TCM: The Greatest Movie Channel

[wilsie]

@ratgirlagogo Mine is fine.  I get cable through FIOS if that's a help.

[Crisopera]

TCM has been fine all day down here in NC.

[Sharpie66]

Last night, my brother pulled up his list of recent purchases on Vudu, including a bunch of old Irish-themed movies that were on sale on Saturday. We watched The Luck of the Irish, with Tyrone Power, Anne Baxter, Jayne Meadows, and Lee J. Cobb. I really liked it! The Irish accents and pace of speaking was a bit much for my mom who had problems following some of the dialogue, but I have never been more impressed with Power than in this film. Also got a kick when I looked up the name of the guy who played Cobb’s office toady (a brief but funny performance)—Phil Brown, who thirty years later was Uncle Owen in Star Wars.

I will have to keep an eye out for it on TCM next St. Patrick’s Day. 

Edited March 19, 2018 by Sharpie66

[aradia22]

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/renee-zellweger-is-judy-garland-in-first-photo-from-biopic_us_5aafb239e4b05b221800ab71

How are we feeling about this? It's only one photo and I'm well aware there might be some creative angles or maybe even some photo editing. Heck, maybe they told Renee to open her eyes as wide as possible. But if you take the photo at face value, the makeup person really has to be commended for the way he or she has interpreted Renee as Judy. It feels like the Kevyn Aucoin celebrity makeup thing. She's not a replica of Judy but she looks as much like Judy as she was ever going to look.

[Charlie Baker]

It's an impressive shot--enough at least to stir up some interest.  Seems like the script covers the same period as the play with songs End of the Rainbow, which wasn't  a great play but did allow for Tracie Bennett's powerful theatrical impersonation of Judy,  Judy Davis didn't resemble Garland so much in the TV miniseries Me and My Shadow, but she did suggest the persona strongly and the performance was excellent. I'd be willing to give Zellweger a chance.

[jjj]

On ‎3‎/‎17‎/‎2018 at 5:58 PM, Charlie Baker said:

Secret Ceremony is a strange one all right--sometimes Robert Mitchum appears as if he's wondering what on earth he's doing in this movie. (Though maybe his thoughts would have expressed it a little more colorfully.)  Still it has some compelling moments.  I think both it and Reflections in a Golden Eye may come across better now than they did in their initial releases.  Though neither is a masterwork, to understate it, I think an audience of today might be a little more accommodating with the weirdness on display. 

When Secret Ceremony played on broadcast TV, the network softened it, of course, and the studio shot new scenes with actors who weren't in the rest of the movie in an effort to make things clearer.

This is hilarious.  I was the original poster (said that I could not tell who knew what or what they thought their relationships were in this film; it was not just me who was confused, but I thought the characters were confused, also!), so the idea that inserting new scenes with new actors would clarify the film is such a bad plan.  Unless the new scenes were actors with pointers standing in front of printed posters that had explanatory arrows going from one character to another. 

[voiceover]

Now I wish I'd posted this before tonight, so I'd look prescient (and other long words), but ya play the hand you're dealt:

The reprise of Diane Keaton, warbling "Seems Like Old Times" over clips from the Alvy/Annie relationship, is one of my favorite movie endings.  (Setting aside that Annie Hall is also one of my favorite movies...)  It's not just that the lyrics describe the scrapbook nature of the picture.  It's also the reedy wistfulness of Keaton's singing voice.  Annie may as well have been describing any lost love.*

The Way We Were is another obvious choice (in my undergrad years, it topped everyone's list of "Movie Endings That Make Me Cry"...IIRC, my #2 at the time was the George C Scott/Susannah York Jane Eyre).  In Julia Phillips's tell-all You'll Never Eat Lunch in this Town Again, she mentions watching them film that scene from her perch at the hotel.

 

*Eh, who am I kidding?  What do I care about the rest of you -- she's describing *mine*.

[PaulaO]

Sunset Boulevard tonight.  Max!

[LilWharveyGal]

14 minutes ago, PaulaO said:

Sunset Boulevard tonight.  Max!

Thanks!  I tuned in just in time to see Buster Keaton playing cards, which always tickles me.

[StatisticalOutlier]

20 hours ago, voiceover said:

The reprise of Diane Keaton, warbling "Seems Like Old Times" over clips from the Alvy/Annie relationship, is one of my favorite movie endings.  (Setting aside that Annie Hall is also one of my favorite movies...)  It's not just that the lyrics describe the scrapbook nature of the picture.  It's also the reedy wistfulness of Keaton's singing voice.  Annie may as well have been describing any lost love.*

When she's singing that song in the club was I think the first time I ever read significance into a scene, in the contrast between the first time she sang in a club (all the clanging and chatter) and this time. 

And I noticed in the scene in the restaurant near Lincoln Center, at the end, the pedestrian light in the background went from Walk to Don't Walk, and I liked to think that was significant, too (since I was on a roll).

[Crisopera]

Well, I have to say that having to watch Gone With the Wind with the sound off last night (in my mother's hospital room, couldn't sleep) was helpful.  It was the first time I'd seen it for many years (I find it very hard to deal with the vicious racism these days).  It reminded me of how monumental a technical achievement it is, the epitome of spare-no-expense studio filmmaking.  I just let it wash over me, and didn't pay attention to the entire length (at one point, I looked up to see Bonnie Blue Butler and thought, Isn't that child dead yet?).  But, by God, the sets!  The photography! That famous crane shot over the dead and dying confederate soldiers! And, since I'm a costume buff, those fabulous Walter Plunkett costumes!  Also, how great is Olivia de  Havilland?  It's incredibly difficult to play a truly "good" character without coming off as goody-goody, but she certainly does it.  All in all, I won't be searching it out to watch with sound any time soon, but does have its amazing aspects.

[Milburn Stone]

3 hours ago, Crisopera said:

All in all [GwtW] does have its amazing aspects.

Indeed it does. I've come to the point that the racism is a dealbreaker, but not because of its treatment of any of the black characters in particular. More because of its treatment of the white characters--namely, its treatment of the white characters as heroes. Let me get this straight (I say to the movie now)...you want me to mourn the loss of this "gallant civilization"? (The one that decided some people were property?) You want me to see the plight of these white characters as somehow tragic? (The characters who fought to perpetuate people-as-property?) Can't do it.

[NowVoyager]

On 3/24/2018 at 12:21 AM, Milburn Stone said:

Indeed it does. I've come to the point that the racism is a dealbreaker, but not because of its treatment of any of the black characters in particular. More because of its treatment of the white characters--namely, its treatment of the white characters as heroes. Let me get this straight (I say to the movie now)...you want me to mourn the loss of this "gallant civilization"? (The one that decided some people were property?) You want me to see the plight of these white characters as somehow tragic? (The characters who fought to perpetuate people-as-property?) Can't do it.

I feel your plight. Yes, it can be hard to have that suspension of disbelief when you are watching such blatant racism. I mean, look at the way the movie glosses over the creation of the Ku Klux Klan!

I guess I just watch the film with the firm belief that the narrative point of view is fundamentally flawed. That works for me & I'm able to enjoy the movie for what it is. However, I know a lot of people who feel the way you feel about this film & other classic films & just can't get past it.

[Milburn Stone]

12 hours ago, NowVoyager said:

I feel your plight. Yes, it can be hard to have that suspension of disbelief when you are watching such blatant racism. I mean, look at the way the movie glosses over the creation of the Ku Klux Klan!

I guess I just watch the film with the firm belief that the narrative point of view is fundamentally flawed. That works for me & I'm able to enjoy the movie for what it is. However, I know a lot of people who feel the way you feel about this film & other classic films & just can't get past it.

I was where you are until the last couple of years. So I totally get it.

I think it was the all the "proud Southerners" in the last few years defending their Confederate flag and their Confederate statues that did me in. A movie about "proud Southerners" defending their Confederate regime just looks different to me now.

[Inquisitionist]

On 3/23/2018 at 11:21 PM, Milburn Stone said:

Let me get this straight (I say to the movie now)...you want me to mourn the loss of this "gallant civilization"? (The one that decided some people were property?) You want me to see the plight of these white characters as somehow tragic? (The characters who fought to perpetuate people-as-property?) Can't do it.

I view it as Margaret Mitchell buying into the "myths" she was told as a child and the film being faithful to that mythology.  Her "theme" was the difference between them that's got gumption and them that don't, when it comes to dealing with social upheaval.  The Civil War and defeat of the south happens to be the backdrop, with some unfortunate consequences.    

On 3/25/2018 at 2:38 AM, NowVoyager said:

I guess I just watch the film with the firm belief that the narrative point of view is fundamentally flawed. That works for me & I'm able to enjoy the movie for what it is. 

I haven't watched it for a while, but that's how I've approached it, too.  As long as the film is, I wish it could have incorporated some of the other memorable characters from the book, such as Dilcey (Prissy's mother) and Grandma Fontaine.  Hey, how about a Hamilton-inspired mini-series where Black and Latino actors play the lead roles and the slaves are portrayed by Whites?  ;-)

14 hours ago, Milburn Stone said:

I was where you are until the last couple of years. So I totally get it.

I think it was the all the "proud Southerners" in the last few years defending their Confederate flag and their Confederate statues that did me in. A movie about "proud Southerners" defending their Confederate regime just looks different to me now.

Yeah, recent events do make this more galling.  I like to think that Mitchell would have evolved over time and would have no part of that ugliness, but who knows. 

[Milburn Stone]

1 hour ago, Inquisitionist said:

I view it as Margaret Mitchell buying into the "myths" she was told as a child and the film being faithful to that mythology.  Her "theme" was the difference between them that's got gumption and them that don't, when it comes to dealing with social upheaval.  The Civil War and defeat of the south happens to be the backdrop, with some unfortunate consequences.  

It may well be that this theme emerges as predominant in the novel. I can imagine it. But with its prologue, the movie relinquishes all claim that the mourning of a great civilization is not its primary theme:

"There was a land of Cavaliers and Cotton Fields called The Old South...Here in this pretty world Gallantry took its last bow...Here was the last ever to be seen of Knights and their ladies fair, of Master and of Slave...Look for it only in books for it is no more than a dream remembered. A Civilization gone with the wind."

So, I defer to your take on the book, not just because I haven't read it, but because I've read enough of you to give your take on it tremendous credence. As for the movie: While it contains a story of gumption in the face of social upheaval, its prologue leaves a viewer in no doubt that he is meant to view that social upheaval with regret.

[Luckylyn]

I have read the book Gone With the Wind but have never been able to make myself actually sit down and watch the film.  The book was enthralling and Scarlet is a fascinating character who can be awful but is compelling.  But the problems you mentioned about the protrayal of white and black characters is a major flaw and as a result I have trouble watching the film.  The book really upset me and so I can’t get motivated to watch the film even though I understand the technical achievements.  One of these days I need to read The Wind Done Gone which tells the story of Gone With The Wind from the slaves perspective.  I’d love a remake of Gone with the Wind told from the slaves point of view.

Gone with the Wind and Birth of a Nation are movies that are important for technical reasons in film history but whose content is incredibly problematic.   

[Inquisitionist]

56 minutes ago, Milburn Stone said:

It may well be that this theme emerges as predominant in the novel. I can imagine it. But with its prologue, the movie relinquishes all claim that the mourning of a great civilization is not its primary theme:

Yeah, the prologue is troublesome.  And it is a view expressed by some characters in the novel, though in more nuanced ways.  For example, Ashley Wilkes mourns the loss of their way of life, but also claims that, absent the war, he would have freed his family's slaves when his father died anyway.  Would that way of life have survived without slave labor?  Ashley's not practical enough to think about that.  ;-)

[Padma]

Darn, I'm such a big Wm Holden fan and didn't realize it was a Holden night and I missed all but the final minute of Mankiewitz with Stephanie Powers (I thought she was Lee Grant at first, trying to figure out the subject matter.)  All she said in my segment was that they never sat around and watched any of his old films together except the full version of one Jim Aubrey directed (name?) that the studio had cut huge parts from.  They did watch Network and current ones together, "of course".  I wish I'd heard more of what she had to say, including if she mentioned the Africa wildlife ranch/foundation that I think she still runs.

This was at the end of "Our Town" which he made at 22.

Edited April 3, 2018 by Padma

[GreekGeek]

On 3/26/2018 at 8:18 AM, Milburn Stone said:

It may well be that this theme emerges as predominant in the novel. I can imagine it. But with its prologue, the movie relinquishes all claim that the mourning of a great civilization is not its primary theme:

"There was a land of Cavaliers and Cotton Fields called The Old South...Here in this pretty world Gallantry took its last bow...Here was the last ever to be seen of Knights and their ladies fair, of Master and of Slave...Look for it only in books for it is no more than a dream remembered. A Civilization gone with the wind."

So, I defer to your take on the book, not just because I haven't read it, but because I've read enough of you to give your take on it tremendous credence. As for the movie: While it contains a story of gumption in the face of social upheaval, its prologue leaves a viewer in no doubt that he is meant to view that social upheaval with regret.

I hesitate to jump into any discussion of GWTW because it's become such a bone of contention, but I do want to point out that the florid prose of the movie prologue is not in the book. I'm guessing Margaret Mitchell gave it her blessing, though, so it remains problematic. But the book is much more nuanced in its characters. I wish the film could have included Dilcey, because she's as intelligent and hardworking as Prissy is stupid and virtually useless.

Also, as backward and racist as the book and movie were, they were in many ways ahead of their time in the treatment of women. They show just how oppressive and unsustainable the role of "lady fair" was. It would take decades for a woman as complicated as Scarlett to appear again on the screen.

