to read how wonderful and intelligent YOU are - at the expense of everyone else. GROW UP!

 

That's the last thing I'll ever have to say to you - you've already taken up too much valuable time in my head - and you're not worth the effort. I wonder how any of us managed to survive before you came along to 'show us' how wrong we've all been in so many areas. And here we were wasting our time getting along, having good discussions and being friends, despite our different opinions. Tsk, tsk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

//I think Crispy has already shown more maturity than you.//

 

Goes from a petulant tirade (read: tantrum) to a pouting, arms-crossed holding-of-breath . . . yep -- the epitome of maturity.

 

Anyone who proclaims: "I'M MORE MATURE THAN YOU" --- typically isn't, hence the overcompensation.

 

scarlet's cathartic 'time out' to cc was provoked

 

every good child deserves favour

every problem child deserves sticks and coal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another person got his start in a teen horror film, Michael Landon, in "I was a Teenage Werewolf" (1957). Although this is not as good a film as The Blob, it gave Landon a push towards stardom also. In both instances these films put Steve Mcqueen and Michael Landon on the radar screen for more work and causing the telephone to ring with offers of more and better parts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sam, I'm gonna respond and then walk away, shaking my head.

 

"Anyone who proclaims: "I'M MORE MATURE THAN YOU" --- typically isn't, hence the overcompensation."

 

Um, do you actually read these posts, or just have knee-jerk responses? Crispy never said, "I'M MORE MATURE THAN YOU". I said that because I thought Crispy was acting more mature by not responding to scarlett.. NOT YOU. Unless you and scarlett are the same person and you've mixed up your login when replying.

 

"Goes from a petulant tirade (read: tantrum) to a pouting, arms-crossed holding-of-breath . . . yep -- the epitome of maturity. "

 

Tell me, how do you have the power to see through Crispy's monitor and know what they're thinking or doing? Do you really think you (or scarlett) have that much effect on their lives? Are you really THAT full of yourself? It MUST be the truth...not merely your opinion, because you never make blanket assumptions based on FACTS.

 

Did you ever stop to consider maybe that Crispy doesn't care enough about you to reply?

 

"every good child deserves favour

every problem child deserves sticks and coal"

 

And you still say that you do not address this board in a condescending way? What the heck do you call that? Or is it my own problem that I read more into it than you meant?

 

Those were rhetorical questions, btw.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, cc did specifically infer her perceived superior maturity in another post. That was what I referencing.

 

Similarly a comment like //I'm gonna respond and then walk away, shaking my head.// is also a statement intended to shame and to be controlling, two types of behaviour which I regard as dysfunctional and less than mature, and certainly not conversational. If someone wishes to debate (even passionately) ideas and perspectives, that's great; it is engaging. But resorting to direct personal attacks or to controlling ways of dominating a discussion (? la Bill O'Reilly) has a way of killing conversation.

 

//Tell me, how do you have the power to see through Crispy's monitor and know what they're thinking or doing? Do you really think you (or scarlett) have that much effect on their lives? Are you really THAT full of yourself? It MUST be the truth...not merely your opinion, because you never make blanket assumptions based on FACTS.//

I have no interest in having an effect of total strangers' lives whatsoever. My only intent when posting a comment is just that -- posting a comment or evaluation of mine. Obviously, given the very nature of such forums, anything I post is merely my opinion -- that's a given. However, I do try to cite points to support and explain my opinion rather than just making assumptive statements.

 

Nonetheless, I'm always open to reevaluation of my perspectives, but that does mean I am open to just anything contrary. The contrariness must have something evidencing what is missing in my perspective. There was nothing of that sort that I regarded in cc's challenges. It is not assumption, on my part, to challenge assumptive comments by others.

 

//Did you ever stop to consider maybe that Crispy doesn't care enough about you to reply?//

Actually, I am indifferent to cc's motives, either way. However, again in another post, it was cc making the connexion between non-participation and refusal, and, further, attributing it to her self-proclaimed maturity.

 

//And you still say that you do not address this board in a condescending way? What the heck do you call that? Or is it my own problem that I read more into it than you meant?//

Well, actually, yes, you did misread what was meant, or rather was in fact said (and that is not my fault nor arrogance on my part for saying so).

Firstly: I wasn't addressing the board, I was clearly addressing the focus of the topic which happened to be the behaviour of a poster, not the board.

Secondly: my closing comment was presented condescendingly, in regards to the subject, to further illustrate that if someone behaves childishly then one often gets treated like a child.

 

Pointing out childish, bullying behaviour is necessary to prevent people who exhibit such behaviour from treating others like doormats. It is not arrogance to call arrogant people on their arrogance. Nor is it bullying to expose a bully. And it is increasingly tiresome to listen to people who seem to have a propensity for vomiting their opinions out onto others rather than expressing them eloquently and respectfully. And it is equally tiresome when innocuous erudition is targeted by people who become insecure when challenged.

 

There are more intelligent, actualising and rewarding ways to behave and interact with others than the fight-or-flight course of action. My comments, following yours, were intended to highlight that fact, by supporting scarlet's response and by denouncing yours. Your response not you personally. However, it appears you took it personally and sought first to 'fight' me and then to 'take flight' (//I'm gonna respond and then walk away, shaking my head//) instead of debating.

 

It is difficult sometimes to discuss or debate without feeling personally attacked, but when one does so it can be a very stimulating encounter.

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...