My ears have been bothering me so much these past two day I've not done any serious long-duration watching, but instead limited myself to relatively short YouTube videos of various sorts. I normally try and catch TYT's daily (except weekends) 2-hr live YouTube news-stream, but Friday's stories were so disheartening I bailed 30min before the end.

Speaking of disheartening, I learned of two movie-related deaths within the past two week that received next to no coverage by the major news outlets. On 4 Sep Jean Darling passed away at age 93. On the 7th Dickie Moore left us just shy of his 90th birthday. Both were alumni of Our Gang comedies. What's more, both were amongst the handful of verifiable surviving actors from the silent film era. With them gone, that list is down to 11! As might be imaged, those who remain were all child actors during the silent days, the oldest having just entered their teens as the era came to a close. The last silent actor who might be termed adult . . . and an extremely young adult at that . . . departed early last year, at age 104 if memory serves. The last adult-age silent actor of acknowledged 'star' status, Anita Page, passed away in 2008.

On a more lighthearted note, I recently learned that a complete second reel of Laurel & Hardy's two-reel silent comedy "The Battle of the Century" was discovered in a collection several months ago!!!! This is the famous pie-fight reel, which up until now was thought to have survived only in a highly edited version. Funny thing is, the complete reel 2 has been in plain sight for quite some time. The reel's previous owner assumed he had a copy of the edited version so never bothered to watch it. The current owner made the same mistake for a number of years, and only recently decided to give it a look-see. The reel is now in the hands of preservationists. We should at some point get to see the pie-fight in all its unedited glory. (Much of reel one, missing only its final segment, was unearthed in the late seventies.)

Here' the pie fight as it's been seen for many years, in its edited, truncated edition.

Just watched Excalibur. Gotta love that film.

Excalibur once mesmerized me. I watched it in various LA area cinemas during its initial run more times than any other movie. I mean, I saw it a LOT. Later on it was an early DVD purchase. Later yet, I became somewhat disillusioned, finding a certain amount of 'hokiness' within it. That said, I still find much to enjoy. It is easily my second favorite Arthurian film, the first being 'Monty Python and the Holy Grail.'

Another movie I once put quite high on my list of favorite films but now consider a bit 'corny' while still greatly enjoying it is the Errol Flynn 'Adventures of Robin Hood.'

I agree that Errol Flynn in Robin Hood is quite corny, especially after - oh, say, fifty views or so.

Channel 9 when I was growing up (aka Superstation WGN nowadays) used to have Saturday Matinees when they would air classic movies. This one was aired about once a year, along with other classics like Tyrone Power in The Mark of Zorro, and Burt Lancaster in The Crimson Pirate. Errol Flynn was one of my favorite action actors growing up, and I watched that movie religiously every year. When I was in vet school and living in Minnesota, my younger brother (the same one I always squabbled with when we were young) found the 50th Anniversary DVD of the movie, in its full uncut version, complete with captions. There were moments when I was like I don't remember that! and it renewed my delight in the film.

Now let's see if I can dig it out . . .

Yes, it's corny, but dang, Errol Flynn in tights!!

Make mine Captain Blood. Too much of this nonsense in Robin Hood for me!

I bet you're not a fan of The Laugh and the Furious either...

I prefer this version of Robin Hood. One of my all time favourite films, and the first VHS tape I owned as a wee lad.

Funny that you should say this, because when I went to check out the vid clip, I got an ad for the Fast and Furious #7!

The dvd for Furious being out now is probably what put it in my head.


In other news I finished my latest watching of Claymore today. Wow, that was really good. Now I am itching to play more Persephone back in Skyrim. Like I said before the look and emotion of that show was definitely in my subconscious when I created Persephone.

I also discovered something interesting. Laura Bailey is one of the English voice actresses! Yes, our favorite vampire from Skyrim plays a half-human, half-yoma killing machine. Not really much of a stretch! She plays Jean, and is in the second half of the series. It is not that big of a part, at least in screen time. But she does make a huge impact on events at the end. I found myself switching from Japanese to English whenever Jean was in a scene. Then I would switch the audio back to Japanese of course, because most of the other English voice actors are atrocious.

Fakey laughter, huh? Not a fan. I'm with Hazmick on preferring the fox and bear,

Me too! I even had an old lp with the entire audio track on it.

Made it through about fifteen minutes of the premiere of the B*****d Executioner on FX last night. It's really trying hard to be the 13th century version of Vikings… but it all comes across as trite to me. I'll try to give it a legitimate shot over the weekend, but I'm not optimistic.