Edited April 3, 2018 by GreekGeek

[Milburn Stone]

1 hour ago, GreekGeek said:

I hesitate to jump into any discussion of GWTW because it's become such a bone of contention, but I do want to point out that the florid prose of the movie prologue is not in the book. I'm guessing Margaret Mitchell gave it her blessing, though, so it remains problematic. But the book is much more nuanced in its characters. I wish the film could have included Dilcey, because she's as intelligent and hardworking as Prissy is stupid and virtually useless.

 

Thanks for this background, GreekGeek. It confirms a supposition I made that the prologue was one of the movie's unique contributions, but I wasn't certain.

As regards the book--I like imagining that Margaret Mitchell made no explication of the book's title in the text, leaving those four words to reside in the realm of poetry and for the reader to supply a meaning. If so, the meaning I would supply would allow for a somewhat more "value-neutral" interpretation of the title than the one the movie spoon-feeds us, something along the lines of "whichever side you're on, this is a civilization whose peculiarity we will never see again. You may say 'thank God for that,' or (if you're a racist) you may say 'what a shame,' but either way, it's not coming back." Would you say that's roughly what MM intended?

Edited April 3, 2018 by Milburn Stone

[Inquisitionist]

The phrase "gone with the wind" actually appears once in the text, but I can't find the exact quotation online.  I'll thumb through my copy of the book tonight to see if I can find it.  :-)

[Rinaldo]

I'm going to insert a jump from that contentious topic to another no less contentious, but perhaps less so in the particular movie forms we were shown recently. I'm talking about King of Kings and The Greatest Story Ever Told.

My present perspective is a thoroughly secular one, but I grew up in a standard sort of middle-of-the-road Protestant suburban family, my teens coinciding roughly with the 1960s. Oddly (as I look back), we went to several of the biblical-epic movies popular in that period, but mostly the Old Testament sagas featuring fascinating women (Delilah, Ruth, Bathsheba, Anne Baxter....). Somehow we never went near either of the "life of Jesus" movies that came out in that decade (we did see Ben-Hur and The Robe, but they were based on popular novels, were tangential to the official life story, and in any case we had our issues with both). So in fact I've never seen them until this time around, had a hard time remembering which was which, and even now haven't quite made it all the way through TGSET.

The surprise to me was that both films clearly were trying hard to be unexpected, and even "artistic" as that word was understood in Hollywood. King of Kings, though it hit all the familiar points, did so from an unexpected viewpoint, focusing on political rebellion (to the point of elevating the once-mentioned Barabbas into a major ongoing figure), casting few if any box-office stars. TGSET did use plenty of stars, mostly in one-scene cameos (and it's often been mocked for that), but it opens quietly and un-portentously, and the casting of Max von Sydow is a most interesting choice. I may feel different after I've made it to the end -- it's over 3 hours long, and we're told its original release was over FOUR hours. Clearly they were trying for something unusual, even if they didn't succeed at that.

[GreekGeek]

1 hour ago, Inquisitionist said:

The phrase "gone with the wind" actually appears once in the text, but I can't find the exact quotation online.  I'll thumb through my copy of the book tonight to see if I can find it.  :-)

Your post made me curious so I thumbed through my own copy, and actually managed to find it on page 390. It occurs on Scarlett's journey home after the burning of Atlanta:

Quote

But the small cloud which appeared in the northwest four months ago had blown up into a mighty storm and then into a screaming tornado, sweeping away her world, whirling her out of her sheltered life, and dropping her down in the midst of this still, haunted desolation.

Was Tara still standing? Or was Tara also gone with the wind which had swept through Georgia?

Here is a list of fun facts about GWTW. It includes the origin of the title, which was in a poem by Ernest Dowson about a man lamenting his lost youth. Also interesting are the alternate titles Mitchell considered.

[Milburn Stone]

4 hours ago, GreekGeek said:

Here is a list of fun facts about GWTW. It includes the origin of the title, which was in a poem by Ernest Dowson about a man lamenting his lost youth. Also interesting are the alternate titles Mitchell considered.

"Went with the Wind"?

[Inquisitionist]

5 hours ago, GreekGeek said:

Your post made me curious so I thumbed through my own copy, and actually managed to find it on page 390. It occurs on Scarlett's journey home after the burning of Atlanta:

Thanks!  I thought that's about where the phrase appeared.  So it's referring simply to the destruction of Georgia, and not necessarily "a dream remembered, a Civilization gone with the wind...” as the opening of the movie repositions it.

1 hour ago, Milburn Stone said:

"Went with the Wind"?

I almost posted a link this morning, but I figured you could find the Burnett clips on your own.  :-)

[Milburn Stone]

2 hours ago, Inquisitionist said:

Thanks!  I thought that's about where the phrase appeared.  So it's referring simply to the destruction of Georgia, and not necessarily "a dream remembered, a Civilization gone with the wind...” as the opening of the movie repositions it.

Well, I think MM must have meant it more broadly than just the destruction of Georgia, else why would she pluck that phrase to become her novel's title?

But I still can imagine that she didn't mean the disappearance of the entire civilization was necessarily a tragedy, as the movie would have it.

Edited April 4, 2018 by Milburn Stone

[voiceover]

At last! the TCM premiere of Romancing the Stone!  I *really* missed Robert tonight, and what he might have had to say about it.

The early 80s was also the time that a handful of theaters screened only classics.  I'm fairly certain somewhere in a box of stuff is an old monthly schedule for the one in my neighborhood, doodled with the names of the classic film stars I'd used to recast RtS (de Havilland & Flynn, obviously; Ty Power and Jane Wyatt, if memory serves).  

I adored the snappy back & forth between Kathleen Turner and Michael Douglas.  Their best exchange is also one of my favorites all-time: 

During their first escape, Joan despairs over the impossibly ridiculous -- now filthy -- pumps she's still wearing in the Colombian jungle.  Jack takes both shoes in hand, hefts his machete, and whacks them into flats.

Joan(quietly devastated): "These were Italian!"

Jack: "Now they're practical."

 

Some of the best movies ever made have a writer-as-hero.  Writing!!!! The world's dullest profession! How do you make sitting at a typewriter, or clasping a pad of paper, interesting?? And yet....

Here's one of 'em.

[Crisopera]

Watching Easter Parade the other night, all I could do was wonder if the costume designer, Irene, had some sort of grudge against Judy Garland, because some of those clothes were brutally unflattering, especially the steel-blue dress she wears for the "Midnight Choo-Choo" audition scene. It's too tight, the length is awkward, and, combined with the matronly hairdo, makes her look about forty-five. (Admittedly, the emerald-green gown she wears for "Better Luck Next Time" is gorgeous.)  I just notice this stuff because I must have seen it a dozen times - enough times to lunge for the ff button when Jules Munchin does his salad routine.  Urgh.  Anyway, this movie always provokes another in my unending thoughts about what makes a star: Ann Miller vs. Judy Garland.  Both started as adolescents (if you can believe Miller's unintentionally hilarious autobiography - did you know she was the reincarnation of Hatshepsut?), and were both undeniably talented, but Miller just didn't break out or have the luminous quality that Garland had.

[Wiendish Fitch]

7 minutes ago, Crisopera said:

 Anyway, this movie always provokes another in my unending thoughts about what makes a star: Ann Miller vs. Judy Garland.  Both started as adolescents (if you can believe Miller's unintentionally hilarious autobiography - did you know she was the reincarnation of Hatshepsut?), and were both undeniably talented, but Miller just didn't break out or have the luminous quality that Garland had.

My theory (please dispute if you think I'm full of it): Ann Miller was a gorgeous woman and one hell of a dancer-one of the best, really- but she was a merely okay singer (but she really improved later on), and kind of blah as an actress. 

Judy Garland, on the other hand, had it all, a legitimate triple threat with an unforgettable face (those lovely doe eyes) and a vulnerable quality that made you care about her. 

Is it bad that I don't like Easter Parade? I want to, but I just don't. The pacing is pokey, Fred Astaire comes off as a douchebag, Garland comes off as pathetic, Ann Miller's part is thankless, and, uh, is there a reason for Peter Lawford's existence in this movie? Anyone? I do like "Shaking the Blues Away" and "A Couple of Swells", though.

Going back to Judy Garland, I know a lot of film fans scoff at it, but I really like Presenting Lily Mars. It's a bit wittier and more sophisticated than most MGM musicals at that time, and I really like Garland's character arc.

[Sharpie66]

On 4/4/2018 at 12:25 AM, voiceover said:

At last! the TCM premiere of Romancing the Stone!  I *really* missed Robert tonight, and what he might have had to say about it.

The early 80s was also the time that a handful of theaters screened only classics.  I'm fairly certain somewhere in a box of stuff is an old monthly schedule for the one in my neighborhood, doodled with the names of the classic film stars I'd used to recast RtS (de Havilland & Flynn, obviously; Ty Power and Jane Wyatt, if memory serves).  

I adored the snappy back & forth between Kathleen Turner and Michael Douglas.  Their best exchange is also one of my favorites all-time: 

During their first escape, Joan despairs over the impossibly ridiculous -- now filthy -- pumps she's still wearing in the Colombian jungle.  Jack takes both shoes in hand, hefts his machete, and whacks them into flats.

Joan(quietly devastated): "These were Italian!"

Jack: "Now they're practical."

 

Some of the best movies ever made have a writer-as-hero.  Writing!!!! The world's dullest profession! How do you make sitting at a typewriter, or clasping a pad of paper, interesting?? And yet....

Here's one of 'em.

I remember reading somewhere years ago that RtS was being taught in an LA college course on screenwriting, since it hits just about all the points of a really tight script. I love it so much, ever since I saw it in the theater on its first release. I was already a romance book fan in my teens, so this film just delighted me to no end. Kathleen Turner is fantastic, Michael Douglas has never been more charismatic, Danny DeVito is hilarious, and the way the plot moved from set piece to set piece was really well done. 

[Rinaldo]

1 hour ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

Is it bad that I don't like Easter Parade? I want to, but I just don't. The pacing is pokey, Fred Astaire comes off as a douchebag, Garland comes off as pathetic, Ann Miller's part is thankless, and, uh, is there a reason for Peter Lawford's existence in this movie? Anyone? I do like "Shaking the Blues Away" and "A Couple of Swells", though.

I'd say you have plenty of company in disliking it. I seem to read that opinion regularly in writing about Astaire. (The movie wasn't initially planned for him, of course.) And he comes off as a douchebag in more than one movie of this decade -- I'm always nonplussed at how his character behaves in Holiday Inn, and we're somehow not supposed to notice. In fact, I'll go you one better: "A Couple of Swells" is my least favorite kind of number -- I automatically shiver in revulsion at that sort of makeup.

37 minutes ago, Sharpie66 said:

I remember reading somewhere years ago that [Romancing the Stone] was being taught in an LA college course on screenwriting, since it hits just about all the points of a really tight script. I love it so much, ever since I saw it in the theater on its first release. I was already a romance book fan in my teens, so this film just delighted me to no end. Kathleen Turner is fantastic, Michael Douglas has never been more charismatic, Danny DeVito is hilarious, and the way the plot moved from set piece to set piece was really well done. 

I agree, except that Michael Douglas annoys me in this period by insisting on consistently mispronouncing a word that the others in the cast get right: in this case, Cartagena, to which he adds an "i" before the last "a." (In The China Syndrome  it was "nukular.") The movie's director, Robert Zemeckis, is himself a master screenwriter: I Wanna Hold Your Hand, Used Cars, 1941, and the Back to the Future movies are all brilliantly constructed comedy-farce scripts in which every detail clicks into place.

[Sharpie66]

Yeah, “Cartagenia” bugs me, too! 

I even had the novelization of the script, which was cleverly packaged just like a 1980-era romance novel, with the tight clinch between the couple, flowing hair on her and bulging biceps on him, and written by “Joan Wilder.” 

Edited April 6, 2018 by Sharpie66

[Crisopera]

Oh, I agree about not particularly liking Easter Parade, for all the reasons mentioned above.  (I do love "Drum Crazy" and "Better Luck Next Time" and I'm fond of Peter Lawford, useless as he is in it).  Rinaldo, I couldn't agree more about "A Couple of Swells" - that's another quick lunge for the ff button for me.   it really seems as though they barely changed the dialogue for Astaire - it all sounds written for Kelly.  However, Wiendish Fitch, I don't think it was her lack of a distinctive singing voice that did Ann Miller in - after all, Eleanor Powell couldn't sing or act and it didn't slow her down.

[Milburn Stone]

On 4/3/2018 at 10:04 PM, Milburn Stone said:

But I still can imagine that she didn't mean the disappearance of the entire civilization was necessarily a tragedy, as the movie would have it.

I now have some information to impart on this matter. The matter being: Granted that Gone With the Wind's problematic movie prologue is not contained in the novel; nevertheless, does it accurately reflect the point of view, or otherwise capture the essence, of the novel?

On page 297 of Ronald Haver's book David O. Selznick's Hollywood, he writes this:

Margaret Mitchell was reportedly unhappy with Ben Hecht's foreword to the film, which described the Old South as a "land of Cavaliers and cotton fields...of Knights and their Ladies Fair, of Master and of Slave..." "I certainly had no intention of writing about cavaliers," she wrote to a friend, feeling that the lines gave a distorted, romantic view of her book. But Selznick's concept of the story was extremely romantic, a larger-than-life depiction of a doomed civilization.

Although I've never read the novel, my hunch has been that it doesn't glorify the Old South the way the movie does, and Margaret Mitchell's displeasure with the movie's prologue confirms that.

