Zardoz/Mame

1895-1999
User avatar
flipp525
Laureate
Posts: 5806
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 7:44 am

Postby flipp525 » Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:20 pm

Big Magilla wrote:The Mame poster is quite rare. I suspect it will go for $75 or more.

Sure enough, the owner was at the shop this evening when I popped in after work and told me that the Mame poster was the only thing in the store not for sale. Oh well.
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."

-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell

User avatar
flipp525
Laureate
Posts: 5806
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 7:44 am

Postby flipp525 » Mon Jan 29, 2007 12:22 pm

Thanks, Damien and Big Magilla. I think I'm going to stop by the shop afer work this evening and pick it up. From your comments, it seems to be too much of rarity to leave there languishing behind a rack of used t-shirts and some go-go boots. The girl behind the counter didn't seem to realize what a find it was either which might help with a lower price.



Edited By flipp525 on 1170091422
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."



-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15565
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Postby Big Magilla » Mon Jan 29, 2007 12:17 pm

Damien wrote:
flipp525 wrote:On a Mame-related note, I was shopping with my aunt yesterday on the U Street corridor when I ran across this fantastic vintage framed poster advertising a "new musical on Broadway - Mame!" in an old curio shop. Very awesome poster. They just got it in and told me call about the price this week (?) but I'm sure they'll be asking $75-100. Should I buy it? My aunt (who's 30, btw) thought I should. The frame looked old-school, too.

Flipp, I would check on ebay to see what the going price is (if no one is selling Mame, then check out some other 60s musicals). I know that prices for movie posters range from ridiculously expensive to ridiculously cheap, depending on the dealer.

Yes, and theatre posters are even more expensive. The Mame poster is quite rare. I suspect it will go for $75 or more.

User avatar
Damien
Laureate
Posts: 6331
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:43 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Postby Damien » Mon Jan 29, 2007 10:47 am

flipp525 wrote:On a Mame-related note, I was shopping with my aunt yesterday on the U Street corridor when I ran across this fantastic vintage framed poster advertising a "new musical on Broadway - Mame!" in an old curio shop. Very awesome poster. They just got it in and told me call about the price this week (?) but I'm sure they'll be asking $75-100. Should I buy it? My aunt (who's 30, btw) thought I should. The frame looked old-school, too.

Flipp, I would check on ebay to see what the going price is (if no one is selling Mame, then check out some other 60s musicals). I know that prices for movie posters range from ridiculously expensive to ridiculously cheap, depending on the dealer.
"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

User avatar
flipp525
Laureate
Posts: 5806
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 7:44 am

Postby flipp525 » Mon Jan 29, 2007 9:34 am

On a Mame-related note, I was shopping with my aunt yesterday on the U Street corridor when I ran across this fantastic vintage framed poster advertising a "new musical on Broadway - Mame!" in an old curio shop. Very awesome poster. They just got it in and told me call about the price this week (?) but I'm sure they'll be asking $75-100. Should I buy it? My aunt (who's 30, btw) thought I should. The frame looked old-school, too.
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."



-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell

User avatar
criddic3
Tenured
Posts: 2750
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 11:08 pm
Location: New York, USA
Contact:

Postby criddic3 » Fri Jan 26, 2007 3:29 am

Big Magilla wrote:You raise a good point. Gene Saks was a decent stage director, but a lousy film director. Still, his screen versions of Barefoot in the Park, The Odd Couple and Cactus Flower, though lacking in cinematic skill, were decent showcases for their actors and Saks' then wife Bea Arthur was the best thing about Mame. She had zero chemistry with Lucy, but she and Angie would have been magical together as they proved several times through the years when performing Bosom Buddies at the Tonys.

The worst thing about the film version of Mame was its lack of energy due to Lucy's lethargic performance. She was recovering from a ski accident and literally hobbled through her dance numbers, which is most notable during the title song sequence only slightly camouflaged by her character's wearing riding boots that were too small for her.

Yes, it was sad to watch this movie. My Grandmother met Angela Lansbury once after one of her stage performances years ago. She gave an autograph and they chatted for a few moments. Apparently Lansbury was extremely disappointed, but she said it was all about this notion that she wasn't a big enough star nation-wide for the studio. They went with Lucy because they figured she'd bring in the crowds. How wrong they were.
"If you can't stand the nut on the left and you can't stand the nut on the right, go for the Johnson,” Jonathan S. Bush (10/21/2016)

Reza
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 7768
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 11:14 am
Location: Islamabad, Pakistan

Postby Reza » Fri Jan 26, 2007 1:35 am

Sabin wrote:I just saw 'Zardoz'.

...what?

How...?

I'm so astonished this movie got made. It's a thousand different shitty ideas rolled into one with seemingly no awareness of A) how to treat this trippy, metaphysical gumbo, and B) how to make it remotely coherent. It's such a delightfully horrible misfire. Sean Connery, clearly with no idea what the screenplay means, convinced to run around in those red trunks and straps...wow. Bad career move. I can only hope that Caine gave him #### about that for years.

Was this pretty much the nadir of 1974?

Surely you have to admit that Charlotte Rampling is one hot babe?

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15565
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Postby Big Magilla » Fri Jan 26, 2007 1:16 am

You raise a good point. Gene Saks was a decent stage director, but a lousy film director. Still, his screen versions of Barefoot in the Park, The Odd Couple and Cactus Flower, though lacking in cinematic skill, were decent showcases for their actors and Saks' then wife Bea Arthur was the best thing about Mame. She had zero chemistry with Lucy, but she and Angie would have been magical together as they proved several times through the years when performing Bosom Buddies at the Tonys.

The worst thing about the film version of Mame was its lack of energy due to Lucy's lethargic performance. She was recovering from a ski accident and literally hobbled through her dance numbers, which is most notable during the title song sequence only slightly camouflaged by her character's wearing riding boots that were too small for her.

User avatar
criddic3
Tenured
Posts: 2750
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 11:08 pm
Location: New York, USA
Contact:

Postby criddic3 » Thu Jan 25, 2007 11:32 pm

The worst part about the film version of Mame from 1974 is it shows how wrong Lucille Ball was for the role, and how robbed Angela Lansbury was. But it was also not a very well-directed movie, so maybe she lucked out. She would've improved it to a decent movie, but maybe not a great one.
"If you can't stand the nut on the left and you can't stand the nut on the right, go for the Johnson,” Jonathan S. Bush (10/21/2016)

User avatar
flipp525
Laureate
Posts: 5806
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 7:44 am

Postby flipp525 » Wed Jan 24, 2007 9:33 am

Big Magilla wrote:the real bottom of the barrel for 1974 is generally considered to be Lucille Ball hobbling around and croaking in front of a camera covered in vaseline in Mame.

Oh, the numerous times I've had to endure the clip of Bea Arthur and Lucille Ball singing "Bosom Buddies" at showtunes night at J.R.'s, a local gay watering hole. It seems like every gay man on Earth knows the words except for me. Of course, I know every word of "Otto Titsling" when the inevitable Beaches scene pops up and certainly never fail to sing that one...




Edited By flipp525 on 1169649380
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."



-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15565
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Postby Big Magilla » Wed Jan 24, 2007 3:53 am

Sabin wrote:Was this pretty much the nadir of 1974?

For science fiction films, yes, but the real bottom of the barrel for 1974 is generally considered to be Lucille Ball hobbling around and croaking in front of a camera covered in vaseline in Mame.

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 7301
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Postby Sabin » Wed Jan 24, 2007 2:10 am

I just saw 'Zardoz'.

...what?

How...?

I'm so astonished this movie got made. It's a thousand different shitty ideas rolled into one with seemingly no awareness of A) how to treat this trippy, metaphysical gumbo, and B) how to make it remotely coherent. It's such a delightfully horrible misfire. Sean Connery, clearly with no idea what the screenplay means, convinced to run around in those red trunks and straps...wow. Bad career move. I can only hope that Caine gave him #### about that for years.

Was this pretty much the nadir of 1974?




Edited By Sabin on 1169622682
"If you are marching with white nationalists, you are by definition not a very nice person. If Malala Yousafzai had taken part in that rally, you'd have to say 'Okay, I guess Malala sucks now.'" ~ John Oliver


Return to “The First Century”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest