User talk:Loeba/Archive6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Signpost: 13 November 2013[edit]

DYK for Charlie Chaplin[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 16:05, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review[edit]

Hi, sorry for not getting back to you earlier: this message will also be a lot more brief than I would wish. I'm having some personal issues at the moment with uni stress, and that's also why I have been a bit MIA this week. I should have some more time next week though – but unfortunately after that you might have to take most of the responsibility of the peer review until mid-December, I'm sorry :( It's last assignments + exam period here and I'm quite worried about how I am managing my stress levels at the moment. I'm sorry :(TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 20:33, 16 November 2013 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3[reply]

Oh God don't apologise, uni completely got on top of me as well. It's so tough, especially at the end of a semester. Would you rather we postpone the PR until you have more time? I don't mind responding mostly alone, but I'm completely happy to wait as well. Either way is fine, just let me know. Take care of yourself - watch comfort films and eat comfort food and try as hard as you can to relax! You're clearly very smart and I'm sure you'll do great :) --Loeba (talk) 20:43, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, memories of uni, sounds like fun. Nothing like going for a good run to get rid of stress. Always works a treat for me!♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:04, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stella Gibbons[edit]

If you have any time to spare from wrestling with the Chaplin review and all the other aspects that fill your time, I'd be very pleased if you could look at the peer review for Stella Gibbons. She was an English novelist of the previous century, a one-book-wonder in many people's eyes, though I think she was worthy of more than that. It is not too long; anything you can suggest would be more than welcome. Brianboulton (talk) 22:21, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes absolutely, I'm happy that there's some way I can return the favour. Will be there soon. --Loeba (talk) 16:54, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 November 2013[edit]

Stella Gibbons[edit]

Just to advise you that this article, which you commented on at PR, is now at WP:FAC. Brianboulton (talk) 21:44, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Precious[edit]

film actresses
Thank you for quality articles on intelligent performers such as Katharine Hepburn Julianne Moore and Charlie Chaplin to the pleasure of millions of readers, for your love of your subjects (shown in your first username), for reviewing, clean templates and diplomacy, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:22, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Very kind, thank you! --Loeba (talk) 07:46, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats on TFA!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:15, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrolled[edit]

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:

  • This permission does not give you any special status or authority
  • Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
  • You may wish to display the {{Autopatrolled}} top icon and/or the {{User wikipedia/autopatrolled}} userbox on your user page
  • If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it
If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing!  Wifione Message 04:21, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 04 December 2013[edit]

Katharine Hepburn[edit]

Haha Holiday (1938 film) is hilarious!!! "If I'd known you were rich I'd have proposed after 2 days rather than 10". "I wait until General Motors makes a decision and I do just the opposite". "One summer I drove a garbage truck" -"admirable" LOL!! Loved Summertime (1955 film) too.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:39, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ahem, KathArine! I can't abide such gross errors on my talk page. ;) Yep Holiday is great - I love when Kate & Cary do the gymnastics! It's been over a year since I last saw it actually, you've got me itching for a rewatch. She's absolutely lovely in Summertime, anyone who says she was too "stuck up" to be likeable only needs to watch that film. Have you still not seen Adam's Rib? Woman of the Year? Pat & Mike? You must! Or for a flat out incredible dramatic performance (esp since you're into Lumet) you must see Long Day's Journey Into Night (although be warned it's very long and intense). --Loeba (talk) 21:39, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Still no luck with Adam's Rib and Woman of the Year. I'll see Long Day's Journey Into Night tomorrow.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:43, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen Long Days Journey now. Brilliant in parts, a bit tedious in others! Hobson's Choice coming next, I'm gradually working my way back through Lean's filmography!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:25, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do love John Mills in the more "humble" roles. I think he's brilliant in roles such as that and the limping idiot in Ryan's Daughter. I'm not too keen on Brenda De Banzie though, I find her irritating. Physically I find her disagreeable to look at, I think it's her stern features which reminds me of an imperious old dinner lady! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:34, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd agree with your assessment of LDJiN. But Kate is fantastic, no? I watched Hobson's Choice a few months ago and loved it! Charles Laughton was one of the greatest ever. Mills is great too, although I actually didn't like his role in Ryan's Daughter much. From lean I still need to see The Passionate Friends, Madeleine and The Sound Barrier. I watched a great 70s crime film the other day: Straight Time with Dustin Hoffman and Harry Dean Stanton. Check it out if you haven't seen it. --Loeba (talk) 10:52, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Of course Kate was fantastic! Sound Barrier is coming next from 1952 then The Rainmaker (1956 film)! Not sure what your opinion is of that, I know that you generally agree with me on Lancaster. I've been meaning to watch more of Hoffman's 70s films, including that one. I loved All the President's Men, I thought him and Redford were extremely convincing as journos. The Red Shoes and Key Largo I've also been meaning to watch from the late 40s.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:01, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm I'm not really a fan of The Rainmaker...it's okay I guess, but it's a bit annoying. Kate was Oscar nominated for it, but I think she's better in many more films. She was miscast, basically; they don't suit as a couple at all. A lot of people seem to like it and the performance though, so you may enjoy it. --Loeba (talk) 11:12, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah that was my thought, Kate and Burt I can't imagine having any chemistry whatsoever, although it couldn't possibly be worse than him and Rita Hayworth in Separate Tables, a similar mismatch to Bacall and Peck probably. I'll give it a watch anyway.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:24, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen the Rainmaker now and although I enjoyed watching it I agree with everything you said on it. Lancaster's "excitable conman" worked in Elmer Gantry but was rather irritating in this film, and Hepburn playing the "subdued minger" type was definitely wrong. Yet she was such a great actress she produced a fine performance, but I think somebody like Judy Garland would have been much more suited to the role.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:52, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting me know about Straight Time, one of the best crime films I've ever seen, although the ending was a bit undercooked.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:48, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What did you think of Undercurrent? Murderous horse!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:24, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not a great film but I LOVE Kate in it. Very underrated performance IMO. Glad you enjoyed Straight Time! --Loeba (talk) 16:56, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was very impressed with Judgement at Nuremberg, sort of like a 60s Schindler's list in terms of subject/quality. I can't think of anybody who could have played the judge more convincingly than Tracey. Best performance I've ever seen from Lancaster. Lean's Blithe Spirit and Great Expectations coming next..♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:28, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you think of anymore for Category:Films set in country houses? I've just found that I tend to enjoy films set in country houses so thought it might be a useful category.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:22, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I added a few films that came to mind! A couple in the category don't quite strike me as being primarily "set in country houses", but I guess it depends how strict you want to be... As for Judgement at Nuremberg, the standout performances for me are definitely Schell, Garland and Clift. Even though the latter two are only on screen for about 15 minutes each, I think it's probably the greatest work they ever did. --Loeba (talk) 16:59, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed on all, although I thought Garland's performance in A Star us Born was better. Yeah perhaps we'd better be stricter with the country house requirement. Feel free to remove the cat from those you disagree with. I loved Blithe Spirit BTW, wasn't overjoyed with Gosford Park I must say, what did you think of it? Considering the acting talent I thought it lacked depth. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:08, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I really like Gosford Park. It's not one of Altman's masterpieces (he would be in my top 5 directors, LOVE his style) but I still find it pretty great. Mirren's little breakdown at the end is heartbreaking! Ryan Phillippe is awful though and slightly cheapens the whole film. Who the hell thought of casting him?! --Loeba (talk) 17:38, 12 December 2013 (UTC) Just read that the role was originally going to be played by Jude Law - he's not the greatest actor in the world either but that would've been sooo much better. --Loeba (talk) 17:45, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) I've taken the liberty of adding a few articles to the Doctor's new category -- will add more as I think of them (it seems that all my favorite movies are set in grand houses...). :) And I was just watching Gosford the other day -- I quite enjoy it as well, and it seems to grow on me more and more on every rewatch. Agree that Philippe is awful (in this and everything else) though! Ruby 2010/2013 18:19, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Ruby. Well yes he was awful in it, didn't fit in at all, but then again I don't like Clive Owen either, I think he's a slimy bugger! The film was OK but I can't exactly say "Wow that was amazing". Compared to Rebecca or Sunset Boulevard or something in this category it pales in comparison. Have either of your seen Husbands (film)? Awful film, joins my lists of super duds. One of the worst (and most childish) films I've ever seen. Cassavetes should be ashamed of it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:08, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I've seen Husbands. Didn't hate it as much as you, but I did find it pretty dull and ultimately pointless. Not as bad as Killing of a Chinese Bookie, which did absolutely nothing for me (most misleading title ever?) Cassavetes is frustrating in a way - his films have a brilliant quality to them but occasionally he goes and takes that quality too far and it all ends up being drawn out and boring. I always say - Cassavetes was sometimes too "Cassavetes" for his own good! That said, I think A Woman Under the Influence, Love Streams, and Faces are all brilliant. Opening Night and Shadows are pretty great too. And his wife was/is one of the greatest actors ever. She's just marvellous, so I love watching his films purely for her. Although my favourite Rowlands performances doesn't even come from a Cassavetes films - it's from a little known Woody Allen film called Another Woman. As it happens, I very recently downloaded Minnie and Moskowitz, which I may even watch tonight. --Loeba (talk) 16:58, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yup I've seen Another Woman, Hackman played her lover in it didn't he. She was great in that. Surprisingly I enjoyed Chevalier's performance in Love in the Afternoon (1957 film). I usually find him irritating, but I thought he really good in it and enjoyed it. I love every film of Audrey's though! Watching Moby Dick (1956 film) at the moment. Good atmosphere in it, but Peck's performance isn't exactly top notch acting, he's trying too hard to be a stereotypical sailor. Next I'm going to try to see as many of the films which actors and actresses won Best Actor/Actress for. There's loads I haven't seen, especially the older ones for actresses!! Have you seen Pygmalion (1938 film)? That's one I've been meaning to see. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:08, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh is Chevalier in Love in the Afternoon? I have seen him in something then! Yes Audrey is very likable. I think her greatest film (and performance) is the wonderful The Nun's Story (film). Pygmalion is great, I think you'll love it. Watching the new Hobbit film today, which will be fun. --Loeba (talk) 08:58, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What did you think of War and Peace (1956 film)? I don't think Fonda was right for the role, he didn't look right on screen in it. I can think of more suited actresses than Audrey to the role too. Have you seen The Electric Horseman? I rather enjoyed it!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:06, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Haven't seen either of those...I have some interest in War and Peace, despite it's poor reputation. As for the latter, well I'll watch anything with Jane Fonda so will keep it in mind! Sad that both Peter O'Toole and Joan Fontaine died yesterday isn't it? She was one of the last remaining stars to work in the 1930s...so few of them left now... --Loeba (talk) 20:05, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, her sister Olivia is still living too at 97! Was watching The Private Life of Henry VIII yesterday and I've just seen The Story of Louis Pasteur and will begin on Captains Courageous shortly. In Old Arizona is well worth a watch if you haven't seen it. Not your typical western of that period. Going through the Best Actor films at the moment.. I've seen quite a lot though already which I'll skip of course. I can't get hold of Disraeli from 1931 though.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:12, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah it's nice to know Olivia's still around, but she's a ripe old age...I've kind of been expecting to hear about her or Joan passing away for years now, heh. But then Luise Rainer is still with us at almost 104! --Loeba (talk) 17:19, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What did you think of Captains Courageous, Boys Town, Watch on the Rhine, A Double Life, Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? and Waste Land? I loved Tracy as the Portuguese fisherman!! I enjoyed all of the films, Baby Jane is most brilliant if painful to watch. I've discovered that I enjoy every film of George Cukor's and have been watching some of his 30s films of late. Trying to see more of Bette Davis's films too... ♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:18, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Captains Courageous: alright, Boys Town: not a fan, Watch on the Rhine: pretty good, A Double Life: not seen, Waste Land: not seen (do you mean the 2010 documentary?), What Ever Happened to Baby Jane: camp as hell but love it! I adore Bette Davis and this is pretty much her at her best. She's utterly glorious, probably my #2 actress behind Kate (very boring that my top 2 match up with the AFI list, but I swear it's just a coincidence and I can't help it.. Or I say they were voted the best for a reason!) I've seen around 30 of her films so far, let me know if you want any recommendations. --Loeba (talk) 17:41, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Waste Land the documentary. An excellent documentary. Audrey Hepburn is my favourite but I agree on Katharine and Bette being the top 2 greatest actresses. Currently watching San Francisco (1936 film)...♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:07, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm having a 1936 film watching spree at the moment! Have you seen Libeled Lady, that's a funny one. BTW, any chance you could give Mughal-e-Azam a read and copyedit for Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mughal-e-Azam/archive1. The article has changed quite a bit since I last read it and not always in a good way. If not, no worries!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:13, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah Libeled Lady is good fun! I wouldn't put it among my favourite 1930s screwball comedies (one of my favourite types of film to watch), but it's one I've been meaning to return to. I may be able to look at your FAC nom (my school has now broken up for a 2 weeks holiday, which gives me more time), but I've promised to do this review for the Christopher Nolan article and also just nominated Chaplin. Woo hoo, finally! You can find it here, if you are able to offer some comments. No pressure though (as always). --Loeba (talk) 17:51, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Will try to look at it over the next few days. Saw Waterloo Bridge earlier, next on my list are Pygmalion, The Unforgiven (1960), Khartoum, Airport, Save the Tiger and Norma Rae.. Have you seen Odds Against Tomorrow. I was eyeing it up earlier, if you recommend it I'll watch it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:55, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen Porco Rosso? It's really good.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:59, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sorry I forgot to reply! Odds Against Tomorrow is one I found out about a year or 2 ago and was instantly interested in seeing it. Somehow I still haven't though. I think you should definitely see it and tell me what you think! One really fun but 1950s noir that I want to recommend is The Narrow Margin. Great stuff. I liked Porco Rosso a lot (even with the cheesy American dubbing). Ghibli films are always worth a watch. Which Waterloo Bridge did you watch, the Vivien Leigh one? That's a great film, shamelessly romantic but in a good way. --Loeba (talk) 13:45, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Will try to see it! Yes the Vivien Leigh and Robert Taylor one. For me it was the stereotypical Golden Hollywood romance film! I enjoyed it but as you say "shamelessly romantic"!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:38, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It might be worth bringing up your plot concerns at WP:FILM and asking to see what the general consensus on the matter is. I can certainly see your point, although my feeling is that if people don't want to learn about the film before watching it then don't read the encyclopedia article LOL! The Unforgiven was rather a disappointment I must say, the worst film of Audrey's I've seen to date. It was OK but for John Huston I can see why he considered it his least satisfying film. Khartoum almost felt like it was one of Lean's, I think Peter O Toole would have been better casting than Charlton Heston for the main role though..♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:29, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well obviously I think the plot should be outlined in the lead, but I don't think it's necessary to do the whole plot at this point and give away the ending. Anyway, even if I didn't think giving away spoilers was a problem, I still think summarising the whole plot is too much detail for the lead. An outline in one or two sentences is all that's required IMO.WP:FILMLEAD seems to agree: "If possible, convey the general premise of the film in the paragraph and identify actors' roles in the premise." As for those films you mentioned, I haven't seen either of them but I do have some interest in Khartoum. --Loeba (talk) 13:45, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff agreed with you and removed it :-].♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:48, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well worth a watch.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:13, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library Survey[edit]

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 15:26, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 11 December 2013[edit]

Chaplin[edit]

Hi Loeba, apologies for not getting round to the Chaplin PR: a host of on and off wiki things kept getting in the way, not least was writing up Hattie Jacques for a push to FA shortly. I do promise to make sure I am a full and willing participant in a Chaplin FAC, and I hope that you will be there soon with him: I am sure it will be a successful process for you. All the best - SchroCat (talk) 17:11, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, there was never any obligation. :) Hopefully we'll take it to FAC in the next week or two...I don't feel like it's guaranteed to be successful, since Chaplin is such a big name he could potentially receive a lot of scrutiny (and I'm a cynical sod who prefer to expect the worst so that I'm not disappointed) but we've done our best! Cheers --Loeba (talk) 17:18, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes be sure to let me know when it's at FAC.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:29, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for some help.[edit]

First of all, as fan of movies, thumbs up on your work shaping the Charlie Chaplin and Katharine Hepburn biographies. I'm reaching out because I need some help with director Christopher Nolan's biography page. I think its pretty good, but I'm always looking at your stuff for inspiration, so here goes nothing; would you care to take a look at our work? Unfortunately I have limitations with the english language (one of those damn Norwegians:-), but I'm aware that the text need some NPOV cleaning, a clooser look at the images/copyright and a new lead. I also hope to fix any weak prose.

Anyway, feel free to pass on this (sorta desperate) request.

All the best Sammyjankis88 (talk) 13:40, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, I can tell from your username that you're a Nolan fan! I'm a huge Memento fan as well...haven't quite loved any of his other films, but they're always worth checking out (and he'll always have my admiration for Memento alone). Just took a quick look at the page, and it's already looking a lot much better than it was during the GA nom a couple of years ago - I chipped in there because I was concerned about the lack of information on his filmmaking style/themes and private life, so it's great to see these sections have been developed. I'd be happy to review the article properly and try and help improve it further...Nolan is a major figure in film right now, and I'm sure thousands of people view the article every day, so the page should be as good as possible. It might be easiest if you open an official PR? Let me know! --Loeba (talk) 17:05, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Guilty as charged. As you can see in my history I've only worked on his wikipedia page (so far); mostly because I think of him as a gateway into becoming a cineast. As someone who love movies and have an academic background in film, I'm painfully aware of how rare it is to have someone that innovative (other than in VFX) having massive commercial success - particular in today's landscape. While I equally adore, say Wes Anderson's work, I felt Nolan was the perfect guy to start with. I would love to see filmmakers like Haneke, P.T Anderson, Nolan and Malick all have GA/FA quality biographies.

I found your stuff via those old comments and have used your work as inspiration since. Heartwarming to see that old masters like Charlie Chaplin get's the quality treatment they deserve.

Appreciate the kind reply and will happily open it up to a Peer Review. Sammyjankis88 (talk) 19:25, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the kind comments. I see that you've opened a PR, I will "claim" it now and start in the next couple of days (sorry, it's been a busy week). Best --Loeba (talk) 17:43, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated and take all the time you need. Sammyjankis88 (talk) 21:02, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 December 2013[edit]

Merry Christmas![edit]

A very happy Christmas and New Year to you!



May 2013 bring you joy, happiness – and no trolls or vandals!

All the best

Gavin / SchroCat (talk) 20:43, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, thanks and a very merry Christmas/New Year to you too! --Loeba (talk) 22:44, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas Loeba! I was watching The Leopard (1963 film) earlier, have you seen it? It's rather good, but not sure it is worth a 100% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Pygmalion was great, but it was like watching a black and white Mr Fair Lady, I hadn't realized the 1964 film was so close! Have you seen Streisand's Funny Girl? Enjoyed that one! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:54, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You too! We finally just put up our christmas tree, haha my family is so rubbish. Yes I've seen The Leopard, it's technically very impressive but the story didn't quite grab me. I also have a real issue with the dubbing in Italian productions. I think it sounds so cheap, it drives me mad! And then there's no way you can always have the dialogue synch up with the actors, because they stupidly used these international casts with everyone speaking their own language and whatever audiotrack you use SOMEONE is out of synch...gahh! Sorry, it's really one of my pet peeves haha. Visconti was a great director though. I've seen 5 of his films so far, my favourite being Death in Venice...that was the first film I saw with Dirk Bogarde as well, and I was instantly captivated by him. I actually haven't seen Funny Girl, but I really should because I find Barbra Streisand very charming. --Loeba (talk) 23:18, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I agree, the plot wasn't very gripping, half the film was set in a ballroom LOL. I thought it was very good overall (partly because I love Claudia Cardinale and films set in Italy hehe) but definitely not 100% worthy! I've seen quite a lot of Burt Lancaster films now though and I've concluded that I don't rate him as an actor. His delivery comes across to me as forced, like he's acting being an actor do you know what I mean? Too preachy, like he's rehearsed what he's saying a thousand times looking in a mirror. I agree on Nuremberg and Atlantic City being his best performances, largely because he wasn't forced in his delivery. On American/Italian dubbing I quite like that aspect of it! It makes the production look amusing to me that they've assembled all these different nationality actors into one film. Actually the full length version of Good Bad and the Ugly has a few extra scenes in which Eli Wallach's character is dubbed by a different voice to the rest of the film which is funny!! Funny Girl is a great film and I like that they play on Steisand's looks and make a thing of it in the film. It's quite brilliant in parts I think. ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:29, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well you're one of the few people to agree with me about Lancaster then, good! I actually didn't like him in Nuremberg, but yes - Atlantic City is probably my favourite BL performance. I can't understand how anyone can enjoy dubbing but to each there own haha ;) I don't know why the Italians couldn't just record sound properly like pretty much every other country in the world...they have so many great filmmakers, but the dubbing gives these wonderful films a slightly cheap, detached quality IMO. Booo. Have you watched any Fellini? --Loeba (talk) 11:48, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lancaster was quite believable in Nuremberg I thought. I've seen La Strada, La Dolce Vita and 8 1/2. Fellini's a master of course, too many American /British classics to see at the moment though to concentrate on the French and Italian classics! It's no coincidence that the Criterion Collection and the 1001 films you must see etc tend to have an astounding number of French and Italian movies, Criterion to me seems to have them more than American films!. I agree that the dodgy dubbing cheapens the films though. But for me the dodgy dubbing I suppose is similar to driving a rickety old classic banger. Crap, but has the novelty/character factor! Guys and Dolls is on at 1:50 on BBC2 today. Haven't seen it!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:32, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I love watching French films from the 30s to the 70s. Regarding Criterion, I think the reason they have so many non-American films is that they try and pick ones that haven't already had a DVD release. Make sure you check out Nights of Cabiria from Fellini. Giulietta Masina is just wonderful in it (people always praise her work in La Strada, but I think she even better there). --Loeba (talk) 17:11, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good point! I didn't even think that that might be the reason! Just finished watching back to back 1955 films Guys and Dolls and The Night of the Hunter. What a masterpiece the latter is, one of the best films I've seen to date of the 50s and I've seen a lot of 50s movies and counting :-] About to start reading the Chaplin article now...♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:01, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas![edit]

I don't know how to get those cool Christmas cards, but merry Christmas nonetheless! I hope I can be a bit more active in Wikipedia this coming month – and that I have time to watch some films. Les yeux sans visage was on telly here a couple of weeks ago and my parents very kindly managed to save it for me! TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 11:02, 24 December 2013 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3[reply]

Thankksss THS you too! I did a bit of goggling and...Hyvaa Joulua! :D I lovvvve that film, let me know what you think. By the way, I recently remembered you saying that you wanted to include a mention of A Woman of the Sea on the Chaplin article? I'd completely forgotten this! We could still mention it, it's arguably the most important thing not there right now...I wouldn't say it's a major problem to miss it out, but I'd be on board with its inclusion as well? All the best --Loeba (talk) 11:35, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Kiitos :D I've changed my mind about A Woman of the Sea, I don't think it is that important to include in the main Chaplin article. His filmography page has a mention of it, and it also has its own page. Completely off-topic, but I was wondering whether you've seen any of Hitchcock's silent films? I watched Downhill yesterday and was a little bit disappointed by how the story was constructed. I want to watch more silent Hitch and was wondering if you could recommend something a bit more upbeat! TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 13:57, 27 December 2013 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3[reply]
I've seen a bit of The Lodger: A Story of the London Fog, which is definitely his best known silent, but I haven't seen any of them all the way through. Did you watch Eyes Without a Face? --Loeba (talk) 15:31, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is a bit belated, but happy new year! I watched Eyes Without a Face yesterday. I found it very beautiful in terms of the cinematography, but also again had problems with the pace (it felt too slow) and the minimalism. I don't understand why these qualities are such problems for me when it comes to films from that era, since I have thoroughly enjoyed watching many other films which also could be said to be minimalistic and slow-paced! Have you seen Almodovar's The Skin I Live In, which was inspired by the film? It's not one of Almodovar's best (I have to admit I fast-forwarded bits), but it certainly has many similarities to Eyes Without a Face, in fact it's a bit like a re-interpretation. I also watched another French film yesterday, The Hedgehog (the book that it is based on has an even better title, The Elegance of the Hedgehog), which I really enjoyed and recommend if you haven't seen in already! It's not a masterpiece, but still it's a lovely little film with great acting.TrueHeartSusie3 (talk) 10:31, 3 January 2014 (UTC)TrueHeartSusie3[reply]
Happy new year to you too! I've wanted to see The Skin I Live In since it came out but still haven't. As for The Hedgehog, I've never even heard of that but looked it up and it sounds really interesting! Thanks for the recommendation. --Loeba (talk) 11:59, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You've both done a tremendous job on Chaplin. A joy to read! With pleasure I've given my support with a few minor things brought up. I'd definitely like to see detailed sub articles on each stage of his career though, especially early life as your article has made me thirsty for more!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:32, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're very kind! You should really get the Robinson biography, it's such an interesting read. But yes, an "Early life of Charlie Chaplin" article would be well worth having. There's obviously a lot of detail the main article has to miss out (Robinson has about 70 pages before CC even joins Karno at age 18). It would also mean the info could be presented chronologically (ie, Eight Lancaster Lads in the right place), which I felt would mean too much "back and forth" for the main article. I'm not sure it's something I could personally take on any time soon (as much as I love him, I'm a bit Chaplin-ed out!) but I'd fully support its development. I guess there could also be article on each of the studios he worked for as well (ie "Chaplin at Keystone", "Chaplin at Mutual"...) As for Night of the Hunter, that's one I really need to rewatch. It was one of the first classic films I saw, when I first became interested in them (nearly 4 years ago now), and I really didn't like it! But most film buffs rave about it and I'm much more into classic films now, so I should definitely give it another try...I'm sure I'll still find that little girl unbearable though, I remember her being laughably awful! --Loeba (talk) 21:17, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas! The scene where the girl sings on the dark lake in TNOTH is really atmospheric!! Given how ballsy Shelly Winters was in real life her performance is brilliant acting I thought. I had the 1001 movies book from my sister for Christmas, it's one of the best books ever! I've seen a few hundred of the films, maybe 300-400.It has some strange selections/evasions in part though. I mean it has High Plains Drifter but not The Kid for instance. High Plains is one of my favourite Eastwood movies but it's obviously not comparable to something like The Kid! Currently watching The Red Shoes on BB2 which is in the book of course, I know you recommended it! The original was probably in black and white, I'd guess I'm watching the colourized version. Nope just checked and seems it was in technicolor. Surprising as their skin it in looks a bit paint-like.. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:23, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen Hugo (film)? What a brilliant film. I enjoyed every single shot of it. It was magical to me and to bring those silent movies to life like that was amazing I thought. I rank this among the best films I've ever seen, it's the last entry in the 1001 book!♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:05, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you've had a nice day! I'm sufficiently stuffed, haha. I've got a version of 1001 movies from a couple of years ago, it's a really nice book to own. According to ICheckMovies I've seen 662 films in the recent one (although actually there must be a new one just out?) As for The Red Shoes, that's the signature Jack Cardiff look. It does look painterly, but personally I love the style. Yeah I enjoyed Hugo, especially the bits related to classic filmmaking (of course!) --Loeba (talk) 00:11, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The one with Harrison Ford on the cover right? I did a check and I've only seen a measly 212, 213 now including Hugo!! 662 is very good! I'm aiming to see all 1001 of course! I'll be ticking more off today, on TV pretty much in succession are The King and I (I only seen bits of it ages ago not the full movie as a film buff) High Society, and Meet me in St Louis! I thought I was watching it before but I watched the Spirit of St Louis LOL! Have you see Black Orpheus? That woman in the film was stunning, such beautiful skin! I have Adam's Rib on DVD now but I was thinking of getting the Hepburn/Tracy set which has ones like Woman of the Year, Pat and Mike and Adam's Rib and reselling the DVD. You remember I said about what the greatest year in film is? The 1001 books intro author seems to think 1940, but I think 1939 (as does Scorsese) first then 1962. If I had to pick a year of particularly groundbreaking or risk taking films though I'd pick 1973. Those years 1972-4 were incredibly important I think in the development of cinema IMO, I think you know what I'm getting at.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:12, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No mine has Heath Ledger as the Joker on the front. Is High Society really in there?? Psshhh that's kind of ridiculous. I have a bit of a vendetta against that film, no one but Kate, Cary and Jimmy should have played those roles! Obviously I fully advocate you getting the Tracy-Hepburn collection :D I have the Definitive Collection, which is only available on Region 1 but that's easy to tap into. It also includes "The Spencer Tracy Legacy" documentary, presented by Kate, which is a nice addition. --Loeba (talk) 11:24, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for alerting me to that one!! I was going to get [1]! The King and I isn't actually in the book it's on right now, but I'm baffled as to how Brynner won the Oscar in 1956 and James Dean didn't for Giant!!! It's alright, but given that I'm not the biggest fan of Kerr anyway, her singing is a bit irritating.. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:59, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not surprised you have a vendetta against the film being a remake of Philadelphia! Some films just shouldn't be remade.. Obviously nowhere near as good but I enjoyed it, although the ending was way undercooked. I'd rather have watched that cast in a more Catch a Thief type film rather than that though.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:53, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you order the boxset, make sure you have a way of cracking region 1. I often watch films on my laptop (curled up in bed, hehe) so I just downloaded this. But I'm pretty sure there are ways of making a DVD player region-free as well...--Loeba (talk) 12:21, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just finished watching Intolerance. Didn't like the way it kept alternating with some weird Babylon story and America. It was bizarre, I didn't have a clue what the Babylon stuff was all about. I gathered parts were about having a baby confiscated and a man to be hanged, but it was rather weird. I can't say I enjoyed it much. Some of the Babylon sets though for the time were rather impressive though, I'll give it that. "The cross-cutting, self-interrupting format is wearisome.... The sheer pretension is a roadblock, " is a very good summary of it. I think if he'd picked say two stories and made the film about 100-120 minutes and not cross cut all the time it could have been an excellent film but too much of the text on the screen was difficult to understand and odd. It's definitely one of those films which the critics rave about and I don't enjoy.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:39, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well at least you watched the whole thing, kudos for that because it's really long! I've seen about 40 minutes of it, still have it saved on my PC but haven't gone back to it yet...I did find it interesting though. I've only seen one Griffith feature all the way through - Orphans of the Storm, which I saw at the BFI with a live pianist...my boyfriend and I both really enjoyed it. Very melodramatic but good fun. --Loeba (talk) 15:31, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that's in the 1001 book too and will get around to watching that some time. I shan't be watching another silent for a few days anyway! Les Vampires is like twice the length like 7 or 8 hours. Hahah watching a 7 hr silent movie is the equivalent of like 24 hrs for a modern sound film! 3hrs is gruelling enough! 7 hrs is bleedin' ridiculous!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:02, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well films like that I think you just have to watch in chunks, as if it was a TV show. Like, I've seen all of Shoah (film) but no way did I watch it all in one (I think I watched it over 5 separate intervals). I think it would've ruined the film to force myself to watch all 8-9 hours in a row. By the way, do you think that Shoah should link to the film rather than be a redirect to Holocaust? I don't think many English speakers know the Holocaust as Shoah, and I think almost everyone putting in that term would expect it to refer to the film... --Loeba (talk) 16:20, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dunno, perhaps propose to move it on the talk page? Adam's Rib was hilarious BTW!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:36, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I saw your recent work; I watched My Man Godfrey the other day, she was terrific in it! I thought Arsenic and Old Lace was hilarious too. Watched Monsieur Verdoux yesterday and Jezebel this morning. Lilies of the Field (1963) I'll watch this evening I think.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:47, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad you liked Carole! Obviously I think she's great ;) Yesterday was the first time I've touched her article in a month..still quite a bit to do there, and I seem to be getting slower and slower at writing these days! What did you think of Monsieur Verdoux? --Loeba (talk) 19:52, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent!! Got better as it progressed I thought. loved Lilies of the field too. On the infobox front I support them on most articles which have a lot of data like sportspeople, aircraft, boats, buildings, settlements, most types of articles really. But in biographies where the boxes are very short and contain nothing really which isn't said in the intro I really don't see their use other than as decoration. I think a nice big photo looks more presentable personally. The infobox thing is something which really needs to be solved. I'd support a mandatory infobox box thing controlled by wikidata and editors have the option to hide them to their own preference. It causes more trouble than it's worth.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:26, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can see how it's frustrating for you. I'd be frustrated if there were always people removing infoboxes (particularly from articles I'd worked on). Unfortunately I just think the anti-infobox crowd is smaller than the pro-infobox crowd - or at least the latter is louder - which is why you're regularly having to deal with such disputes. It's such a silly thing to invest energy in though! (this is not aimed at you or anyone, I think we both agree it's all a bit ridiculous) I kind of do think it would be better for wikipedia to make at flat decision: either all articles have them or none! Then they could even do a broad survey, maybe advertised in a small box at the top of the page when people visit, like the fundraising one, so that as many people as possible (not just registered users) could contribute and it could show if there's a consensus either way...it will never happen but something like that could finally put an end to the disputes! --Loeba (talk) 21:45, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I just understood you meant by the way, about letting users chose in their preferences if articles include an infobox or not. Now there's a good idea! Much better than mine haha. --Loeba (talk) 23:05, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What annoyed me on this was that the arb consensus is to respect the reviews of the article writers on the matter. I explicitly said on the talk page that we agreed on no infobox at the FAC yet 2 hours later Rexx tried to impose an infobox which I found highly disrespectful especially after the Sellers ordeal. If anybody's violated arb agreements it's him, but we know that "civility" takes precedence on this website. Yes it would be like you discussing your preference and agreement on using infoboxes in your Chaplin, Tracy and Hepburn articles and 2 hours later me coming along and removing the infoboxes saying "they add nothing of value". Any normal person would be annoyed.... Not worth the trouble anyway, I'm sure at some point infoboxes will be controlled by wikidata anyway...

Have you seen Lilies of the Field? It really is a lovely little film, the English lessons are a gem!! I love Poitier's films in that period, you can cut the atmosphere in some of his films with a knife, you can really sense the way he represented the path to accepting black men as equals during that period. He's treated like an alien in a lot of his films which I think is half good acting, half reality. I can sense that even some of his co-stars are wary of him being black and a lead actor and it is quite inspiring to see his films evolve and him become like the film poster boy for the revolution in the 1960s.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:11, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No I've not seen it, I'll put it on my hypothetical watchlist. That's an interesting point you make about the cast genuinely being wary of Potier. I think you're right. If I remember correctly, K Hepburn admitted that she initially found acting with him strange until she realised he was a great actor and a nice man. I wouldn't rank him among my favourites but he was revolutionary in Hollywood, no doubt about that. --Loeba (talk) 13:17, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Very interesting! Yes, I'm sure a lot of the others would say the same thing. Yes, a lot of the actors in the 60s looked uncomfortable around him, and I think it was reflective of what the public were probably thinking at the time. Some of the actresses especially seemed a bit guarded having him look at them, like he was some sort of randy monkey or something. There is definitely a stereotype and I think probably a lot of them had little or no experience working with black actors, a leading, intelligent black actor back in those days was really revolutionary. Blacks in films like Jezebel, Gone with the Wind etc were always portrayed as dumb slaves weren't they. It didn't help though that Poitier rarely seemed to blink, he has these staring, transfixed eyes doesn't he which makes him stand out even more!♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:37, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I saw American Hustle earlier!! It was a pretty good film but SOO badly copied in part mostly from Casino and films like Goodfellas, Donnie Brasco and American Gangster. I agree that it was a bit of "a sloppy sprawl" at least in the middle as the Variety reviewer says, it lacked the cohesion and believability to quite be a great film on the level of Scorsese's films but I enjoyed the film overall. Compared to a lot of the franchise superhero crap it was a great film though!! Bale is SO obviously impersonating Robert de Niro in Casino. One of his lines "It's a sign of disrespect" is lifted directly from the scene in Casino where one of the "cowboy" visitors to the Casino has his feet on the table and he's taken out the back and beaten up by Joe Pesci! He does a very good job on impersonating him though but De Niro was in the film and I reckon he taught Bale his mannerisms!! Baffled as why De Niro wasn't credited though. Bale's comb over in the film is hilarious!♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:58, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I enjoyed Last Vegas too.. Currently watching 1900 (film), 5 hrs 7 minutes!! Have you seen it?♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:05, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that's another one of those films that drove me a bit mad because of the dubbing - especially because it's so good in just about every other aspect! I love those sorts of family epics that cover a long period of a country's interesting history (Sunshine (1999 film) is another one of those). There's a couple of extremely brutal moments in it. Donald Sutherland has never been so evil. --Loeba (talk) 14:13, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, him swinging around the child and banging his head against the wall and killing him and the shooting in the rain was a bit extreme, he was certainly rather scary! I thought the film was a masterpiece and I'm definitely much richer for having watched it, but I fully agree with one of the Rotten Tomatoes reviewers who said it's like eating too much of your favourite pasta. It could have easily been cut by an hour. The ending lasted like 50 minutes when it alone could have been cut to 10. I saw Easy A last night which I thought was rather funny in part. I really like Emma Stone, including her 60 year old smoker's voice which while a downside to most women I think it actually makes her more undearing in an odd way. Obviously the film is teeny-bopper oriented but I tend to enjoy high school comedies like American Pie and Drillbit Taylor. They're fun to watch even if I don't take them as serious pieces of cinema. I'm about to watch Touch of Evil.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:44, 5 January 2014 (UTC) Touch of Evil was enjoyable but in all honesty I didn't think it was brilliant. I mean Heston as a Mexican for a start... Have you seen The Most Boring Film Ever Released? It joins my small batch of super duds.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:27, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah Heston was a terrible casting choice, but I think it has a great atmosphere. I'm not sure I'll ever see The Greatest Story Ever told, not my sort of thing at all! I recommend Dallas Buyers Club by the way, I really liked it...its article didn't have a proper plot summary, so I did the decent thing and pulled one together. As a current film that's bound to get lots of Oscar noms, I imagine lots of people will want a full plot summary to read. I must say, between this and Mud (2012 film), McConaughey is proving himself to be one of the best actors working right now. --Loeba (talk) 19:22, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is good? Cool. 12 Years a Slave I've also been thinking about going to see. Avoid Greatest Story like the plague!! Read the reviews here! I consider Max Van Sydow to be a very respectable actor but it's almost like they sedated him, took his soul and left him with one expression, he's like a zombie as Jesus. The film had me yawning all the way through and I genuinely had to check myself several times from shutting off for a kip! Never a bright moment, nothing to lift the mood, even the silly cameos in it. It's not that the film, the scenery or whatever is bog standard or dreadful, but its the way the scene are compiled and the lifelessness of the actors in it which make it exceedingly dull and uninspiring to watch. David Lean was apparently an uncredited assistant director on it which I find hard to believe. Uncredited perhaps because of sheer embarrassment with the result. I'm not sure how anything in which Lean so much as touched ended up that dull... I just saw Treasure Island (1972 film). Welles was perfect casting as Long John! Repulsion and Barry Lydon I'm planning on watching tomorrow. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:23, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Repulsion is one of the most disturbing films I've ever seen. It's between that and The Texas Chain Saw Massacre. I felt genuinely distressed and unhappy after watching it, and I rarely get that. It's very good though. I've been looking forward to 12 Years a Slave for about a year now, it sounds so interesting. Definitely going to see it in the cinema. --Loeba (talk) 21:30, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's been getting rave reviews, in the advert it says that some critics are already rate it as one of the best films ever made, probably one reviewer said something like that and they've inflated it, I dunno but it definitely looks very good. Yes the 1001 book says Repulsion is disturbing but then again people said films like Halloween, and Nightmare on Elm Street were disturbing... Slasher films, especially low budget rarely make me batter an eye lid. I agree though that the scenes of the corpses in the room in Texas Chain Saw and that storage room were really disturbing (it was like you could smell the room wasn't it). Certain scenes from that, The Exorcist, Silence of the Lambs, the bathroom scene in The Shining, and the Devil impregnating Mia in Rosemary's Baby I think rank highly among the "disturbing". The scariest moment I've seen though was actually on TV made back in 1996 starring Pauline Quirke, The Sculptress. That had some truly terrifying scenes in it!! Psychological thrillers/horrors tend to me scarier to me that the obvious gory slasher type films. Look forward to seeing it anyway! Scorsese's new film is also one I hope to see at the end of the month. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:46, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No trust me, Reuplusion is nothing like those slasher films you mentioned. I don't think anyone can say they're "disturbing", they're just aimed to give you a fright. I quite like feeling scared in films (but it's hard to get me genuinely scared), but feeling disturbed isn't enjoyable...and Repulsion is disturbing. Pure psychological horror. As for Chain Saw, I always assumed it was a slasher flick, but was shocked that it was actually this really gritty, realistic film about a cannibalistic family! Yikes it was horrible. That granddad character - UGH. I actually remember that Pauline Quirk film being on TV, but I would've only been 9 so I think I freaked out and turned it off! --Loeba (talk) 22:03, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was 14 I think and felt pretty much the same and would now I think if I saw it again. It was her obesity and convincing smug face, the hideous decor on the walls and the pool of blood of her mother and sister's bodies and then the arrangement scene in particular combined which was truly horrendous and surpasses anything I've seen in some of the notoriously scary films. Yes that storage room and attic I think it was with the corpses in chairs in Texas Chain Saw I think rank among the worst rooms in any film, but the fact that the sons were pretty retarded and that monotonous tone of the chainsaw took the film's sting out of it a bit for me. Still, definitely the scariest slasher film I've seen overall, but as you say the elements in it made it far more disturbing and convincing than your typical slasher. Sorry if I implied Repulsion was a slasher film, I am aware it is a psycho horror! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:13, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen Repulsion just now! Very good, loved the contrast in black and white and the atmosphere of the film but I must admit I didn't find anything in it which really disturbed me. For me Rosemary's Baby had creepier scenes in it. Deneuve and 60s London was too attractive to look at for me! Obviously it's a dark movie though and a sad one. I was a bit disappointed with the way the first guy was murdered so soon after shutting the door. I was hoping for some sexual aggression between them and something more brutal! The corridor scene with the hands though was definitely creepy! The only film I can think of at the moment which really made me feel disturbed/depressed was actually Changeling. The ranch scenes, particularly the children being forced to kill and the bones being dug up and then of course the asylum and the hanging and then after it all her never finding her son. On a brighter note, did you like The Ladykillers? I thought it was great! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:56, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It was the ending, when the sister has to come back and find everything that really freaked me out...I just thought that was the most horrible idea. Changeling is very sad, especially knowing it's based on a true story...Jolie was very good in that one I thought. The original Ladykillers is great, the Coen Bros remake not so much (the only film of theirs I don't like). --Loeba (talk) 20:48, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I agree the ending was the saddest part! I tell you an actor who's starting to become one of my favourites, Lee J. Cobb. He's been great in everything I've seen him in whether it was On The Waterfront, 12 Angry Men, Man of the West or The Exorcist! His facial expression just screamed "asshole boss" didn't it LOL! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:42, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen Dallas Buyer's Club now! Very good film, McConaughey was excellent wasn't he, but something will be seriously wrong for me if Leto doesn't win Best Supporting Actor. I thought he was brilliant. I doubt the film will win Best Picture though but it'll definitely get a nomination and a nom for Best Actor for McConaughey I think. BTW I started Hylda Queally, very talented lady herself it seems with an eye for spotting talent!♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:30, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad you watched it and enjoyed it! I think Leto is a shoe-in for Best Supporting tbh, he's already winning most of the critics awards...he was extremely good, but IMO McConaughey was even better. That was a really complex role and he absolutely nailed it. I think he'll definitely get a nom, but no he probably won't win... Chiwetel Ejiofor is my current bet (even though I haven't seen the film yet, it's just a feeling). I'm glad it's not painfully predictable this year, like last year and Daniel Day Lewis. The moment it was announced that he was playing Lincoln, that award was predetermined. --Loeba (talk) 20:55, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that's definitely by far the best performance I've seen from him. He is a native Texan anyway but he couldn't have looked more like how you'd envisage a white trash rodeo guy who had AIDS!! Really got the appearance of the real life guy right too [2]. The only downside to the film for me was that I was a bit disappointed with the ending, I wanted to see him win that court case, and I think it would have been more moving if he'd died helping somebody or whatever rather than the note that he died but it is based on a true story after all. I think you're right, Ejiofor at present looks most likely to scoop it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:48, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah it was a bit of a weird way to end it...especially, I thought, that they spend the whole film making out AZT to be this horrendous drug, and then we're told that it has saved loads of lives! I knew nothing about it before hand, and I was expecting them to say "AZT was discontinued in X year" or something...I've done some reading about it since, and apparently it was just given in too high quantities at first. I'd quite like to develop Ron Woodroof into a proper article at some point if I can be bothered...Do you have any thoughts on this by the way? --Loeba (talk) 22:05, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Answered on talk page! Let's try to get the film up to a half decent status first! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:27, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've been reverted at it restored to "her" by an individual who obviously has personal issues with it...♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:29, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, I'm not surprised. Whatever - I'm sure it's constantly going to be changed back and forth so there's no point getting caught up in it all. It would be nice if people joined in the TP discussion and we eventually gained a consensus, but in the meantime... --Loeba (talk) 16:48, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe if transexual is offensive these days what would sort of response would "tranny" get! Have you seen In a Lonely Place? I quite enjoyed it, great noir atmsophere, although the ending again was rather disappointing! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:42, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blonde Cobra is definitely the most bizarre film I've ever seen. It is a sicko decision to include it in the book too! It's rather repulsive and obviously intended to shock. The article was missing. It's a half decent start on it anyway. I can quite safely say though that it is definitely not a film anybody must see! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:48, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How any decent person could call Blonde Cobra a comic movie and a classic beats me. It's a piece of crap!! There's little shocking graphically about the film but the content really isn't funny. And to think that the authors included it at the expense of ones like Lilies of the Field and Charade for 1963 beats me! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:16, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've never even heard of it, "1001" must have added it recently. They do like to have a couple of really obscure, controversial choices for variety. I scanned through the youtube video, it looks very strange! It's been a while since I saw In a Lonely Place and I don't remember it very well, but I know I liked it. My favourite Nick Ray film is probably Bigger Than Life. I watched American Hustle yesterday, enjoyable but somewhat shallow as well; definitely not the classic it wants to be. --Loeba (talk) 12:45, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah AH tries too hard to be a Scorsese like classic doesn't it and comes across as false in doing so. Enjoyable and a good film nonetheless. I've seen 12 Years a Slave now! Strongly recommend it, it's a great film! It's sure to win Oscars and I wouldn't be surprised if it won multiple ones. For me though the strongest performances were by Fassbender and Lupito Nyong'o. I had thought Jared Leto's performance would easily win Best Supporting Actor but I was very impressed with Fassbender who really made the film what it was in my opinion. It was a great film but I did think it was lacking something a bit in terms of plot, I'd hoped to have seen more of a twist and filming of the court proceedings at the end of the film but it ended pretty abruptly and he was then reunited and then messages came up on what happened before it finished. I also didn't like Brad Pitt's role in the film. To me it makes him look very egotistical (him being producer and cherry picking such a role), him being the one who essentially freed the slave. It'll still go down as a classic though for sure. I loved the look of the film, it really felt like the 1840s or whatever it was, and the plantation looked really genuine, I believe it was actually shot at Magnolia in Louisiana which was actually one and it really felt like it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:50, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Watched Lord of the Rings trilogy through entirely earlier (haven't been feeling too well was in bed). I've had them on DVD since they came out, extended versions too but I don't think I've watched them in nearly 10 years. I doubt you'd agree but I really do have to consider it the greatest film I've ever seen by a mile if you consider the three together as one and actually look at what is created within the film. It really has a balance of everything and takes you into a different world. I was viewing it through completely different eyes than I did 10 years ago, I found it hard going in the cinema, especally the 3 hr 30 Return of the King but I'm well adjusted to film watching marathons now! Virtually every scene was not just enjoyable but a marvel to watch and there are very few films I can really say that about. Just the combination of the stunning scenery, the characters, tasteful and stunning CGI work and the nailing of what are clearly extremely difficult aspects to get right like Gollum etc, the beautiful Celtic music and feel of the film all combined for me it far surpasses anything I've ever seen. I think of all the historical epics/epics which are obviously among the best made and the sheer body of work of the trilogy I think it easily surpasses them all. I mean to even begin to envisage making a film on a book as complex and long as LOR is mind boggling but to actually produce it so wonderfully. Funny thing is I don't rate the recent Hobbit films, they're good but unlike the LOR films feel like they're being dragged out just to make money. But I was watching LOR trying to find flaws in the way it was shot and to figure out how they shot certain scenes and it still boggles my mind how they managed to pull it off and make it look convincing!♦ Dr. Blofeld 23:01, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well there was definitely a time when I pretty much considered the LOTR trilogy my favourite films! I seriously loved them when they came out, and I still think they're great. They're undeniable powerful and captivating, I don't see how anyone can fail to get caught up in them (although the last one does drag). Interesting that you hadn't seen them since they came out! I've watched them many times. I liked the first Hobbit film - nowhere near as good as LOTR but I still enjoyed it - but the recent one was absolute wank. Hated it. Jackson was mad to drag it out like this, it could have been so great as one film (maybe two)...all they cared about was making as much money as they could... --Loeba (talk) 22:04, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, The Hobbit is a disappointment and was clearly made for making money. The second one was even worse as you say than the first which I said the same thing about to you a while back. The artistry of it has been ruined by the dragging it out to make money. Obviously they're still well done but as you say 2 films max it should have been. I mean three films for the Hobbit (probably even shorter than one of the three books) and three films for LOR says it all. Obviously there's classic films which have stronger character/emotional interaction/or a more gripping/intense action/comedy etc but as one work I honestly haven't seen any movie which even comes close to being on such an epic scale and cinematic grandeur. Yeah I last saw it through in about 2004 I think, once on my DVDs after seeing all in the cinema of course and I found it hard going back then and too much for me to really fully enjoy. I've seen tons of films since and the film for me now is far better than it was when released, breathtaking to watch. The only minor thing for me was that it was missing Tom Bombadil, probably the most awesome character in the book, and the ending wasn't really quite as strong as it could be. What did you think of Avatar? I thought it technically a groundbreaking film, yes, and obviously visually spectacular in parts, but definitely was not a great film IMO because of the rather weak/unoriginal plot. It sort of felt like Dances with Wolves/Aliens/Apocalypse Now with tall blue people. Those films of course were all great, but Avatar I think was hugely overhyped and nowhere near as good as it could have been using that sort of technology. I hope in the sequels Cameron tries to think more about pushing boundaries with the subject matter. Give me Titanic any day!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:59, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I enjoyed Avatar while watching it in the cinema, but when I caught a bit on TV I decided it was fairly crap! --Loeba (talk) 23:10, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah it was the 3D thing that's why. of course, but it was still hyped though even in the cinema! I see the final Oscar nominations are in and pretty much exactly what I'd expected., although I never thought American Hustle would out do 12 Years for nominations! I'l be really annoyed if Bale wins Best Actor above McConaughey. I loved Streep in Osage. I don't think Kate was better in Blue Jasmine but I have a feeling she might win it, Sandra Bullock also lovable in Gravity of course.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:44, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There's a couple of surprises - I expected (and really wanted) Emma Thompson to get in...looks like Meryl Streep took her place (all the others were a given). Sometimes I think they'd nominate Streep for standing still and staring into the camera! I haven't seen the film yet. I'm shocked that Bale got in over Hanks, the latter has had far more attention. Bale was great but Hanks deserves the nomination more. And I can't for the life of me understand how Stories We Tell missed out on Best Documentary. Loeba (talk) 17:11, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh Streep was amazing in Osage County, she did deserve a nom IMO. If anything I'd question the Amy Adams nomination.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:31, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yeah I don't think Adams deserved the nom (I've never quite got the hype over her) but it was always going to happen. Streep hasn't had as much attention this year which is why I think she←'s the "surprise" who pushed Emma out. Loeba (talk) 17:37, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Amy Adams is very nice to look at of course, her chest especially in American Hustler, but even close to a Best Actress performance? No way. Osage is really very good, although if anything it had too much acting in it if you know what i mean. Both Meryl and Julia Roberts were great in it. I really think you'd think a lot of Osage and recommend it. The Kenyan girl in 12 years though deserves Best Supporting Actress.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:13, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yep I completely agree with you, I've seen Saving Mr. Banks now and her performance was easily the best I've seen of the year. It is appalling to me that Amy Adams got a nom and she didn't!! I do wonder if the nature of her role had anything to do with it, it was pretty anti-American and probably came across as British snottiness to the Academy.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:54, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In thinking about it Fatal Attraction is pretty scary!♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:25, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah it's pretty good. I've seen Osage County now and Streep is indeed very good. I loved Emma's performance of course but I do actually think Blanchett was the best actress of the year (that I've seen anyway). Since she's bound to win the Oscar, this may be one of the rare times that the academy and I agree! Loeba (talk) 13:47, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I actually didn't think that much of Blanchett's performance. For me her friend and her greaser boyfriend in it made the film. She'll win it though I think. I've seen Inside Llewyn Davis now. Very good film, I liked the look of it but Oscar really didn't feel right or believable in the role for me. I particularly liked Goodman's quip about jazz using all 12 notes and dumb folk musicians playing the same old G and C etc which is very true and also applies to pop music! Best visual effects and cinematography I think has to go to Gravity. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:43, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I still need to watch Inside Llewyn Davis! Still need to watch quite a few of last year's big films, I've been slacking *slaps wrist* --Loeba (talk) 16:30, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr. Blofeld: I've been helping out a bit with the Christopher Nolan article, and I think it's probably good enough for GA now. If I advised the primary editor to nominate it, would you be interested in doing the review? --Loeba (talk) 18:41, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, might not be until mid next week though but if you nom I'll reserve the review. Looks thorough and GA worthy at first glance.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:00, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks! I want Sammyjankis do the nomination to make sure he gets full credit and everything. I've let him know on his talk page. --Loeba (talk) 23:48, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 December 2013[edit]


Comment request[edit]

Since you were involved in a similar discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Actors_and_Filmmakers#Should_.22award.22_articles_be_comprehensive.3F I thought you might want to comment on the propriety of including Film Critic Societies at Critic top 10 lists in film articles at Talk:In_a_World...#Request_for_Comment.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:07, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hugh Walpole[edit]

I have noticed your marvellously thorough contributions to the peer review of Stella Gibbons, and as I now have her contemporary colleague Hugh Walpole up for peer review I'd be most glad of your thoughts, if you have time and disposition to look in. Quite understand if not, naturally. – Tim riley (talk) 16:39, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh that's nice :) I will do my best to contribute over the next few days. --Loeba (talk) 19:44, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year[edit]


Happy New Year, Loeba.
Thanks for all the good work. Span (talk) 14:50, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For your tireless contributions. Span (talk) 15:02, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh hey Span (long time no talk!) I think "intermittently tireless contributions" would be more appropriate, haha, but thanks very much. Happy new year :) --Loeba (talk) 15:05, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I had a long Wikibreak, much needed, and have now returned. How are things going? You seem to be thriving and achieving great things. High winds and torrential winds where we are, eh? Span (talk) 15:09, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well I had a very long wikibreak, but have now been here fairly consistently since the end of the summer...I have ups and downs, sometimes I feel like doing loads, sometimes I can't be bothered to do anything. Chaplin seems to be on the cusp of promotion to FA though, which is very exciting since that's been my dream for the article for over two years. Can't quite believe it! Yes the weather has been shite, which is why I'm spending the day online...seems to have cleared now though so maybe time to get out...so I'm guessing you're still in Finsbury Park? --Loeba (talk) 15:15, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still in the area. Off to the shops between the deluges. Congrats on Chaplin Span (talk) 16:56, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 01 January 2014[edit]

Disambiguation link notification for January 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Christopher Nolan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to The Dark Knight
From Hell to Heaven (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Paramount

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Loeba/Archive6&oldid=1144361873"