Page 1 of 4
Posted: Thu Jan 03, 2008 11:08 pm
by Big Magilla
She's 48 years older than she was in Where the Boys Are, but I was easily able to identify her among the other nuns.
A quote from the article:
As the only nun who is a voting member in the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences, Mother Dolores still makes headlines from time to time. Each February, reporters try to contact her to learn what picture or actor she has voted for — something she will not reveal.
“It’s against the rules to tell,” she said, her blue eyes mischievous below her black veil.
Posted: Thu Jan 03, 2008 9:55 pm
by Damien
By coincidence, the New York Times had an article about Regina Laudis the other day, complete with a picture of Dolores Hart as she appears today (she doesn't look anything like she did in Where The Boys Are).
http://www.nytimes.com/2007....pecial2
Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2008 7:11 pm
by Damien
Big Magilla wrote:Actually quite a nice one. She's now a Mother Superior of her order in upstate New York. There was an interview with her (I forget for which magazine) at Oscar time two years ago when they tried to bait her about Brokeback Mountain. She said that as a member of AMPAS it was her duty to see all the nominees which she did, though she wouldn't say who or what she voted for.
It's actually in Connecticut -- The Abbey of Regina Laudis in Bethlehem Ct. in Litchfield County. It also has an outdoor shrine to the Blessed Mother. I've been there several times. It's of the Benedictine Order.
The Abbey has another interesting film connection besides Dolores Hart, who is the Prioress of the Abbey and who said that leaving Hollywood to join a convent was Like "falling out of a forty-story building and landing on my head." The film Come To The Stable was based on the founding of the Abbey.
That's another lovely film, albeit a bit more idealized than The Bells Of St. Mary's.
Here's the Abbey's website:
http://www.abbeyofreginalaudis.com/
Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2008 6:33 pm
by Damien
ITALIANO wrote:Damien, you'd be even right about looking at the art and not the artist. But there are two problems here. First, I don't consider The Bells of St Mary's as art - I consider it as a very smart commercial product, a cynical cultural operation, extremely interesting by the way, but still all industry and no art. But even if it were art, since it aspires to profound moral values (and even your reaction to it is moral, "a celebration of the human spirit etc", not artistic), then it has to be judged on these terms too - it's my right to see how sincere it is. And - quite obviously - it's not. (You do the same with Elia Kazan movies).
Marco. I didn't mean the word "art" to be taken literally -- I meant more "creation" and "creator" or "product" and "producer" in that the beliefs/behavior of the person who creates a work should not be part of the equation in judging the creation. I don't think McCarey's politics (which were actually quite complex and somewhat contradictory) make the film amy less sincere.
I don't think I do this with Kazan films. I think he's one of the most vile weasels who ever set foot on a sound stage, but I still think East of Eden and Streetcar are both incontrovertibly great films, and I'm also very keen on A Tree Grows In Brooklyn, Wild River, Gentlemen's Agreement, Baby Doll, even his "home movie," The Visitors.
It's true I don't like On The Waterfront (or Sea of Grass, Panic In The Streets or the dreadful Splendor In The Grass), but that's not because it's a blatant and spectacularly wrong-headed attempt by Kazan and Budd Schulberg to justify their ratting to the House UnAmerican Affairs Commitee -- it's because it's so banal and pedestrian and melodramatic and calculated and overwrought.
Steph and Akash, I'm delighted that you'll be seeing Bells soon. Looking forward to hearing your reactions.
Edited By Damien on 1199230515
Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 8:43 am
by ITALIANO
Akash wrote:I'm going to check out the Bells of St. Mary's too. See Marco? You're so good that you're recruiting people for the film even though you hate it.
But I don't hate it. Not at all. I think it's very well made, very well acted, and everything one can expect from an important American production of the 40s. I just hate some people's reaction to it - I don't think it's a realistic movie, I don't think it's a profound religious and human experience. It's a very superficial movie, just this. My personal spiritual values are completely different, and hopefully a bit deeper.
Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 1:53 am
by Okri
Sonic Youth wrote:Akash wrote:What hotness is in Chicago?
"Cell Block Tango."
Yeah, the "Cellblock Tango" was incredible. I still say the costume designer won for the use of black lingerie in that scene.
Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 1:00 am
by Akash
I'm going to check out the Bells of St. Mary's too. See Marco? You're so good that you're recruiting people for the film even though you hate it.
Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:47 am
by Sonic Youth
Akash wrote:What hotness is in Chicago?
"Cell Block Tango."
And I thought Gere was fine.
Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:43 pm
by Akash
Meh, they're both bad films but gun to my head I'd rather watch Dreamgirls again than Chicago. At least the former has a few people who can sing. The latter has Zellweger, Gere and...oh god, GERE! That performance was downright embarrassing! Thank god the Oscars got it unusually right, rejected the consensus of the Globes and SAG, and snubbed him good.
Plus Dreamgirls has Beyonce and I don't care what any of you haters say, she is HOT. Seriously, undeniably, drop your pants HOT. I remain grateful to Eric for pointing me towards her "Ring the Alarm" video which is better than any bland porn. What hotness is in Chicago? Catherine Zeta Jones? Please. You should only fuck her if you want instant cryogenically frozen sperm.
Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:29 pm
by Steph2
Oh Dreamgirls is even worse. And not just because of the American Idol cow.
Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2007 10:22 pm
by Penelope
anonymous wrote:Steph2 wrote:The movie is on its way. Depending on whether I like it or not, I will pledge myself a Damienite or an Italianoite.
You hated Chicago. That automatically disqualifies you as a Damienite.
I also got the impression she didn't care much for Dreamgirls, which also puts her outside the Damienite category.
Incidentally, shouldn't it be Italianoist rather than Italianoite?
Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2007 9:54 pm
by anonymous1980
Steph2 wrote:The movie is on its way. Depending on whether I like it or not, I will pledge myself a Damienite or an Italianoite.
You hated Chicago. That automatically disqualifies you as a Damienite.
Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2007 4:03 am
by Steph2
The movie is on its way. Depending on whether I like it or not, I will pledge myself a Damienite or an Italianoite.
Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:13 am
by ITALIANO
But what can we expect from someone whose nickname is "anonymous"? It says all.
Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2007 10:21 pm
by Steph2
Not just idiotic, but extremely unfunny and a little vile. Anonymous, that was totally uncalled for. I don't see how Italiano's sincere and articulate interpretation of a film warranted such a response.
Congratulations Damien and Italiano. Your back and forth has inspired me to check this film out. I just got Netflix for Christmas 