In keeping with Selznick's glorification of that civilization, here is some more information from the Haver book (p. 300):

The main titles from GONE WITH THE WIND utilized a graphic approach unusual in an era when motion picture credits were normally presented quickly and simply... The majesty and excitement of the GONE WITH THE WIND credits was apparent from the very first appearance of the title card that announced the cooperative venture of the two studios [Selznick International and MGM] and the fact that the film was in Technicolor; this dissolved into a full-frame credit for Margaret Mitchell, at which point the main title boomed across the screen, each word filling the entire frame momentarily, perfectly capturing the feel of romantic grandeur that Selznick wanted the picture to have. The backgrounds for all these titles were carefully selected for mood and beauty. Many of them had been photographed in the South by James Fitzpatrick, while the vistas of the plantations and the city of Atlanta were the paintings of Wilbur Kurtz combined with Jack Cosgrove's matte work.

Now, on that question of Selznick's motive, I don't know of any information. I can imagine he wanted his movie to be well-received everywhere, including in markets in the South, and Ben Hecht's prologue certainly would have helped with that. Perhaps more to the point, a cold-eyed view of a civilization built on slavery would not have supported the grandeur Selznick was after. I don't see evidence to support a more sinister motive. One article I found on the internet reports an Emory University professor's discovery of telegrams and memos from Selznick protesting Atlanta's decision not to allow the film's black actors to appear at the movie's premiere.

[Rinaldo]

3 hours ago, Crisopera said:

Eleanor Powell couldn't sing or act and it didn't slow her down.

Two comments, sort of speaking up for opposite sides of this point. (Do I contradict myself? Very well then, I contradict myself.)

One is that Eleanor Powell hasn't survived in popular culture as one of the immortal stars of the period. Movie buffs, especially those into musicals like me, know of her, of course, but she's not on the Gable/Davis/Astaire/Hepburn level in general memory. With DVDs, TCM, etc., I suppose there's a higher general level of awareness of such things than there used to be, but I remember that when the first of the big-release old-movie clip-fests, That's Entertainment!, came out, I was stunned that there was someone like Eleanor Powell whom I had literally never heard mentioned before (and I had read the works of Pauline Kael to date).

On the other side, she could sing -- she just wasn't allowed to in the movies. Like Vera-Ellen, she had appeared in stage musicals with singing as part of the package, but Hollywood had a narrow idea of what its leading ladies were supposed to sound like, and rough-and-ready "dancer voices" were scorned in favor of smooth "band-singer voices." (In fact Powell possibly did sing for herself in one or two cases -- sources differ -- which helps prove that her own voice was acceptable if it's not noticeably worse than her ghost voices.) Hollywood in that era was dubbing-crazy; Rita Hayworth and Cyd Charisse were never allowed to sing for themselves in the movies either, and Patricia Morison* was dubbed just before taking the soprano lead in the original Kiss Me, Kate on Broadway.

(*Having mentioned Ms. Morison, I can't stop myself from adding that she's still actively with us at age 103, and just a couple of years ago sang a bit at special gala events.)

[StatisticalOutlier]

The Philadelphia Story was just on, and is one of those movies I will watch every time they show it.  I like everything about it, but I particularly adore Virginia Weidler as the little sister.  I'd list the high points, but they're all high points.  Just an absolutely perfect performance. 

Every time I see someone having difficulty wrangling something, I advise, "Put salt on its tail," and they just look at me. 

[Crisopera]

Rinaldo - but are you large and do you contain multitudes? 

I expressed myself badly about Eleanor Powell 's singing, but she was a genuine star in the mid-thirties, even if her stardom hasn't survived to the present day, which stardom Ann Miller never achieved. It's not that Powell couldn't sing (she acquits herself well enough in Born to Dance) but that Miller could sing in the brassy belt style, was a decent actress, and boy, could she dance! She just didn't have that final oomph to put her over the top.

[Popples]

On 4/5/2018 at 9:01 PM, Wiendish Fitch said:

Is it bad that I don't like Easter Parade? I want to, but I just don't. The pacing is pokey, Fred Astaire comes off as a douchebag, Garland comes off as pathetic, Ann Miller's part is thankless, and, uh, is there a reason for Peter Lawford's existence in this movie? Anyone? I do like "Shaking the Blues Away" and "A Couple of Swells", though.

Gene Kelly was supposed to star in Easter Parade but broke his ankle before filming. He usually plays the brash and cocky type and they didn't change the character when MGM coaxed Fred out of retirement to replace Gene.

I don't mind the film; it's not one of my absolute favorites, but I watch it every year due to my unhealthy obsession with Judy Garland. I still think she should have ended up with Peter Lawford's character instead. I don't mind him because he was attractive, but he only served to be the third side of two love triangles (a love square?). I also wish Fred Astaire and Ann Miller could have had an epic tap dance routine together, but one can't have everything.

