[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyHcPCUhQSc?wmode=transparent&autohide=1&egm=0&hd=1&iv_load_policy=3&modestbranding=1&rel=0&showinfo=0&showsearch=0&w=500&h=375]

HALLOWEEN MOVIE RECOMMENDATIONS: “Straight Jacket” (1964)

This chilling, creepy movie starring the iconic Joan Crawford will amuse you and confuse you. It will disturb you and unnerve you, as you start to realize what Fay Dunaway may have based her portrayal of “Mommie Dearest” on. And, it will relieve you as you entertain the thought that maybe Christina Crawford is actually Joan’s biggest fan after all? Hint-hint…

Low-budget bravado; simple, mellow, campy, fun, tacky movie-treasure! And, all in glorious black & white! Why is that significant? Well, as the lovely Hitchcock beauty, Ava Marie Saint once said in an interview (paraphrased), “Black and white is art. B&w films can be beautiful and are particularly suited to the horror, suspense and thriller genres, because the color’s contrast to reality protects the viewer from getting too carried away, thus acting as a protective shield between fantasy and reality, keeping the viewer nicely relaxed and entertained at the same time.” 

I think it’s safe to lament that the days of the A-grade, sophisticated horror  film generally ended with the end of black and white. In fact, I would venture to say that the late 1950s to 1960s was the only period in film history when the horror genre could be enjoyed by general audiences (with some parental supervision, of course). And, it was also the only period in which the genre could be described as eerily beautiful rather than repulsively grotesque.

Fortunately for us though, those horror gems still exist in various formats for us to enjoy. So, when you get a chance, treat yourself to a viewing of “Straight Jacket”—-you’ll love it!

(Source: http://www.youtube.com/)

you're welcome! i'm glad you know who he is and appreciate the card haha :]

Yes, I totally do! And, I have recently become familiar with a number of his films. One of my dad’s favorite movies is Inherit the Wind (1960).

Stanley Kramer’s filmography as a whole—-both as director and producer—-is pretty impressive, I think. But, what I hate is that regardless of how impressive his resume is, as you’ve said and indicated, he seems to be a bit under-appreciated and not well-known enough, for some strange reason. Even some of his films are hard to come by, such as the 1979 drama (his last), The Runner Stumbles, starring Dick Van Dyke as a priest who falls in-love with a nun (based on a true story)! And that, I simply can’t wrap my head around!

I mean, Dick Van Dyke was a veritable TV icon, and needless to say, Kramer worked with the best of the best! And, the fact that he was one of, if not *the first* independent film-maker in the business while still maintaining strong ties in the industry was really a feat! Plus, as you may gather from the two titles I mentioned already, the majority of his films veered on the controversial side, made news, and helped to change laws (i.e. Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner helping to change the law about interracial marriage I think, and I heard that Bless the Beasts and Children had a similar impact on animal rights). Yet, relatively little is known about him compared to others. But, I really want to see his last film! I hope TCM shows it soon!

Remembering Desilu as Star Trek celebrates 45 years!

Even if you are a non-Treki, like myself, there was no way you could be on the internet yesterday and not know about Star Trek’s 45th anniversary! As one of my Facebook friend’s statuses informed me, Google was in on the party in its usually unique way, with a special Google sign, designed just for the occasion:

Needless to say, my friend was bowled over by excitement, after she saw the fun graphic honoring one of her very favorite shows. And, although I am not a Treki (Star Trek fan) myself, I must admit that this anniversary means a lot to me, too, thanks to a little bit of history calledDesilu!

In case some of you aren’t aware, Desilu was the name of the television production company ran by Desi Arnaz (company president) and his wife, TV comedian, Lucille Ball (vice-president). And, according to A Book by Desi Arnaz as-well as several other sources, the company was, at its peak, the biggest, most active TV production studio in the world, producing more programs and more episodes than any other company! So, it should come as little surprise that it was this very same, successful studio that first brought Star Trek into people’s homes 45 years ago!