Well I've been watching Project Runway (of course) and am rooting for Ashley Nell Tipton to win.

If you look at how she dresses herself, you wouldn't think she would make a great designer, but so far she has turned out some of my favorite designs each week. She has never failed to please me with them, even when she didn't win the week's challenge. Her personality is as nice as the clothing she produces too, making her my favorite contestant.


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-W8lWmckQ25I/VfLm...on_r900x493.JPG


I also like Swapnil Shinde for a hopeful second place, lol.

As to the Errol Flynn Robin Hood, I think the deliberate decision to use the modern-day American vernacular of the time plays against its long-term appeal. I can see this being considered effective for the short-term, especially for a film made before there was a viable home video sales-market and thus not much thought of longevity. And of course its not an issue with movies set during the time period in which they are filmed. At any rate, choice of dialog is my only knock with the film. I still consider it my overall favorite Robin Hood movie and amongst the best swashbucklers ever made. I don't know of a better film music score.

Due to continued ear/hearing issues I've done no extended movie or GoF viewing. I did, however, watch this documentary on Herculaneum's Lost Library. Being a history buff I eat this sort of thing up.

Thank you for that! I watched the Herculaneum vid, and now I am watching Meet The Romans with Mary Beard.

I'm so sorry your ears are still giving you problems; and hope you find a solution for that. I really loved the vid you linked to; have always been fascinated by the digs of the ruins from Vesuvius - I remember as a child seeing the photos of them finding dogs frozen in time, and it was my first excited glimpse into archaeology. Awesome vid!

Now, on to the vid SubRosa linked!







I'm also a history buff, so liked this vid. Interesting; but a bit slow - wish she could pick up the pace a bit in this vid; she probably kept it slow deliberately for the subtitles, which I could have done without. But I think it would be awesome to follow in the footsteps or stand at the site of some of the moments in history - that was cool to do, though when the camera draws back it shows the modern view, and takes the immersion away, lol.

People interested in the history of Native America can find a treasure trove in the mountains of Tennessee; you can still dig up arrowheads, pottery, etc. - in fact, Tellico Lake was man-made (flooded the area via dams) - right over a Native American burial ground, angering the gods and tribes.

It became a favorite dive to see the relics, but if you take one, it is a federal offense.

I just finished watching Avengers: Age of Ultron, picked up the dvd earlier today.

Damn good film. Don't know that I'd call it better than Avengers Assemble though. A little predictable in places, but it had some very cool action sequences, a nice look inside their heads, and Scarlett Johansson

I really like her down-to-nirn attitude. "This is how we have to imagine life in the ancient city. Everyone shitting together." As she is sitting on a toilet in one of the big public restrooms.

That, and one can see many similarities with modern urban Western life. Ancient Rome was one of the first consumer cultures. It's people didn't grow their own food, chop their own firewood, build their own homes, and all take their turn fighting in the ranks of the citizen army.

Instead in Rome it all came from somewhere else. People didn't do everything. Instead they had specialized professions. They were shopkeepers, shoemakers, pepper-salesmen, dressmakers, bakers, butchers, and so on. And they identified themselves with their profession. Their tombs say "I was Lucius the purple dyer", or "I am Sellia the clothier". Which is just like we are now. When you meet someone, one of the first questions that comes up is "What do you do?" and it is always something like "Oh, I'm a network engineer," or "I am a mechanic."

Also just like America, ancient Rome was a melting pot of different ethnicities. People came from all over the ancient world in the hopes of making their fortunes. Or as slaves. Either way they came in as outsiders, but they and their descendants ended up as Romans.

I just watched this vid of Mark Hamill talking about how he got into the Batman Animated Series, and became the Joker. He even gets up and does this fantastic in-character monologue from the Sid the Squid episode, where the Joker thinks that Batman was killed by Sid, and he delivers a euology for Batman. This guy is just pure awesome!

Luke Skywalker as the Joker?

To be honest, I've lost track of Mark Hamill. I knew he turned in an outstanding performance as Wolfie in the Broadway version of Amadeus, and I totally loved him as Christopher Blair in Wing Commander 3 and 4. It makes sense that he would go into voice acting, since he has the flexibility to take on different roles. After seeing the vid you linked, Sage Rose, now I kind of want to see Sushi Girl!

He was also Firelord Ozai, if I recall correctly.

That was an absolutely stunning performance he gave impromptu there, and I love how he acted out the role as he spoke, even making his face mobile to the part/features of The Joker - but overall I was really floored to see the Mark Hamill I remember from Luke Skywalker has changed so much in physical appearance - did not expect that, somehow - holy cow!

I mean, let's face it - this is how I always think of him:


http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/starwa...=20100622233847


This vid followed your linked vid, also a great look at Hamill doing his voice performances for the video game Batman:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUBfbW2-vfQ

He was indeed.

He does a ton of voice acting for various animations.

Sushi Girl was an outstanding movie! Definitely watch it. It is a really dark criminal drama, about a guy who just got out of prison for a jewel heist, in which the jewels themselves disappeared. Now his partners want to know where they are, and he doesn't know. Mark Hamill turns in an extraordinary performance as a truly psychotic killer.

But you have not heard about him being the Joker? Get thee to The Batman Animated Series at once! Mark Hamill is the Joker. The one, the only. His Wikipedia page even has an entire section just on his Joker appearances. Likewise, Kevin Conroy is the ultimate Batman. That show really defined the two characters like never before or since. It is also where the character of Harley Quinn was invented, and became so infamous that she crossed over into the comics and now movies.

Sorry.

No captions. No watch.

I started watching Gotham. I am really loving Donal Logue as Harvey Bullock. He really brings the character to a whole new level from being simply a thug (like he was in the comics) or a slob (like he was in the Nolan movies). Oops, I was thinking of Flass. Now I remember Bullock from the Animated Series. While admittedly still slovenly, he is a guy who is easy to relate to, and is very fun to watch.

Jada Pinkett is really cool as the crime under-boss Fish. She has a great sadistic streak to her, and it is easy to see her being a mob lieutenant. John Doman rules as the the crime boss Falcone, and the Proto-Penguin is a delightfully sociopathic worm. Even young Catwoman (Kitten-girl?) is delightfully cute and larcenous.

The only thing I really balk at is James Gordon himself. Ben McKenzie seems kind of bland. I loved how they portrayed Gordon in the Nolan movies. Gary Oldman was exactly what I envisioned Gordon to be. But this guy with his buzzed hair, no glasses, and just sort of dull personality is not really it. I think it is the latter that really disappoints me. The actor himself just doesn't seem to have any magnetism. He doesn't own the scenes he is in. He is just there with the background.

Just finished watching this series. mALX, thanks for mentioning the subtitles. I wouldn't have watched it if you hadn't said anything. Google captions is horrible, and oftentimes laughably NOT what was said! But this series had genuine subtitles. And mALX, it's not slow paced because of the subtitles. It's just the way Mary speaks. She has very careful enunciation. So careful that I wonder if she has some kind of physical issue. In any case, I enjoyed watching Meet the Romans. I noticed many of the same things SubRosa mentioned. And I just can't get over how Mary Beard says "A Roman menage a trois"!

Well, finished blitzing the first four series of Babylon 5. Which for me is all there is, because I never liked the fifth series.

Now, I'm watching Firefly again. Because it's Shiny!

Now get the hell out of our galaxy!

Between the newest iPhone launch and reinstalling and starting Skyrim with a new character, I haven't had time to watch anything for about a week. But I did finally get around to watching Peter Jackson's The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey.

Watching it, I realized that it has to have been 35 years or more since I last read that little tome. LOTR was more my speed - big, epic, plenty of memorable characters. I'm watching this movie trying to remember if this was in the book, or if that was in the book. I do vaguely remember Bilbo conning the trolls into staying out until the dawn caught them. I also remember Bilbo meeting Gollum. However, I don't recall the rivalry between Durin Oakenshield and the Pale Orc. I guess I will have to dig out that tattered paperback copy I have and reread the book. It would be very enjoyable, I'm sure. I just don't know if I want to do it before I watch the other two films in the Hobbit trilogy, or if I want to wait until afterwards.

If I recall correctly, Azog the Defiler was established as a minor character in the appendices of the Lord of the Rings (and then creatively interpreted by the film team). He definitely wasn't in the original text of The Hobbit.

There was an Azog mentioned early in The Hobbit, by Gandalf to Thorin;

"Your grandfather Thror was killed, you remember, in the mines of Moria by Azog the Goblin."

But that's literally all there is.

And it wasn't Bilbo who kept the trolls up all night.

If you're committed to watching the films, watch them before reading the book. Otherwise you might not be able to finish watching them. But this is said as someone who knows some of the changes made, and refuses to watch the films on principle.

