caracas1914
-
Posts
3.4k -
Joined
Content Type
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Discussion
Posts posted by caracas1914
-
-
I couldn’t quite get Astrid. We are told what a wonderful, warm & chic individual she is, but how does she expect no strain in her marriage when she’s literally spending millions of dollars on shopping sprees,then trying to hide it from the husband?
-
It’s a beautiful film, and it conveys so much of “American” cultural values including rugged individualism and wanderlust , but you also get the all encompassing sense that the rug been pulled out from beneath so many of these senior baby boomer nomads, capitalism at its worse has betrayed them.
-
2
-
-
Abraham Riesman's True Believer: The Rise and Fall of Stan Lee, the latest bio raises up once again who was responsible for Marvel's golden age of comic characters. Mr. Riesman falls on Jack Kirby's side of the ledger, seemingly giving him most of the credit for the Marvel "Creation".
Interesting opinion on this from previous Marvel writer, editor Roy Thomas.
-
Was pleasantly surprised on seeing for the the first time in years Katharine Hepurn's "Morning Glory." I had dismissed it in my mind as dated "THE theatre" hokum, and in many ways it is.
Physically Hepburn is so unique, her face even then sharp and angular; an early scene in a theatrical waiting room she's sitting down next to another actress who is dressed to the nines and has the kewpie lips and almost round rouged face in vogue and the contrast is startling. Certain actors such as Hepburn, and say Louise Brooks, Greta Garbo (at least by her American film debut) , seemed to have had their look from the moment they first stepped in front of the camera, fully developed and formed.
However the intensity of Hepburn in the role is fascinating to watch and as Adolph Menjou's character says "she's a nut" but you can't keep your eyes off her. Drunken scenes are are hard to pull off, because a lot of times there's a self-consciously "wink wink" shtick actors rely on, yet Hepburn has one were she's proclaiming herself a great actress and doing scenes from Hamlet and Romeo and Juliet and it somehow works, she is both embarrassing and compelling at the same time.
I know many nonfans rag her for excessive mannerisms and we do have a different sensibility to what acting standards are these days, but I thought her scenes hold up surprisingly well.
-
4
-
-
On 1/30/2021 at 4:23 PM, Everina said:
I watched The Women, today. I had seen parts of it before, but this was the first time I sat down and watched it from start to finish. I have thoughts...
I really enjoyed some things about this movie, but other things drove me absolutely nuts. For one thing, I couldn't understand why Stephen Haines was such a big prize to be fought over and won, since he was completely spineless and lacked agency. I also call bullshit on him really loving Mary, since he chose his mistress over her when confronted, and didn't seem to care at all that she was heartbroken. That is not love. I understand that the men weren't the true focus of the story, and that they only exist to propel the story forward for the sake of the women- which is actually pretty feminist for a movie made in 1939- but I still couldn't forget about that. It made the ending a huge disappointment.
Another criticism I have is that Mary is given a couple of speeches by her mother and by Paulette Goddard's character about how to be a wife, and how "fighting" for her man is all part of the deal. Excuse me, but how did Mary not "fight" for her man? She confronted him, she told him he could choose his wife of ten years, or his flash-in-the-pan mistress, and the spineless wad chose is mistress. What else was she supposed to do, exactly? Yes, I know these are values straight out of 1939, when divorce was frowned upon and women had MUCH fewer options, but good LORD, was it hard to hear in 2021. Everything was put on Mary's shoulders, and Stephen was treated like a big, dumb animal who couldn't help himself. Mary should have known how to handle her delicate little baby-man. UGH.
This makes it sound like I hated the movie, but that isn't true. I liked a lot of things about it. I wouldn't say it's one of my favorite movies of all-time, but I really liked the performances. Joan Crawford was perfectly cast as a bitchy shopgirl/homewrecker (I always like her better when she plays bitchy instead of nice). Norma Shearer elevated a boring role and had me feeling for her with her emotional reactions. Paulette Goddard is stunning, and completely arresting, onscreen. But, the one who really stole the show for me is Rosalind Russell. I adored her in this movie. Her whole look, her catty line delivery, the physical comedy she throws herself into, everything she does in this movie is sheer perfection. I've heard people say Joan Crawford steals this movie, and I think Joan is great, but for me, the MVP is Rosalind Russell. She's fantastic.
Anyway, I am not sorry I watched this movie, and I really do understand things were different back then, but I don't know if I will watch it again. TBH, the energy of the movie is exhausting, especially the opening scene. I kept silently urging the women to stop and take a breath. I might just revisit clips on YouTube, instead. And those are my thoughts on The Women, thank you for reading, lol.
Can't really disagree with most of what you said. What saves "The Women" somewhat is the cynical POV that while the film doesn't portray women in exactly a positive light, the men are actually portrayed just as bad if not worse. It's essentially "men are dogs" , so women have to cope with it as best you can. Not exactly enlightening, I grant you. Yet the zingers and repartee in the film wear down any resistance. The comic timing is impeccable by the cast.
I did think the Paulette Goddard advice speech to Norma Shearer is different then the one by her mother , the one genuinely insufferable character played by Lucille Watson. The mother essentially tells Norma to shut up, grin and bear it and never confront her husband and to confide in no one. Seriously.
Goddard's take is fairly risque, obviously implied, Norma needs to beat her rival sexually, not just be the placid complacent housewife. Again hardly putting the onus on the husband as it should be, but I just thought it was a different spin.
For my money the character/actress who steals the show is Mary Boland as the numerously married Countess who always marries "for love", her lament "La publicitee!'" is priceless.
-
2
-
-
NFL Thread
in Sports
I think it’s obvious by now that Brady hatred/Jealousy only makes him stronger. Let it go.
Of all the insane statistics with the man is this nugget:
Since turning 40, Brady has reached 3 Super Bowls, winning 2 , was a SB MVP , was a regular season MVP, and this year including the playoffs threw for 50 TD’s.
Since he’s playing next year, barring injury, he could conceivably have gotten into the Hall of Fame based on just the 40+ age phase of his career.
-
2
-
-
Contrast with Nadal's public stance:
"We can't complain"
-
4
-
-
NFL Thread
in Sports
I dunno, I get that the Chiefs/Mahomes are the favorites, (3 points sounds about right). However their Offensive Tackle Eric Fisher is out with an ACL and it looks like OT Swartz isn't returning for the Superb Bowl. so up in the trenches it will be interesting how the Buccaneers pass rush fares.
-
NFL Thread
in Sports
Well, looks like Bucaneers versus Chiefs.
Ok, so let's see if at least 3 out of the 4 Offense/Defense Coordinators going to the Super Bowl end up as head coaches next year.
Just saying.
-
NFL Thread
in Sports
1 hour ago, stealinghome said:Super happy for Brady and the Bucs, but wow, was kicking that FG the worst sports decision since Kevin Cash taking out Blake Snell in the World Series. What was LaFleur THINKING? You have Aaron Rodgers at QB for fuck’s sake!
Of course the irony is Rodgers will probably be the league MVP, but yeah, you don’t put the game in his hands. WTF?
Sorry but the facts are Rodgers losing at home ( with pregame snow) is now 1-4 in NFC champ. games, losing 4 straight. As to the Bucaneers, well they’re winning with the big D, which last time I looked is key to winning champs. They should get AB back for the Super Bowl.too.
I hate the word “legacy”, but yeah, for Rodgers it has to hurt.
heheheheheh.
-
3
-
-
NFL Thread
in Sports
7 hours ago, mojoween said:Matthew Stafford is 33? He looks older than Brady.
the secret:
Avocado Ice Cream.
-
3
-
-
8 hours ago, crimsongrl said:
Poor Novak, "Woe Is Me" must be his middle name. "Victim" is definitely his last name.
-
2
-
-
NFL Thread
in Sports
Good God, Aaron Rodgers winning a 2nd SB would make him nigh unbearable. As it is, we know how "beloved" he is by so many of his ex teammates. Incredibly gifted Quarterback but alas also incredibly "gifted" as an asshole. .