That’s right, I may not be aStar Trekfan per se, but I am a Lucy-Desi fan, all the way! So, I am very proud of them for helping to launch such timeless programs asStar Trekall those years ago. And, even though the studio was eventually sold to Paramount, at which time it was renamedParamount Television Studios, the history ofStar Trekand other shows pioneered there will keep the memory of its original incarnation alive.

So, as you think ofStar Trekon its 45th anniversary, don’t forget to rememberDesilutoo—-the place where it all began.

Happy 45th, Star Trek fans!

[gallery]

People have remarked how much the late British actress, Natasha Richardson (seen here in sills from the 1998 remake of the 1961 Disney classic looks like fellow Brit star, Emma Thompson. And, as you can see from the Emma image below, they are quite right.

 

But, I’d like to take this comparison a step further and say that they both sound almost identical! I was listening to Natasha talk about her favorite sorts of movies on a 1990s AFI WOMEN IN FILM special, chronicling the different types of characters women have traditionally played in movies, and how those representations have changed through the decades, (located here, in-case anyone is interested), and I swear, every-time she uttered a word, I either thought of Jennifer Saunders or Emma Thompson—-and no, it’s not just because they’re British. I mean, I certainly wasn’t thinking of Julie Andrews, Maggie Smith or Emma Bunton!

Both lovely women, with very lovely, very distinct voices! And, I tell you true, the more I see of this Natasha Richardson, the more I like her! The Parent Trap turned me on to her, and now, I am a fan. Too bad I was such a late bloomer in that regard, though… I wish she was still with us.

[gallery]

ephemeral-:

by eko bintang

I can’t remember the last time I have loved art pieces so much! I love these—-mostly because looking at them only reconfirms what I’ve long thought—-1950s sophistication and lady fashion rocks! The classicist of all! Although, I will admit that the 1910s, 1920s, and 1930s come pretty close too. I also like the first half of the 1960s—-albeit, such a specialized period cannot be easily distinguished in a retrospective set like this.

It was the cusp between the 1950s and 1960s (a period that is not readily recognized as distinct) that simply oozed elegance, charm, sophistication, and sex-appeal. Just take a look at old photos of the glamor stars of the day (Liz Taylor, Natalie Wood, and Deborah Kerr come to mind), and you’ll know what I mean. Ah, so lovely!

Goodbye Again (1961)

Just saw a so-so film I hated, called Goodbye Again. While I didn’t enjoy the film, Ingrid was great! Can’t understand why people complained about her wardrobe, hair and all being too matronly, cause that’s when she looks her best! At her beauty-peak in middle-age! The older look suited her well! Much better than the young look of her years prior! In fact, I think that this movie, though not one I really liked, is worth seeing FOR HER LOOKS ALONE!

Ingrid looks better here than at any other time I’ve ever seen her. <3

The Graduate (1967)

What a landmark year 1967 was for films! Was just watching The Graduatefor the very first time tonight, and believe you me, you can definitely tell the Hayes Code had just been abolished! (*_*)

A Child is Waiting (1962)

Watching Judy Garland in A Child Is Waiting. What an emotional and tender-hearted actress she was! Without a word, she lets you know what she’s feeling with a single stare. Such sympathy shines through… Hard to believe she died only about 6 years later.

What Ever Happened to Aunt Alice? (1969)

What Ever Happened to Aunt Alice?was a psycho-good movie from 1969! Glad I watched it today! I hate the gory, blatantly violent horror films of the past 20-25 years (won’t even bother with them). But, by 1960s-70s standards, I’m an occasional fan.

Where Angels Go, Trouble Follows (1968)

…in other movie-news, I just saw Where Angels Go, Trouble Follows (the 1968 sequel to The Trouble with Angels) and I loved it!! It helps that Rosalind Russellis great at playing a nun, and I am one of her biggest fans! Groovy family movie! Better than the first, in my opinion.