I enjoyed the Hobbit trilogy, they were fun films with some nice special effects. As an adaptation from book to film it makes me scream "What the gosh darn heck was that!?". It's the same with Game of Thrones, and about 80% of the manga I've read. 1:1 adaptations are few and far between.

I liked the Hobbit films, as well as the LOTR ones. With the Hobbit in particular I was wondering how it was going to turn out, since as I recall the Hobbit was essentially a children's book, as opposed to LOTR, which was definitely aimed at adults. But I think the films turned out quite well.

I certainly did not mind the changes in either movie series. Print is a different medium than film, and some things have to be done differently between them. Not to mention the fact that Tolkien wrote the books 80 years ago, and the society we live is quite different from the one he wrote his novels for.

For example if someone had written the LOTR books today I am sure a third of the Fellowship of the Ring would have been female. Frodo is definitely a female part, as is at least Merry or Pippin (or both), likewise with Legolas (and granted the movies made him pretty enough that he may as well be female...) I for one loved the addition of Taariel. The series needs more prominent females, and that is just one example of how I think the movies improved on the original.

I also like the added screen time they gave to the Orc lieutenants like Azog and Bolg. Plus how the Orcs got to the Lonely Mountain in the last movie (not going to give away any spoilers). There is an old saying that a hero is only as good as the villain they fight. Seeing some honest to badness Orc champions like them helps keep thing interesting, by giving the heroes something to really struggle against.

The original Hobbit book also has it's share of issues that a have nothing to do with what society's lens you are looking at it through. Starting with the very start. Bilbo being a burglar is beyond stretching the imagination. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever for him to have ever gotten involved with the dwarves. Speaking of the dwarves themselves, in the books they are utterly incompetent. They cannot walk down the road without being captured. They are like the French army of Middle Earth. How are we really supposed to believe these dunderheads are going to fight a dragon? Well, it turns out they didn't (either in the book or the films) so I suppose that did not turn out quite so bad. But at least in the movies I got the sense of the dwarves being competent at what they do - even ferocious. In the book they just seem like the Three Stooges.

I've done no movie watching lately, confining myself mainly but not exclusively to historic topics at YouTube. Watched several additional Mary Beard featured documentaries. Saw an informative and well done Metropolitan Museum of Art lecture on misconceptions of medieval armor.

Re-watched part one of a fascinating documentary on the American silent film. I could kick myself for not buying it on LaserDisc back in the day as, last I heard, it can not be released on DVD/Blu Ray due to royalty complications. (Amazon sells the set on VHS for $380US at the moment . . . no thanks.)

Watched the first few episodes of a recently launched Daggerfall LP.

As to the Jackson Hobbit/LoTR movies, I'm too much a Tolkien purest. There are some very nice scenes in his take on Fellowship. I liked it well enough to see Two Towers at a cinema on release . . . a rarity for me at the time (and now). That film soured me on Jackson's Tolkien. I've not watched another since.

I would so love to go to the MET and see that collection! What a great vid, though I'll admit laughing at the title, lol.

A vid on Daggerfall? THE Daggerfall (from TES)? GAAAAAAAH !!!!! I want to see it!

Yesterday I watched Fort Bliss. It was a wonderful movie about a woman returning from her second deployment in Afghanistan, to find that her young son no longer knows her. It does not pull any punches, and shows her warts and all as she struggles to raise her estranged son while juggling the realities of Army life.

I also got the first disc for I, Zombie, and have been having a lot of fun watching it. I have to admit, the whole brain eating parts are still a little gross. But all in all a fun show.

I also got the first disc for The Flash. But I could not get past the first episode. It is the same problem all the Marvel movies have: the plain whitebread protagonist. Of course I knew that going in. But the actor playing this particular protagonist just seemed thoroughly forgettable. Since I could not care less if this guy got killed in the first episode, I didn't bother watching any more.

It seems like all the young, white, male actors around these days are bland and dull. Where are the young Steve McQueens and John Waynes? All Hollywood wants to give us these days are the Shia LeBeofs and Sam Worthingtons. Or those other boring guys who starred in Godzilla, Pacific Rim, John Carter, The Amazing Spiderman reboots, and just about every other movie out lately. Are there no white men under 40 with any talent and/or charisma?

Nope!

Funny, after reading your short reply I clicked the Metropolitan link and watched the whole lecture again. Yes, 'the' Daggerfall. LPs and other videos based on it aren't uncommon. The LP I'm watching now, based on the few episodes I've seen, isn't one I'd go out of my way to link. I'll think on and try to find Daggerfall LPs I feel comfortable endorsing and link those instead.



I have a soft spot for what nowadays would likely be deemed old-style slightly more theatrical acting . . . though the modern more subdued style certainly has its place and can produce outstanding results. One of the movies I turn to when I want to watch and hear exemplary acting in the 1950 James Stewart 'Harvey'. Great script. Great oral and physical acting from almost the entire cast. There are certain scenes in it where I tend to tear up as much for the performers' delivery as anything else.

I couldn't make it through one episode either. It wasn't a matter of the whitebread; but of the show as a whole. The acting wasn't exactly wooden; but it wasn't believable enough to be immersive. Dialogue bordered on trite, and was way too predictable. It wasn't eye-rolling or contrived like a few movies I tried to choke my way through this weekend; but it wasn't good enough to watch more than 7 minutes of without being able to predict the rest of the series and not caring how it gets to the end point.

Sadly, that does seem to be the case. There are a lot of talented young white actresses around: Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Ellen Page, Saorise Ronan, Dakota Fanning, etc... I hate to sound like a racist, but it seems like there are no white men of the same age who can stand beside them without wilting. If you want a young male actor who is interesting to watch it seems he has to be black, asian, or latino.

It would not be so bad, except that Hollywood keeps trying to shove these bland and boring guys like Sam Worthington down our throats and turn them into stars, no matter how wooden and talentless they are. This Jai Courtney guy from the last Die Hard movie seems to be latest one they are trying to make into a star. He just made me yawn every time I saw him. All I could think was put Bruce Willis back on the screen!


I love to go back and watch Stagecoach. John Wayne was never an actor, but damned was he a movie star! The very first second you see him in that film he leaps out of the screen, a larger than life Western hero. He dominates every scene he is in. Your eyes just cannot look at anyone else when he is there. And he was just a young buck back then. Not the seasoned pro from films like The Searchers. Even when he got old, lumpy, and out of shape he still chewed up the scenery.

QFT.





And dear gods, did they try to make a Die Hard sequel without Bruce Willis sweating bullets through it? NO!

Funny you should point out a film made in 1950, which was a great year for movies all around! In addition to Harvey you had:

All About Eve
Sunset Boulevard (one of my five favorite films of all time)
Cinderella
Born Yesterday
Rashomon
The Asphalt Jungle
Father of the Bride
In a Lonely Place (an incredibly under-rated Humphrey Bogart movie)
Outrage (a film about rape directed by the magnificent Ida Lupino)
Gun Crazy
D.O.A.
Treasure Island
Cyrano de Bergerac
Rio Grande
The Gunfighter
King Solomon’s Mines
Annie Get Your Gun
Cheaper by the Dozen
Winchester ’73
Panic in the Streets
The Furies (Walter Huston’s last performance)
Dark City (Charlton Heston’s first performance)
The Men (Marlon Brando’s screen debut)
No Way Out (Sidney Poitier’s screen debut)

*Yeah, another 'old' movie buff here.

Sidney Poitier could make you feel and believe everything he acted; you could see it in his eyes and facial expression and hear it in his voice. That is what I like, an actor who while they are performing you forget you are watching a play and feel like it is actually real and happening.

Edit:

Meh, not worth it

Come to think of it, Tom Hiddleston has charisma. And he does great impressions. So why doesn't Hollywood try to make him into a star? He'd have made a much better Flash. Then again, he'd make a much better anything...

But who was that a picture of? I didn't recognize him, and the URL address didn't tell.

It was, in fact, Tom Hiddleston





Because he is an English actor. Which, in accordance with Hollywood conventions, restricts him to playing cunning and dramatic villains

We’re still watching this (slowly) but I don’t think it will be a keeper. It feels very paint-by-numbers, and the ghost/vision thing makes my eyes roll. Maybe the main characters will die and we’ll get more Sam Spruell.

Callidus, while I read through the above posts I was thinking Tom Hiddleston!!

Not to mention:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdXlevfK8a4

In War Horse he played a warm, kind, thoughtful, and all around good guy. It is one of the things that really sold me on his talent. He's not just a one-trick pony. He was also in Kenneth Branagh's version of Wallander, and he was a good guy there too (granted, that was a BBC production...)


Ahhh, Jaguar, for middle-aged men who want to get handjobs from women they don't even know...



I watched The Help last night for the second time. Such a fantastic movie. This time around I realized that the protagonist was being played by Valdi.