12 Jun 09 08:27, TOM WALKER wrote to ROY WITT:


 RW>> LOL! Good one. There's a movie theater on the same grand order in
 RW>> Austin. They show the best of the oldies on a daily basis during the
 RW>> summer months of May, June, July, August and September. We're going
 RW>> up in the first part of August for my birthday to watch 'Rebel
 RW>> Without a Cause' on the big screen. I haven't seen it on the big
 RW>> screen since my first viewing, back in the 50s. IMO, any of the post
 RW>> war movies made in B&W or Color are classics, right up to American
 RW>> Graffiti (one of my favorites} and beyond. On a Blue-Ray DVD player,
 RW>> the latest release of King Kong is almost 3 dimensional. Some people
 RW>> rave over the old silent classics, which to me are, yeah, they're
 RW>> OK, but they show how primitive the early industry was. Anything
 RW>> made when talkies debuted is much better.

 TW> Perhaps but there is more to a Classic Movie than flashy Colors and
 TW> or or Sound Track. In the Silent days Actors  HAD to be REAL actors
 TW> or they didn't make it in Movies.

BS...Bringing 100% of themselves to the screen made them, where those who
didn't have the talent to make that transition, didn't make it. Anybody
can stand before a camera and mouth the words, but not many of them could
do so, convincingly, before a microphone. Black and White is not a natural
setting for life, and so it's not a natural setting for movies. If B&W is
all they had, that's all they had. At least that situation was  corrected
when color was finally made possible. Remember the movies of the 40s where
the picture was in B&W, but to emphasize the theme of the movie, they shot
the most important parts in color. See: The Wizard of Oz, c1939.

                R\%/itt

Joy lives in the fight, in the attempt, in the suffering involved, not in
the victory itself.

--- Twit(t) Filter v2.1 (C) 2000