Lets Make Love (1960)

Oddly enough, I think that Marilyn Monroe was at her most stunning just before her death. Saw her 1960 film, “Lets Make Love” last night… Her movies have never been my favorites, but there’s just no denying that “wow” factor that only increased the older she got… makes you wonder…

Wishing to unwind with Joan Crawford and Bette Davis!

(Davis left, Crawford right)

This week is going to be tough! I’m already needing to unwind, and it’s only Monday! Would love to watch a little of The films of Joan Crawford and The films of Bette Davis, back to back. I liked them best when they were creepy, not in sad dramas, but in “campy” thrillers…starting from about the mid-1940s through to the late 1960s, I’d say. Would love to finally see Joan’s big hit, “Mildred Pierce” (1945). But, I  guess I’ll let reality set-in first. Sigh…

What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962)

This is my # 1 favorite scary movie, followed by The Witches of Eastwick and The Poltergeist Trilogy! But, I love this one the most!!

What I don’t understand though, is that so many people have compared this to “Hush, Hush, Sweet Charlotte” and while I am very close to liking t hat one, I think it is to blatant about the bloody, gory side of things. So, while I almost love it, I can’t quite bring myself to add it to my list of favorites because of that. It somehow repulses me too much. But, not this one!

This one manages to scare me ans keep me guessing w/o making me straight up hate the characters. In fact, I find myself feeling for the both the sisters in this movie. And, I think that’s why I love it——because it gives me all the thrills and chills of horror and suspense, but it also pulls on the heartstrings too—- which is quite a feat for a movie of its genre. Hence, this movie top in its class! Fantastic!

Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte (1964)

Grotesue! If you’re happy, and you know it, stay away from this film!, 14 June 2011

Author: IamTheMoviesILove from United States

With all due respect to those of you who love it, I have to say that I resent the way this movie made me feel! I watch movies to get a rush and a high of some kind, even occasionally by suspense. But, this one rubbed me wrong. After the gruesome murder scene near the beginning, I remained grossed out throughout the rest of the picture—-I just couldn’t get that scene, and the nasty take on the title song—-out of my head. And, yeah, about the song that was sang in the opening credits, I think it’s just plain gross and in bad taste! Now, I’ll admit that I know very little about horror movies from the Haze-code years (any film pre-1967), but it seems to me that “Charlotte” went a bit overboard with the overtness of violence and crudity—-for that time period, at least.

Speaking (well, typing) as someone who doesn’t really like horror movies as I don’t like being scared or grossed out, I have been known to make exceptions for the older films, because I don’t expect them to be graphic, only suggestive. So, this film was a real shocker to me! Because not only was it very graphic in parts (albeit, the visual effects pale in comparison to the level of gore that would be seen in a similar film of today, the point still stands that the intent of gore was there), but it was also very anything but suggestive in referencing it; I COULD NOT BELIEVE the lyrics to the opening song, “Chop chop, sweet Charlotte, chop off his head and hands” or something like that…just completely vulgar!

Please understand though, that my review and rating of this film is not to suggest that it is a poor piece of film-making, but rather that it does not happen to suite my personal preferences—-hardly at all! I also feel that parts of it were over-done, and that the graphic scenes were not necessary to move the story along, and therefore were, to me, in bad taste.

I’d advice everyone who believes in the cleanliness of all movies from the “Golden Age of Hollywood” to steer clear of “Hush, Hush, Sweet Charlotte,” cause it just might burst your bubble! For a similar, but perhaps “safer” sort of movie, watch 1962’s “What Ever Happened to Baby Jane”——it may leave you surprised, but not repulsed. That’s my take on it, anyway.

Bonnie & Clyde (1967)

Well, I liked Warren Beatty’s good looks and Fay Dunaway’s voice, but that’s about all I liked! No offense to all the movie buffs out there who love Bonnie & Clyde. But, I never, and I mean NEVER! want to see it again! I mean… all that violence—-and blood! And, made in 1967, no less! (*_*)