TCM: The Greatest Movie Channel

[Fukui San]

His kids have to be 40 at least. The article says they were estranged and that all the money will go to the younger second wife. Not to say that Lewis isn't an asshole, but I'm guessing they could probably see this coming. 

[ratgirlagogo]

His kids are in their sixties and seventies.    Gary for example had his radio hits with the Playboys in the mid-60's.  Jerry's grandchildren on the other hand would be much younger and might be more in need of the money.  Dick move in any case.

[PaulaO]

Watching Some Like It Hot for about the hundredth time.  Jack Lemmon was robbed of the Oscar.

[Inquisitionist]

9 hours ago, ratgirlagogo said:

His kids are in their sixties and seventies.  

His grandchildren, however, are not. 

 

9 hours ago, ratgirlagogo said:

 Dick move in any case.

Absolutely.  Lewis sounds like he was a pretty miserable human being.

Has TCM ever shown Oliver! ?  Having spent this past week in London, the movie has floated through my mind on occasion.  I don't think I've seen it since its release in 1968. 

[voiceover]

9 hours ago, ratgirlagogo said:

His kids are in their sixties and seventies.    Gary for example had his radio hits with the Playboys in the mid-60's.

Wow.  Did not know they were related.

 

22 minutes ago, Inquisitionist said:

Has TCM ever shown Oliver! ?  Having spent this past week in London, the movie has floated through my mind on occasion.  I don't think I've seen it since its release in 1968. 

Yes.  IIRC, a 60s-musicals day, and probably on Oliver Reed's bday.

eta: No doubt showing my age, but I just noticed that Jack Benny looks kinda hot with that goatee (To Be or Not to Be).  Dapper.  Like Ronald Colman's...cousin.

Edited September 23, 2017 by voiceover

[Rinaldo]

4 hours ago, voiceover said:

Wow.  Did not know they were related.

Quote

Has TCM ever shown Oliver! ?

Yes.  IIRC, a 60s-musicals day, and probably on Oliver Reed's bday.

I've always been immensely fond of the movie Oliver! (not so much the stage musical -- I find this one of the rare cases of a show being decisively improved in the filming), and would be happy to see it turn up again (though I own the DVD and can see it whenever I like). It deserved every one of its Academy Awards, including those for Score Adaptation (John Green), Art Direction (John Box), and the special one for Choreography (Onna White).

And the reason I left in "Did not know they were related" in the quote box above? Only last year did I discover that Oliver Reed was the nephew of the movie's director, Carol Reed. At the same time, I discovered that Carol Reed was the son of the eminent British stage actor Sir Herbert Beerbohm Tree -- one of those luxuriously maintained out-of-wedlock second families one sometimes encounters in the Edwardian era, when everybody knew but nobody said anything about the invisible husband of Mrs. Reed and her six children in their grand house.

[Crisopera]

I couldn't agree with you more about the superiority of the movie Oliver! over the stage version.  I saw the stage version when i was very young (6 or 7 perhaps) in London, and I remember loving it. Then I  saw an off-off-OFF-Broadway production a few years ago, and boy, was it a snore.  I also sang through the score with friends when in grad school, and discovered that, like Les Miz, it only has about 3 tunes which keep coming back, and coming back, and coming back.  And the book's structure just doesn't work as well as Les Miz's does.  The movie version is just so much better - I wish that I could say that for Les Miz.

[Inquisitionist]

20 hours ago, Rinaldo said:

And the reason I left in "Did not know they were related" in the quote box above? Only last year did I discover that Oliver Reed was the nephew of the movie's director, Carol Reed. At the same time, I discovered that Carol Reed was the son of the eminent British stage actor Sir Herbert Beerbohm Tree -- one of those luxuriously maintained out-of-wedlock second families one sometimes encounters in the Edwardian era, when everybody knew but nobody said anything about the invisible husband of Mrs. Reed and her six children in their grand house.

Ha, I just learned the Oliver/Carol Reed connection while reading some trivia at IMDb.  When hubby and I honeymooned in London 25 years ago, we did some walking tours led by a part-time actor/mostly carpenter who was very knowledgeable and entertaining.  As a boy, he'd been one of the dancers in Who Will Buy?  I thought he had pointed out the filming location for that song on our of the tours, but according to online trivia, Oliver! was filmed exclusively on backlot sets.  I wondered because when we skirted through Belgravia on our last morning in London, we saw some crescent streets with similar structures, but they didn't have the wide, expansive open space in front that's depicted in film.  I'll be on the lookout for a reshowing of Oliver!

And circling back to Oliver Reed, I remember swooning over him with friends in my college dorm when we watched The Assassination Bureau late one night.  Guy was rather messed up, and literally drinking himself to death by age 61 was horrific, but in his prime he was dead sexy.  Pairing him with Diana Rigg was genius.  

On 9/22/2017 at 8:45 PM, PaulaO said:

Watching Some Like It Hot for about the hundredth time.  Jack Lemmon was robbed of the Oscar.

Figuratively trampled by Ben Hur.  Looking back, I see that SLIH won only one Oscar, and wasn't even nominated for Best Film.

[Milburn Stone]

9 hours ago, Crisopera said:

I also sang through the [Oliver!] score with friends when in grad school, and discovered that, like Les Miz, it only has about 3 tunes which keep coming back...

I took this as a challenge to see how many different songs from the score come back to me within moments. :)

"Food, Glorious Food," "Consider Yourself," "Who Will Buy," "As Long As He Needs Me," "It's a Fine Life," "You've Got to Pick a Pocket or Two." All seem distinct enough from each other, and distinct from the scores of other shows. So I'll have to take issue with you there. (I will concede that "Food," "Consider," and "Fine" bear a family resemblance to each other, but this seems organic and appropriate, and like I say, they seem different enough.)

But I have a feeling you may convince if you can think of certain passages of one song that are inversions of passages in another. I mean that. I can see myself saying, "Damn, those songs are more alike than I thought!" 

[bmoore4026]

Today's theme is Old Scifi Movies.  So let's all enjoy Zsa Zsa Gabor in Queen of Outer Space!

[Rinaldo]

Ah yes. "I hay dot kvinn."

I never even knew there was a movie of The Barretts of Wimpole Street other than the Shearer/Laughton one. And seeing part of it today, I guess I know why. Not one for the ages. Bill Travers, so convincing in strong-man roles, is not a Robert Browning. (Virginia McKenna is also in the movie as a cousin; maybe this is when they met.) But John Gielgud is wonderfully persnickety and hateable as Papa. After seeing her fun English-accented turn in Beat the Devil recently, it was disappointing to see Jennifer Jones be such a simp as Elizabeth. All  self-conscious Great Lady acting, and she didn't even attempt the accent, which she had done perfectly well a couple of years before. The whole thing just felt pointless. Thumbs down.

[Crs97]

On 9/21/2017 at 5:10 AM, Luckylyn said:

TCM is having A Star Is Born marathon of all three versions on September 29 starting 8pm.   I'm thrilled to finally get to see the first one.

I had seen and enjoyed Fredric March in many things, usually when he was an older actor, but this was the first time he became THE FREDRIC MARCH to me.  The first is my favorite of the three, and that is due to his heart-breaking character.

[Rinaldo]

And right after the third Star Is Born, they're showing What Price Hollywood?, an obvious source for its story (RKO considered suing). George Cukor directed both it and the Judy Garland Star Is Born. (He was asked to direct the Janet Gaynor one as well, but declined when he found it so similar to WPH? which he had done so recently.)

[Rinaldo]

I had never seen Tender Is the Night. I knew it mostly from its theme song which was all over the radio in my teens (when the movie was released), one of those slurps-but-pretty ballads that Hollywood liked then. Later I was surprised to discover that it was an adaptation of an F. Scott Fitzgerald novel (surprised because I didn't expect that kind of big Hollywood production to have a respectable literary basis). And then I suppose I never thought about it again till it turned up on TCM.

I've watched the first 20 minutes, and there were three more surprises: 1, that it's in color (in that period, personal dramas not focused on music or spectacle were still often in black and white). 2, that it kept the 1920s setting; this was a surprise that arrive 10 minutes in, because it was not at all obvious from the costuming -- pure 60s -- but then all the popular songs in the background were of the earlier period, and at a party everyone danced the Charleston. 3, that through carelessness or mischance TCM was showing a print formatted for old-style TVs, with the main titles letterboxed so they were a small rectangle (Cinemascope!) in the middle of the screen, and the movie proper was panned-and-scanned for the 4:3 ratio.

Does this happen often? I can't remember a previous instance, though of course I'm not watching every moment; and I do remember one time when the audio description was turned on throughout one film. I wonder if someone at HQ slipped up, or if there really is no widescreen print available (which would seem a bit on the incredible side).

[Fairfax]

On ‎9‎/‎27‎/‎2017 at 0:15 PM, Crs97 said:

I had seen and enjoyed Fredric March in many things, usually when he was an older actor, but this was the first time he became THE FREDRIC MARCH to me.  The first is my favorite of the three, and that is due to his heart-breaking character.

I love Fredric March at all stages of his career.  He was Vronsky for Garbo's Anna Karenina in 1935 -- if you haven't seen it, you definitely should.

[Rinaldo]

Did anybody undertake all of the "Star Is Born marathon"? I saw most of the first one (which I'd not seen before) and started the second one, and then conked out.

One surprise was that ASIB-1 is in color. (It's from an era when Technicolor was still on the way in, largely reserved for animation and historical costume dramas.) And I find that it was in fact the first color film nominated for Best Picture. Fredric March is excellent, but the common wisdom is probably right that the one-on-the-way-down in stories of this sort is a gift to any actor. Interesting to see Andy Devine in a more "cultured" role than usual.

I'm a little surprised that Ben M didn't talk about the issues with the restoration of ASIB-2 to something close to its full length, using a recovered soundtrack over stills and scans to bridge the gaps -- it's bound to be puzzling to a first-time viewer. Maybe Ben did that afterward? I have bipolar feelings about this movie. George Cukor and Moss Hart are among the greats, but they should have known that a two-person story like this doesn't merit treatment at epic length, and they should have trimmed it back before shooting. It's impossible not to root for Judy Garland, returning to the screen in a high-class vehicle after some troubled years, but I don't find her acting here to be all that is sometimes claimed for it (sometimes too insistently one-note, lacking delicacy); and though "The Man That Got Away" is undeniably one of the great musical numbers ever delivered onscreen, this movie is where her singing starts to enter its "second period" (desperate pushiness) and my taste is more for her first period of the 1930s-40s (understated expressiveness). No problems with James Mason though. He does have delicacy, and he's nonstop fascinating.

Edited later to add: No, Ben didn't explain the oddities of the restoration afterward, either -- he just talked about the disappointment that Garland didn't win the Oscar. (This time around, I wasn't sure that she really deserved it on the merits of her acting -- but then I'm not sure that Grace Kelly did either. Which narrative does Hollywood give more statues for? "Troubled former child star manages a comeback" or "Great beauty shows she can act drab and ordinary"? Who would I have favored that year, I wonder? maybe Audrey Hepburn in Sabrina, just to be contrary.)

Edited October 1, 2017 by Rinaldo

[Padma]

On ‎9‎/‎21‎/‎2017 at 9:14 AM, Rinaldo said:

Carrie Rickey wrote a good essay about that in her entry devoted to In a Lonely Place on the Library of America blog "The Moviegoer" (devoted to literary works turned into movies).  It's an addictive blog in general; often the writers are more forgiving of changes than I would be, but that's part of the fun of reading it -- getting a different viewpoint.

It's a biweekly blog, but they took the summer off; I hope they get it going again soon.

Not sure where my post went, but I really enjoyed reading this. Nice find!

I saw a local production of an Agatha Christie this week--"Murder Is Announced".  Today watched my favorite AC movie (replaying on "TCM On Demand", "Witness for the Prosecution". Big difference, undoubtedly helped by not just the superior plotting but also that Billy Wilder was the director and co-adaptor.  I'm not sure the "twist" really works on film, but as an AC mystery on film, it holds up really well.

I'm surprised that all the remakes have been for television. (Wish I'd seen the 1982 version with Ralph Richardson, Deborah Kerr, Beau Bridges, Donald Pleasence, Wendy Hiller and Diana Rigg. Although how could either Bridges or Pleasence have the Tyrone Power role?)

"Witness for.." was Power's last completed film. He died of a heart attack at 44.

Anyway, I was wondering why it had never been remade as a film and what do you know? Ben Affleck is working on it now. I hope they'll keep the Billy Wilder script, but they probably won't.

[Milburn Stone]

Watched a bit of Broadway Melody of 1938, which I DVR'ed whenever TCM last showed it. Robert Benchley showed up as a theatrical press agent, and it made me think about how much I love him no matter what he's doing. No exceptions.

And it made me wonder--what is the earliest example on film of Benchley playing a character not "himself"? I know he appeared as "himself" (in quotes, because his public persona was probably a far cry from his actual self) in a number of short subjects, but I'm talking about his playing a character. (Which probably also ought to be in quotes, because I've never seen him play a character that was much different from the persona he displayed as "himself.") I wonder who was the first movie executive to think of making him an actor?

[Rinaldo]

11 hours ago, Padma said:

I hope they'll keep the Billy Wilder script, but they probably won't.

I'm of two minds about that, as I think it over. I've read all of Christie's mysteries, most multiple times. The Wilder movie certainly works, but the additions to the Christie short story and play were completely tailored to the personality and talents of Charles Laughton (the whole character of the defense attorney was newly invented, as was the nurse for his wife Elsa Lanchester). With another actor, all that additional material would seem pointless; better to invent anew to suit the new actor, if it's even necessary to pad out the play's material to make it feature-length, and I'm not sure it is. Anyway, I consider the Wilder script a one-time phenomenon, and I would expect a new version to do its own take, if it even happens. (And if it does, and Affleck acts in it, I'm assuming that he's already seen that a morally ambiguous role like an accused husband who might be guilty of murder or might be innocent, but seems a little sleazy either way, fits right in his best acting range -- he already played it to perfection in Gone Girl.)

The material is booby-trapped for film adaptation, which what I assume @Padma meant by saying the twist maybe not working on film, and this might be one of the rare times I find a spoiler warning appropriate here, because Christie is all about the surprises:

Spoiler

In this case the wife, played by Marlene Dietrich, disguising herself as the exculpatory Cockney witness so completely that an audience won't recognize her, even in close-ups. Obviously that's no problem in print, and onstage it can be carried off by distance and the artificialities of stage makeup. I think Wilder & Dietrich get away with it, but this is obviously a personal matter and I'm no judge because I knew the story long before I saw the movie, so I was never going to be fooled.