-
1
-
1
-
-
NFL Thread
in Sports
Eagle's Doug Peterson:
Dang, winning a SuperBowl and a couple of playoff spots gets you squat these days....
-
NFL Thread
in Sports
22 hours ago, DrSpaceman73 said:Personally I think baltimore has just benefitted from an easy schedule the last month. I don't think they are any more or less dangerous than any other agc team 2-7. They are all a toss up and very close in that group. Anyone one of those teams can beat any other and I don't think seeding means much in that group. A couple games separate almost all of them.....I think buffalo got to 14 wins? Can't recall if 13 or 14 but they are all strong and competitive.
But I can't see any beating KC. Not that it can't happen just don't think it will. Buffalo has the best chance with offense and defense balance and qb okay but they lack playoff experience.
Does toughness of regular schedule translate to better results once playoffs come? I dunno, Just Playing 16 games, if you're not toughened up by the season end regardless. It would be interesting to have statistical data as to how the teams with the best record versus quality opponents do once the post season commences.
Now I know before the season started the Ravens were projected to have the "easiest" schedule as opposed to the Patriots having the "toughest"
https://www.giants.com/news/2020-nfl-schedule-release-strength-of-schedule-formula-how-it-works
Did the actual results flip alot of that? I don't know, just curious.
-
4 minutes ago, VCRTracking said:
I'm thinking by the time she met Steve she was already centuries old, so 66 years is basically like a year or less to her.
So that means Diana and Steve went around for basically 5-10 minutes?
-
NFL Thread
in Sports
I'm torn: It seems that it's a huge advantage for the #1 team in each conference to get a week rest while everyone else dukes it out. OTOH, why shouldn't the best record have the advantage, since it reflects excellence over the entire season.
Caveat on the WTF and Bucs game, didn't the last 7-9 playoff team pull off the upset in 2011 ?
Not only did the Seattle Seahawks upset the NO Saints, but the Saints with Drew were the defending SB champs. That was a crazy year regardless as the wildcard NY Jets led by Mark Sanchez upset the 14-2 NE Patriots.
However back to reality now, if the Bucs/Brady score a couple of TD's early just can't see Alex/WTF getting much offense going.
-
2
-
-
On 12/27/2020 at 5:51 PM, annzeepark914 said:
Why would Johnny care about Michelle being such a fantastic skater? I was wondering how Miss Tara would handle a video of Michelle skating to music she could no longer hear due to the incredible noise that the standing, cheering audience was making.
Mildly shocked they didn't try to insert a couple of Russian skaters just so Johnny could oh so confidently overenunciate their names.
-
7
-
2
-
-
On 12/30/2020 at 7:11 PM, Danny Franks said:
As for Wonder Woman, it's another case of being hostage to comic book canon. In all the years she's been in print, Diana has really only had one love interest - Steve Trevor. Yes, there's been some subtext stuff with Batman and the weird, New 52 thing with Superman, but otherwise it's always been Steve.
I don't know why, I've not read much Wonder Woman and generally don't see what's great about any of the male love interests that super-heroines are given (seriously, just look at Terry Long, Donna Troy's creepy, writer-self-insert husband), but it's something that's sadly consistent in comics. Even the most powerful, amazing woman must be attached to some boring guy.
So agree with that. Having said that, I did like the treatment of Steve Trevor in the first WW movie, in that it was his compassionate humanity and self sacrifice, his goodness, that attracted Dianna to him. (Well yeah, OK it didn't hurt he looked like Chris Pine). My bigger issue with this WW1984 movie was that it had been 75+ years since his death and Dianna had not moved on. When you add the Justice League movie it appears that 100 + years she is still pining for the man. It's a narrative dead end.
-
1
-
-
On 12/31/2020 at 5:47 AM, Rinaldo said:
Even at the time (beginning onstage) Bells Are Ringing was reviewed as an old-fashioned sort of story, a vehicle for the talents of its leading lady, and appealing according to the degree one finds Judy Holliday irresistible. Many did, and do. In addition to the classic "Just In Time," there's a type of song for which I'm always a sucker, a counterpoint duet (two tunes are first sung separately, then simultaneously), "Better Than a Dream." This was actually added to the Broadway production late in its run (it isn't in the published script or score), but fortunately it was retained for the movie while several songs were cut.
The masochistic "The Party's Over" gets me every time.
-
1
-
-
Mercy alive but it grates on me how Meryl Streep seemingly is offered every role between the ages of 35-75. It's not even a rant on her abilities, but the fact that no actress has a range that wide. For example , She is an OK singer, but she even gets first dibs on singing roles.
-
8
-
-
On 12/24/2020 at 7:28 PM, Rinaldo said:
There are so many lost or partially lost films. Sometimes scenes were cut for censorship reasons and now can't be found, sometimes a film was shortened after initial release to shorten it for neighborhood viewings (get more shows in a day), or was cut for TV airings in the 1950s and the additional footage misplaced. Sometimes nobody is curating the movie as a whole and part of it can't be found (like the final reel of Gloria Swanson's silent Sadie Thompson).
Or even if the whole duration survives, it may not be the right ratio. This applies to post-1950 movies, when widescreen gradually became standard in movies but they had to be cropped for TV showing. Sometimes the version cropped-for-older-TVs is also that TCM is given to show, and my sad presumption is that this is all that survives (I've mentioned Tender Is the Night and All of Me here). I hope I'm wrong and these were just individual cases of carelessness in providing the film to TCM.
I've always thought the Holy Grail was Orson Welles' "The Magnificent Ambersons", which IMO is probably gone forever, Some claim a copy of the original uncut film was sent down by RKO to Orson Welles who was in Brazil; I just read there is yet another effort to try to find the excised footage. However back then they would burn all the excess footage found in their vaults/warehouses after awhile.
The other lost movie frequently referenced is the silent 1924 film "Greed" by Eric Von Stronheim. Reputedly the first cut ran over 8 hours!
Back to the Welles film, even a novice like me can tell where the movie was edited down but still, it's such a great work of art, oh well, coulda shoulda woulda.....
-
2
-
-
I've watched soo many foreign films in my life that CC on english speaking films doesn't phase me at all. As an American, it's especially helpful on British/English movies/shows where the accents make some dialogue indecipherable to my ears.
Netflix shows so so many foreign TV series, let alone movies, that I would think CC isn't that distracting once you get used to it.
-
1
-
-
The Pre-Code 1933 "Babyface" starring Barbara Stanwyck was something else. The frank depiction of sex as a transactional exchange vis-a-vis men for her character to climb up the corporate ladder was so matter of fact. Spelled out so clearly her father allowed men to abuse her sexually from a young age, yet the emancipated Babyface isn't portrayed as a "victim" perse, nor some wicked wayward woman, but, so help me , someone who translates Nietzsche philosophy to exploiting men instead of being exploited. ( It's hilarious to learn they edited out all references to Nietzsche from the post Code version).
Her relationship with Chico, portrayed by Theresa Harris, is unique as far as race relations in that time in films, in that it's established they are first and foremost, friends, even if the conventions of the time have Chico become her maid.
A young John Wayne is one of the men she uses, and again, Stanwyck's character upward mobility is contrasted with the men who think they are using her, yet they let their emotions get in the way while Babyface leaves her feelings at the door.
Sidenote: Didn't realize so many pre-Code films are *lost* in that the perceived racier bits were edited out in subsequent airings and some footage has not been recovered. It was serendipitous that they "found" the original Babyface.
-
3
-
TCM: The Greatest Movie Channel
in Movies
· Edited by caracas1914
Mitzi Gaynor was OK as Nellie, but I just find her acting and singing conventional at best.
I think the film in some ways is a disaster, that weird color filtering for musical numbers, and I'm sorry, just can't get over the fact that Juanita Hall (Bloody Mary) who played the role on Broadway and even won the Tony for it, had her singing voice dubbed. I read somewhere ostensibly it was for legal reasons but still....If Rogers and Hammerstein still the rights to their material, how was she banned from singing it onscreen?