Best Supporting Actress 1963
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 19368
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
- Location: Jersey Shore
Re: Best Supporting Actress 1963
Wherever Damien saw that "amateur movie", it wasn't in Times Square.
At the time I worked in an office on 7th Ave and 53rd St. and was very familiar with the area. I would have remembered such a title. The only thing that comes close is "Two Nuns and a Pack Mule", which was the name of the one and only album from a Chicago noise rock band called Rapeman, which seems to imply the same thing. It was released in 1988.
1977 was right smack dab in the middle of the Golden Age of Porn, when porn films were routinely shown and advertised in the New York Times and other newspapers. You can still see the ads in the Times Machine if you have a NY Times on-line subscription. If you don't want to pay for a subscription, you can sign up for a trial for 4 weeks or whatever they're offering, and cancel, or you can check every day until you find a sample paper from the era. Samples change every day, but lately they've had a lot from the Watergate era for obvious reasons. Today's sample issue, though, is from 1898.
https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/browser
At the time I worked in an office on 7th Ave and 53rd St. and was very familiar with the area. I would have remembered such a title. The only thing that comes close is "Two Nuns and a Pack Mule", which was the name of the one and only album from a Chicago noise rock band called Rapeman, which seems to imply the same thing. It was released in 1988.
1977 was right smack dab in the middle of the Golden Age of Porn, when porn films were routinely shown and advertised in the New York Times and other newspapers. You can still see the ads in the Times Machine if you have a NY Times on-line subscription. If you don't want to pay for a subscription, you can sign up for a trial for 4 weeks or whatever they're offering, and cancel, or you can check every day until you find a sample paper from the era. Samples change every day, but lately they've had a lot from the Watergate era for obvious reasons. Today's sample issue, though, is from 1898.
https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/browser
-
- Emeritus
- Posts: 3650
- Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:57 pm
- Location: Illinois
Re:
I just saw this post again and I would like to highlight it. This may be my favorite thing Damien wrote in his many years on this board!Damien wrote:Uri wrote:There was not one, not two, not three, but FIVE nuns in Lilies of the Field – Damien idea of porn, I guess
In college, Mason and I wrote a Guide To Times Square Porno Shops for the school newspaper (this was 1977). In the course of our research, I actually did see an amateur movie called "Two Nuns And A Donkey" -- which was exactly what you got.
"Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good."
- Minor Myers, Jr.
- Minor Myers, Jr.
Re: Best Supporting Actress 1963
Whatever. It's an important movie and interesting for many reasons.Greg wrote:Tom Jones only needs to be seen to learn what people "Objectively" overreacted to in 1963.ITALIANO wrote:"Objectively" I don't know - some could find those three movies, if not amusing, interesting. And you said that "none" of those you find interesting, and I'd say that Tom Jones at least SHOULD be seen. Objectively.
Re: Best Supporting Actress 1963
Tom Jones only needs to be seen to learn what people "Objectively" overreacted to in 1963.ITALIANO wrote:"Objectively" I don't know - some could find those three movies, if not amusing, interesting. And you said that "none" of those you find interesting, and I'd say that Tom Jones at least SHOULD be seen. Objectively.
Re: Best Supporting Actress 1963
"Objectively" I don't know - some could find those three movies, if not amusing, interesting. And you said that "none" of those you find interesting, and I'd say that Tom Jones at least SHOULD be seen. Objectively.bizarre wrote: I don't think anyone can objectively say that a Lilies of the Field, The V.I.P.s and Tom Jones triple-feature looks like a particularly amusing activity
Re: Best Supporting Actress 1963
There's little enough traffic on this forum that I thought you'd be glad for the clicks. I've been meaning to hit the Shouldabeens threads, however.
And as for 'I don't care for the films', that's not a sentiment unshared by people here for certain years. I don't think anyone can objectively say that a Lilies of the Field, The V.I.P.s and Tom Jones triple-feature looks like a particularly amusing activity
And as for 'I don't care for the films', that's not a sentiment unshared by people here for certain years. I don't think anyone can objectively say that a Lilies of the Field, The V.I.P.s and Tom Jones triple-feature looks like a particularly amusing activity
Re: Best Supporting Actress 1963
flipp525 wrote:Honestly, your posts seem more suited to the Oscar Shouldabeens threads than these. These threads are meant for discussing and dissecting the races as they occurred. Not as they should have been in your own personal competition.bizarre wrote:I haven't seen any of these nominees but none of the films interest me in the slightest.
My picks:
1. Nancy Marchand, Ladybug Ladybug
2. Suzanne Pleshette, The Birds
3. Jessica Tandy, The Birds
4. Ingrid Thulin, Winter Light
5. Emma Penella, The Executioner
I enjoy your posts but you seem to be missing the point. I mean, most folks don't even post here until they've seen all the nominees and can give a thorough explanation as to why they're backing one performance over the other four.
Yes, and also... "none of the films interest me in the slightest"... I mean, even if one doesn't care at all about the Oscars, at least Tom Jones SHOULD be of interest to anyone who's seriously into movies, into film history.
Re: Best Supporting Actress 1963
Honestly, your posts seem more suited to the Oscar Shouldabeens threads than these. These threads are meant for discussing and dissecting the races as they occurred. Not as they should have been in your own personal competition.bizarre wrote:I haven't seen any of these nominees but none of the films interest me in the slightest.
My picks:
1. Nancy Marchand, Ladybug Ladybug
2. Suzanne Pleshette, The Birds
3. Jessica Tandy, The Birds
4. Ingrid Thulin, Winter Light
5. Emma Penella, The Executioner
I enjoy your posts but you seem to be missing the point. I mean, most folks don't even post here until they've seen all the nominees and can give a thorough explanation as to why they're backing one performance over the other four.
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."
-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell
-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell
Re: Best Supporting Actress 1963
I haven't seen any of these nominees but none of the films interest me in the slightest.
My picks:
1. Nancy Marchand, Ladybug Ladybug
2. Suzanne Pleshette, The Birds
3. Jessica Tandy, The Birds
4. Ingrid Thulin, Winter Light
5. Emma Penella, The Executioner
My picks:
1. Nancy Marchand, Ladybug Ladybug
2. Suzanne Pleshette, The Birds
3. Jessica Tandy, The Birds
4. Ingrid Thulin, Winter Light
5. Emma Penella, The Executioner
-
- Adjunct
- Posts: 1188
- Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 9:27 am
- Location: Greece
Uri wrote:There was not one, not two, not three, but FIVE nuns in Lilies of the Field – Damien idea of porn, I guess
In college, Mason and I wrote a Guide To Times Square Porno Shops for the school newspaper (this was 1977). In the course of our research, I actually did see an amateur movie called "Two Nuns And A Donkey" -- which was exactly what you got.
Forgot to include my Top 5 for this year:
1. Lilia Skala in Lilies of the Field
2. Dame Edith Evans in Tom Jones
3. Joan Greenwood in Tom Jones
4. Anouk Aimee in 8 1/2
5. Jane Withers in Captain Newman, M.D.
Edited By Damien on 1279007294
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell