From: ggggg9271@gmail.com   
      
   On Monday, August 6, 2012 at 10:13:21 AM UTC-7, Bill Anderson wrote:   
   > On 8/6/2012 10:00 AM, tomcervo wrote:   
   > > On Aug 6, 9:16 am, William  wrote:   
   > >> On Monday, August 6, 2012 8:53:59 AM UTC-4, tomcervo wrote:   
   > >>   
   > >>> It may be Hollywood, but Hollywood-- in the form of David O.   
   > >>> Selznick-- urged RKO to deposit an original print with MoMA. The only   
   > >>> other contemporary filmmakers I can think of capable of creating   
   > >>> something like this are Ford, Renoir and The Archers, all of whom had   
   > >>> difficulties--Ford with Zanuck; Renoir and P&P with actual government   
   > >>> attempts at censorship.   
   > >>   
   > >> Welles did an excellent job and that a piece of junk like "The Lady From   
   Shanghai" is seen more often than this film astounds me.   
   > >   
   > > Like I said, the lack of a dedicated DVD of this astounds ME. Even the   
   > > most "mystique"-addled Welles fan considers it a masterpiece. It's not   
   > > just the lack of a DVD, but the lack of hype involving such a release   
   > > makes it obscure.   
   > >   
   > Technically it's pretty much the equal of Kane, but I've never cared   
   > much for Ambersons. More specifically, I don't care for the some of the   
   > people in Ambersons. The young man who takes his mother to Europe and   
   > ruins her chances for happiness along with several others' including his   
   > own is just unbelievably, unforgivably stupid. I don't like King Lear   
   > either, for much the same reason. When the story revolves around one   
   > person's irrational, destructive idiocy I tend to tune out.   
      
   Concerning "...one person's irrational, destructive idiocy...". you must hate   
   VERTIGO.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)