Edited April 7, 2018 by Popples
Fixed capitalization

[Milburn Stone]

Two things I learned about Easter Parade from the imdb's "trivia" page: Sinatra was originally slated to play the Lawford part; Judy had never met Fred until they were introduced on the set.

I like the film a lot. I find Lawford charming in it (as I do in Good News and Royal Wedding). And even though the male lead was originally supposed to be Gene Kelly, I find Astaire ideal in it. The blinders-on perfectionism of the character seems a natural and believable fit, and because Astaire has such a talent for comedy, he's able to get across the foolishness of Don's perfectionism (and his revenge motive) at the same time he makes us understand that such foolishness can be essential to the creation of great art. Kelly could have got those things across, too, but not better.

[Calvada]

One issue with Ann Miller was her height.  In the scene after the opening night, when Judy & Fred's characters go where Ann Miller is performing, Miller is wearing heels to do her number, but when she gets Fred to dance with her, suddenly she's in flats.  It's the same issue Cyd Charisse had - too tall for her co-stars.  

I enjoyed the interview with Michael Douglas from the TCM festival; I thought Ben did a very good job, but it made me miss Robert O.   I loved hearing MD talk with such respect about Karl Malden, and how much he learned working with him on The Streets of San Francisco.  I loved that show - mystery/crime which is my favorite genre, a snazzy theme, some comic aspects, the classic "A Quinn Martin Production," and Michael Douglas was pretty easy on the eyes.  But holy cow, he's in is 70s!  I am getting old . . .

[voiceover]

The Rains Came is on; a chance to expand your "There were other films in '39?" list, and see George Brent turn hero before your eyes ("The English are a sentimental people.  And very much ashamed of it...").  

And last time I forgot to mention: *tremendous* special effects -- the earthquake, the monsoon, the flood, and the righteous fate of Myrna Loy's husband.  Long live pre-CGI Hollywood!  Very deserving of that first Special Effects Oscar.

[roseha]

I just happened to look at the TCM schedule for tonight since it is Silent Sunday, and scheduled for 1:15 AM Eastern is SUCH IS LIFE, a short starring Baby Peggy, now known as Diana Serra Cary and the last silent film star still alive at age 99!  She is a joy to watch by the way.

Edited April 9, 2018 by roseha
format

[Sharpie66]

I remember seeing her as one of a group of actors featured in a tv documentary about being a child actor. She had some rather horrifying tales to tell about the pre-Coogan Act Hollywood’s use and abuse of child actors. 

[voiceover]

Aha! my favorite of the Gidget oeuvre: Deborah Walley, Michael Callan, & James Darren all go Hawaiian!

I still think she should've gone off with Michael C, but once James stopped sulking, he was...not bad.  

This is the only surfer movie I wouldn't flinch from owning.  It's like a giant rum-based drink, served in a faux palm tree glass with a fruit kebab: not enough to make you gag; just enough that you leave singing the title song.  Loudly.

[Rinaldo]

Plus it's the movie that shows us the dancing skills of Michael Callan! (As I was kindly informed here not long ago.) That's Riff!

[prican58]

Quote

I still think she should've gone off with Michael C, but once James stopped sulking, he was...not bad.  

Darren was just the dreamiest! That word describes him perfectly. 

Random Harvest on TCM now. Damn, Greer Garson had some great gams! 

On 4/7/2018 at 11:49 PM, voiceover said:

The Rains Came is on; a chance to expand your "There were other films in '39?" list, and see George Brent turn hero before your eyes ("The English are a sentimental people.  And very much ashamed of it...").  

And last time I forgot to mention: *tremendous* special effects -- the earthquake, the monsoon, the flood, and the righteous fate of Myrna Loy's husband.  Long live pre-CGI Hollywood!  Very deserving of that first Special Effects Oscar.

Standing O for every word you said! Brent in white tie and tails is simply breathtaking!

[Wiendish Fitch]

49 minutes ago, prican58 said:

 

Random Harvest on TCM now. Damn, Greer Garson had some great gams! 

 

Even as a straight chick, I have to agree. ;) 

Seriously, why does Greer Garson have this reputation as this stuffy, Margaret Dumont-like figure? Garson was wonderful! Vibrant, classy, and with a beautiful speaking voice and screen presence.

And how about Ronald Colman?! One cannot sing his praises enough!

[small potatoes]

Random Harvest is one of my all-time favorites. 

[voiceover]

Because such things are important to me, I'd say, as much as I love him, Colman was not a great onscreen kisser.  The notable, and wowsa! exception: the one he laid on Jane Wyatt in Lost Horizon.

But he was romantic as hell, and that voice, that voice!  I need a cocktail for Kay Francis; a shot of whiskey for Errol Flynn; but Ronald Colman requires Earl Grey.