I wonder if a new version would feel obliged to retain Christie's own addition to her story, which she insisted on for the stage and film versions.

Spoiler

I mean the revelation that Leonard was unfaithful to his wife despite all she did to save him, so she kills him in the last moments of the play/film. Others found this an incongruously melodramatic last-minute intrusion, but Dame Agatha insisted on it. She said that she couldn't stand the idea that Leonard got away with it, and he had to be punished. But there was also a stagecraft reason: a theater audience would catch on to the disguise if no additional character was listed in the playbill, so having a final character listed as "The Other Woman" created a neat extra deception. Other movies that attempt a similar trick have handled this problem in various ways, like making up names for the open credits, or delaying credits till the end.

[Milburn Stone]

@Rinaldo, re Witness, replying to your "hidden contents" with my own:

Spoiler

 

I know that as a boy of around twelve or thirteen, I was completely fooled by the ruse, but I hardly knew Dietrich then. Seeing it as an adult, I wonder how anybody could have been fooled. Yet the movie being such a hit is a kind of proof that people were, I guess.

But now I wonder something, conjuring the sequence in my memory: Was Cockney Dietrich dubbed? When I hear her as that witness in my mind's ear, I think I hear another voice entirely than Dietrich's own. Which, if so, is a bit of trickery that hardly seems fair to the audience. (Far more unfair than Hitchcock's allegedly unfair use of "false flashback" in another Dietrich movie, Stage Fright, which never has struck me as unfair at all.)

 

[Rinaldo]

In answer to @Milburn Stone,

Spoiler

 

I wondered about Dietrich's voice too, and a quick search online (including the TCM site) brought up the information that although the occasional claim has been made that her Cockney voice was dubbed, there seems to be no responsible evidence that this was the case. She coached extensively on the dialect, and was very proud of her achievement, as were others on the production, though in the nature of things they couldn't get any publicity out of it. One of her dialect coaches was (of all people!) Noel Coward, who wrote in his later-published diary, "It is not easy to teach Cockney to a German glamour-puss who can't pronounce her Rs, but she did astonishingly well." And as to the sound of her disguised voice: after all, one of her tasks was to make her voice sound different, or the imposture would be obvious. So I think we have to give her credit for doing it herself, no cheating.

By contrast, with another movie from that era that advertised using heavily disguised actors, the truth has since come out that they didn't play fair: The List of Adrian Messenger. That film purposed to have secondary characters played unrecognizably by Tony Curtis, Kirk Douglas, Burt Lancaster, Frank Sinatra, and Robert Mitchum. And in the final credit sequence, they all peel of their disguises to reveal their surprising real identity. In fact, most of those (only Mitchum is exempted for certain -- he's actually pretty recognizable in the film proper) were played by other actors, and the stars showed up only to film those end-credits bits. Which, especially in a movie whose original publicity challenged the audience to spot the disguised stars, is definitely not fair dealing!

 

[Milburn Stone]

@Rinaldo, I

Spoiler

 

never knew that about Adrian Messenger, which I saw in the movies as a kid. That is deception right on the cusp of meriting jail time, if you ask me! Sounds like I'm exaggerating, but if I am, only slightly. Where is the line between a Barnum-esque trick and actual fraud, deserving of intervention by the FTC, as well as a phalanx of class action lawyers? If I were Huston, a cast member, or any of the production executives, I'd have been sleeping uneasily until the statute of limitations ran out.

Thanks for the info about Dietrich, who, as Larry Hart said, was

 

a sweet trick.

[ratgirlagogo]

16 hours ago, Milburn Stone said:

And it made me wonder--what is the earliest example on film of Benchley playing a character not "himself"? 

My first answer in my head was Dancing Lady, but according to the IMDB it's Rafter Romance.  Both from 1933.

I've always loved Robert Benchley, his writing mostly.  The first Dewey Decimal number I ever learned as a kid was 817, American Humor - because the first  books I ever read that were in the adult room of the library (on my mother's suggestion - thanks, Mom) were by Robert Benchley and James Thurber.  

Edited October 1, 2017 by ratgirlagogo

[Milburn Stone]

1 hour ago, ratgirlagogo said:

I've always loved Robert Benchley, his writing mostly.  The first Dewey Decimal number I ever learned as a kid was 817, American Humor - because the first  books I ever read that were in the adult room of the library (on my mother's suggestion - thanks, Mom) were by Robert Benchley and James Thurber.  

Are you me?

(I'm serious--right down to the "mother's suggestion.")

Edited October 1, 2017 by Milburn Stone

[Rinaldo]

I discovered Robert Benchley's writing in high school, when the other super-nerd of similar interests to mine clued me in. He loaned me the book he had out from the library right then, I read two or three pieces, returned the book, and proceeded to check out and devour one after another of his books from my own local library (our high school covered 4 or 5 Chicago suburbs). It was a few years before I realized that these were collected magazine pieces, and even longer before I discovered that he performed in old movies.

And @Milburn Stone, I totally agree and don't find your reaction excessive. I can't remember ever seeing that movie, so it's not personal, more on behalf of the concept of ethics. 

[voiceover]

*sniffs the air*

Hey!!  It's Ramon Novarro in prime time!

His Ben-Hur is my favorite of all the Hurs.  Watch the chariot race.  One of the most stunning silent film action sequences filmed.

On 10/1/2017 at 1:11 PM, ratgirlagogo said:

 

I've always loved Robert Benchley, his writing mostly.  The first Dewey Decimal number I ever learned as a kid was 817, American Humor - because the first  books I ever read that were in the adult room of the library (on my mother's suggestion - thanks, Mom) were by Robert Benchley and James Thurber.  

That is such a sweet story.  Ahhh, the Dewey Decimal system!!  And those long wooden drawers at the library, filled with cards.

[Rinaldo]

I knew from an early age that 812 was American plays, and 822 was British plays. And later, yes, when I discovered Benchley I learned about 817 too.

[Milburn Stone]

There are two kinds of people in this world: those who discovered Robert Benchley in their youth, and those who didn't.

[Crisopera]

Milburn Stone, I mischaracterized my reaction to the Oliver! score.  I didn't really mean that it only had 3 tunes -  I really meant that the songs were endlessly reprised in the 2nd act.  (On the other hand, Les Miz really does have only 3 tunes.)  And I am so thrilled to find that my fellow TCM-ers are also devotees of Thurber and Benchley - any fellow fans of S. J Perelman?  His New Yorker series about the pop culture of his youth ("Cloudland Revisited") is absolutely hilarious.

[Padma]

On ‎10‎/‎1‎/‎2017 at 6:52 AM, Rinaldo said:

I'm of two minds about that, as I think it over. I've read all of Christie's mysteries, most multiple times. The Wilder movie certainly works, but the additions to the Christie short story and play were completely tailored to the personality and talents of Charles Laughton (the whole character of the defense attorney was newly invented, as was the nurse for his wife Elsa Lanchester). With another actor, all that additional material would seem pointless; better to invent anew to suit the new actor, if it's even necessary to pad out the play's material to make it feature-length, and I'm not sure it is. Anyway, I consider the Wilder script a one-time phenomenon, and I would expect a new version to do its own take, if it even happens. (And if it does, and Affleck acts in it, I'm assuming that he's already seen that a morally ambiguous role like an accused husband who might be guilty of murder or might be innocent, but seems a little sleazy either way, fits right in his best acting range -- he already played it to perfection in Gone Girl.)

The material is booby-trapped for film adaptation, which what I assume @Padma meant by saying the twist maybe not working on film, and this might be one of the rare times I find a spoiler warning appropriate here, because Christie is all about the surprises:

  Reveal hidden contents

In this case the wife, played by Marlene Dietrich, disguising herself as the exculpatory Cockney witness so completely that an audience won't recognize her, even in close-ups. Obviously that's no problem in print, and onstage it can be carried off by distance and the artificialities of stage makeup. I think Wilder & Dietrich get away with it, but this is obviously a personal matter and I'm no judge because I knew the story long before I saw the movie, so I was never going to be fooled.

I wonder if a new version would feel obliged to retain Christie's own addition to her story, which she insisted on for the stage and film versions.

  Reveal hidden contents

I mean the revelation that Leonard was unfaithful to his wife despite all she did to save him, so she kills him in the last moments of the play/film. Others found this an incongruously melodramatic last-minute intrusion, but Dame Agatha insisted on it. She said that she couldn't stand the idea that Leonard got away with it, and he had to be punished. But there was also a stagecraft reason: a theater audience would catch on to the disguise if no additional character was listed in the playbill, so having a final character listed as "The Other Woman" created a neat extra deception. Other movies that attempt a similar trick have handled this problem in various ways, like making up names for the open credits, or delaying credits till the end.

The Laughton character was not in the original? That is a big surprise. I've read several AC novels/stories but not "Witness for..". in any form. I  can't imagine how it would be without the Laughton character because in the movie, it's really HIS story! He's the main character, this is just one of his interesting cases. It's because of this, that the otherwise melodramatic ending Christie insisted on (interesting, I didn't know that either) actually works, imo. Because it leads Laughton to something new. It works because it's not all focused on the married couple, it's about the lawyer.

Also, his relationship with Elsa provides much-needed comedy and humanity,as opposed to the mystery--which is interesting, but doesn't have enough "heart" going for it  alone, in my opinion anyway. I need to read the story or play now, because I  can't imagine it would be as good. (Then again, for me, AC works well as a puzzle but not as character piece for the most part. "Witness For.." was a BIG exception to me and now it seems the things I think make it work better than most Christie films is something she never intended.  I suspect Affleck will return to the original, though, as I'm sure he'll play the Power role and won't want to be upstaged by there being a different major character.) 

I always thought the wife

 

was dubbed

 (and although Coward gives some credibility to her not being dubbed, he also was Dietrich's great friend and I wouldn't be surprised at all if he'd keep up a deception for her. (And "The List of Adrian Messenger" cheated on the stars? I'll have to rewatch because...not cricket!

For anyone old enough to remember Ruta Lee on all those 1970s (?) game shows and sitcoms, I was surprised to see that she was Diana in "Witness For...". Dark-haired, not blonde, and very young. ,

Edited October 3, 2017 by Padma

[Rinaldo]

7 hours ago, Padma said:

The Laughton character was not in the original?

There's a defense attorney of course, but he's not given a personality and backstory as Laughton was.

7 hours ago, Padma said:

Then again, for me, AC works well as a puzzle but not as character piece for the most part.

Oh, I think that's absolutely true, and I love AC and have read everything she wrote. But it's for a supremely clever puzzle, with the clues hidden right in plain sight and yet unguessed (if I've waited long enough to forget the solution before I reread, she fools me all over again). Very few of her mysteries have anything interesting in the way of characterization -- maybe Five Little Pigs, Sad Cypress, and The Hollow are partial exceptions.

7 hours ago, Padma said:

I suspect Affleck will return to the original, though, as I'm sure he'll play the Power role and won't want to be upstaged by there being a different major character.

He definitely should play the Power role, as that's so totally in his wheelhouse, but I'd give him more credit on the "upstaged" point -- he's been willing to be outshone by more vivid characters in more than one of the movies he's done.

[Charlie Baker]

10 hours ago, Padma said:

For anyone old enough to remember Ruta Lee on all those 1970s (?) game shows and sitcoms, I was surprised to see that she was Diana in "Witness For...". Dark-haired, not blonde, and very young. ,

I was surprised to learn she was one of the brides in Seven Brides for Seven Brothers--under her biirth name Kilmonis.

[voiceover]

Tonight's Monster Marathon makes me yearn for a repeat on the big screen.  I would lay down & die to see Bride of Frankenstein and my favorite Karloff, The Mummy ("He went for a little walk!  You should've seen his face!"...that was one creepy descent into insanity).

I don't know what they were smoking when they chose the 2017 TCM/Fathom schedule, but it wasn't anything good.  The most bizarre marriage of movie to month?  December's film is Guess Who's Coming to Dinner.

All of the wonderful classic holiday films!  I would've even agreed to a Stanwyck...

Edited October 4, 2017 by voiceover
"Fathom" is the sponsor; "Fandango" is ticket sales. Hey. I had a stroke last year.

[Rinaldo]

But this month we have The Princess Bride! That's actually one I'm highly tempted by; I would dearly love to see it with an audience again. Except I fear that it's now become a "Rocky Horror" sort of favorite, and everyone will chant favorite lines aloud with the screen.

[MisterBluxom]

On 9/21/2017 at 0:14 PM, Rinaldo said:

Carrie Rickey wrote a good essay about that in her entry devoted to In a Lonely Place on the Library of America blog "The Moviegoer" (devoted to literary works turned into movies).  It's an addictive blog in general; often the writers are more forgiving of changes than I would be, but that's part of the fun of reading it -- getting a different viewpoint.

It's a biweekly blog, but they took the summer off; I hope they get it going again soon.

For a very long time, Bogart was my favorite actor and I tried to watch all the films he ever made. I still watch several of them regularly.

For anyone who is interested, I want to say that I think his very best film was The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948). It was unusual in that there was no female lead. Hardly any females even appeared in this film. But it was just mesmerizing and although there may have been some other great Bogart films, IMHO, it is clearly the best.

Some others are close seconds. The Caine Mutiny (1954) will most definitely not appeal to most people. A great many people will say it was not even a very good film. There was a terribly insipid sub-plot involving a romance between two characters who seemed to have been present just because some studio head demanded that a romance be present in the film. But after having seen every single one of Bogart's films, it was his acting range that made this one of my favorites. I can't really defend this choice very well. I can't offer any real good explanation. But it remains one of my favorites. I suppose you have to really love Bogart to say this is one of your favorite Bogart films.

Another Bogart film that remains one of my favorites but is very hard to defend is Across the Pacific (1942). It's not really a great film. Hardly even a very good film. It stars Bogart, Mary Astor and Sydney Greenstreet. I've never really enjoyed Mary Astor's work as an actor. Most people say they like her because she is very beautiful, sexy, attractive, etc. I have never found her to be any of those things. In fact,  I really wish they had used a different female actor in The Maltese Falcon. Although I always enjoy watching The Maltese Falcon, I think it could have been a much better film with a different female lead. But Across the Pacific contains many of the elements that I find makes for a most enjoyable film. It's a war story that has a great deal of intrigue. The lead character appears to be some kind of scoundrel. But, for some reason, I always find him to be very interesting and I can't take my eyes off him.

OK. So what Bogart films are my favorites and are also great films? Well, many people may not agree with me. But I think Sabrina was one of his best films. It's a love story and not especially a great love story. I think the reason I find it to be great is because of the Director (Billy Wilder). I always marvel at how there does not seem to be a wasted line in this film. Not a wasted second. It all seems to be put together in a perfect way. Again, kind of hard to describe. But if you don't object to love stories, I suggest you try it. It's not a "sappy" love story. Not at all. It's not very serious either. There is a good deal of comedy involved - although it's not terribly overt comedy.

I have a soft spot for the four films he made with Lauren Bacall (who he eventually married). They are: Key Largo, Dark Passage, The Big Sleep and To Have and Have Not. The first film they made together was To Have and Have Not and it kind of set the standard for the banter they used and the kind of relationship they had that made them an audience favorite. I suggest you try To Have and Have Not and if you like it, then you might want to try the other three. I think that if you don't love To Have and Have Not, you will not like the other three and should probably just avoid them.

The Maltese Falcon (1941) is one of his best films and if you want to see the best of his films, you should definitely see this one. It is kind of a classic in the Detective genre. The Big Sleep is often quoted as another great detective movie. But I never found it to be in the same class as some of the greats. I'd suggest you try the Robert Mitchum film The Big Sleep (1976). IMHO, that is one of the very best detective films ever made. It is a remake of the 1944 film Murder My Sweet starring Dick Powel.  I think these two films are the very best detective films ever made and for anyone who enjoys that genre, it is impossible to find anything to dislike about either film. One is the remake of the other and it's very interesting to see them both and then think on the differences between them. The reason for the differences is mostly about the difference between films made in the 1970s vs films made in the 1940s. It's very interesting to consider the similarities and the differences between these two wonderful films.

Edited October 4, 2017 by MissBluxom

[Crisopera]

I personally love Mary Astor, but her (prolific) output can be spotty, especially when she became typed as a rather bland "mother" character.  I love her performance in The Maltese Falcon, but i prefer her Oscar-winning turn in The Big Lie - a tempestuous diva, way out of her usual wheelhouse.  in her usual way, I think she gives a really lovely performance in Meet Me in St. Louis, the ultimate Mom.  (And her second autobiography, "A Life On Film", is fantastic. She had a second career as an author.)

[Milburn Stone]

28 minutes ago, Crisopera said:

I personally love Mary Astor, but her (prolific) output can be spotty, especially when she became typed as a rather bland "mother" character.  I love her performance in The Maltese Falcon, but i prefer her Oscar-winning turn in The Big Lie - a tempestuous diva, way out of her usual wheelhouse.  in her usual way, I think she gives a really lovely performance in Meet Me in St. Louis, the ultimate Mom.  (And her second autobiography, "A Life On Film", is fantastic. She had a second career as an author.)

@Crisopera, thanks for recommending A Life on Film. I never knew about it. Used copies are on Amazon, and not cheap. But I went for one, based on your reco.

I'm so glad you praised her performance in MMiSL. When you started off with "typed as a rather bland 'mother' character," my knee-jerk response was, "hey, wait a minute, her mother character was the very glue that held MMiSL together!" By the end of your post I had calmed down. :)

[graybrown bird]

I love Mary Astor. She added immeasurably to the solidity and warmth of the Meet Me in St. Louis household, especially in her scenes with Leon Ames. In another kind of movie and role, she was very funny in The Palm Beach Story.  

[StatisticalOutlier]

17 hours ago, Rinaldo said:

But this month we have The Princess Bride! That's actually one I'm highly tempted by; I would dearly love to see it with an audience again. Except I fear that it's now become a "Rocky Horror" sort of favorite, and everyone will chant favorite lines aloud with the screen.

It's going to be showing in movie theaters on October 15 and 18.

https://www.fathomevents.com/events/the-princess-bride

 

17 hours ago, voiceover said:

I don't know what they were smoking when they chose the 2017 TCM/Fandango schedule, but it wasn't anything good.  The most bizarre marriage of movie to month?  December's film is Guess Who's Coming to Dinner.

It's Fathom Events' December selection (is that what you meant by Fandango?).  It's the movie's 50th anniversary--it was released in December 1967.

 

In other news, I'm a very huge fan of Buster Keaton.  I can't remember if he spoke in Sunset Boulevard, but I started to watch one of his talkies this morning and couldn't take more than a few minutes.  His voice was just...wrong.  So I'll stick with the usual slate of silents, which I never get tired of. 

[StatisticalOutlier]

On 9/22/2017 at 4:00 PM, ratgirlagogo said:

His kids are in their sixties and seventies.    Gary for example had his radio hits with the Playboys in the mid-60's.  Jerry's grandchildren on the other hand would be much younger and might be more in need of the money.  Dick move in any case.

Oh, I don't know.  If he didn't have a relationship with them, then why should he leave them money?  And even if he did have a relationship with them, why should he leave them money?

I thought the AV Club article was a little much.  "And just to really twist the knife, he goes on to clarify that his grandchildren are also going to get squat, because the spawn of his disliked spawn deserve nothing as well."  The language the article quoted from the will is pretty standard for providing that a person doesn't take under a will, so drawing inferences from it isn't necessarily appropriate.

And I'll obviously quibble with the word, "deserve."

And add that I never thought I'd defend Jerry Lewis.  Never particularly cared for him.

[LilWharveyGal]

54 minutes ago, graybrown bird said:

I love Mary Astor. She added immeasurably to the solidity and warmth of the Meet Me in St. Louis household, especially in her scenes with Leon Ames.

I enjoyed them as the parents in Little Women, too.

[voiceover]

17 hours ago, Rinaldo said:

But this month we have The Princess Bride! 

Yeah, I have zero interest in that film.   I read the book in high school, and loved it so much I gave copies as gifts for years.  But the movie didn't live up what I'd long imagined the characters to be.

 

11 minutes ago, StatisticalOutlier said:

It's Fathom Events' December selection (is that what you meant by Fandango?).  It's the movie's 50th anniversary--it was released in December 1967.

Thanks.  I corrected it in my post.  I'm always mixing up those two while doing ticket searches!

I knew the *reason* for the selection -- but it's not a holiday film.  (Also, excepting Tracy's speech at the end,  it's not a very good one).  How lovely it would be to have a classic holiday alternative to Reindeer Farts: The Sequel.

7 minutes ago, LilWharveyGal said:

I enjoyed them as the parents in Little Women, too.

I thought of her in that movie, too.

[voiceover]

15 hours ago, Crisopera said:

 (And [Mary Astor's]second autobiography, "A Life On Film", is fantastic. She had a second career as an author.)

Ha.  In his memoir Bring on the Empty Horses, David Niven mentioned her naughty (subpoenaed) diary.  Right after describing her as looking like "a highly shockable nun."

[Padma]

My image of Mary Astor is from "DodsworthS, as the classy, mature, intelligent and down-to-earth "other woman". Single, attractive in middle age--and not "Mom". (Though she was good at it).

Thinking of MissBluxom's Bogart* post, "The Treasure of Sierra Madre" is definitely one of my favorites, too. And its impossible for me to think that Walter Huston was that grizzled old miner....and also was Dodsworth!  Among other things, he's at least a foot taller in "Dodsworth", Talk about acting ability...

*Another one of those actors with too many good films for a "Top 5" list...

[voiceover]

4 hours ago, Padma said:

 a "Top 5" list...

Someone's singing my song!!

I love Garbo, but every time I sit through Flesh and the Devil, I can't help but think: "You bitch!"  Her Felicitas is like Louise Brooks's Lulu in Pandora's Box, only with a gram of self-awareness.

[Crisopera]

BTW, if anyone's interested in seeing Mary Astor at her Oscar-winning best, The Big Lie will be on TCM on Tuesday at 4:30 AM.  It's a pretty entertaining soap, although it's hard to believe that Mary Astor and Bette Davis are fighting so hard over George Brent.

[Rinaldo]

I've never seen it, but I will this time. I remember a story about it from one of the Davis biographies. To get the right striking hairstyle for her role, Mary Astor suggested it be achieved by cutting rather than just waving etc. And Davis, impressed, asked, "Are you sure you want to do it, Mary? It will look very extreme!"

Edited October 6, 2017 by Rinaldo

[Charlie Baker]

The Great Lie is entertaining, but it's also odd.  Reportedly Ms. D. and Ms. A. were unhappy with the script and rewrote their scenes.  Ms. A. was accomplished at the piano and also reportedly did her own playing in the movie.

[MisterBluxom]

I don't think she ever made a movie titled "The  Big Lie". IMDB shows "The Great Lie" but not "The Big Lie". I sure do hope I'm not mistaken. But I often am.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0033677/?ref_=nm_flmg_act_58

Edited October 6, 2017 by MissBluxom

[Rinaldo]

1 hour ago, Charlie Baker said:

Ms. A. was accomplished at the piano and also reportedly did her own playing in the movie.

I've never heard the latter claim made (though I suppose it must have been made somewhere). Astor was indeed a very good pianist, and that contributed to the exceptional visual verisimilitude of her performance: she was indeed hitting all the right notes on the keyboard, and with the arm/finger technique of a real soloist. But it was a silent piano, and and a professional pianist (Max Rabinovich) played offscreen, in sync with her and the conductor.

This makes a good cue for a favorite question of mine: who has done the most convincing fake piano playing onscreen (restricting it to classical, rather than jazz etc.)? Mary Astor certainly belongs at or near the top of the list. I also think of Richard Chamberlain in The Music Lovers and Alan Alda in The Mephisto Waltz. I found The Competition so laughable in all its particulars that I'm afraid I was in no position to judge the miming of keyboard playing by the six contestants. No doubt I've missed some good additional examples.