Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!
This is not the forum to air out this sorry of crap. Feel free to build a Dean Martin (or any other actors) hate forum. You have gone way beyond passively mentioning it and you clutter up topics with your obsession with anti-Jew and racism about a great deal of actors.
It was all in Eyman's biography of Wayne.
Because I'm tired of reading about it.
Wayne was fully aware of the truth. He chose not to mention it in his article.
In this article Duke reflects on his friendship with Dino, admitting that he would “be a liar if I didn't tell you that I love” Martin, adding: “been my friend for the best years of my life. He’s done for me what he’s done for millions of people all over the world because, like so many of you, I feel good every time I see him. I’m entertained by him, I laugh with him, as well as at him.”:
Why are we not allowed to say the truth about Dean Martin?
While seeing an older B&W film colorized is a neat novelty, I find that I prefer the original in most cases. I've seen more bad colorization jobs than good ones. But it really is to each his own. For your sake, I hope they do a high quality colorization one day.
Mark
I usually prefer Laurel & Hardy in the original black & white, but sometimes it's nice to watch the colourised versions too.
I found there is a colourised version on youtube, but it isn't very good quality. It looks more sepia than colour.
I would love to see a high quality colourised version one day. It's been my favourite western since I was a teenager.
I think I found what I needed. Turns out that the script was written for John Wayne, according to my research. The original movie was based and L'amour book, but the Grant adapation had John Wayne in mind. Thanks for those that responded.
It was written for Glenn Ford. Presumably it was rewritten for Wayne. Ford would have fit the role much better as he was a decade younger and more believable as the romantic lead.
There are two great portraits of John Wayne in "Flying Leathernecks" on Fine Art America, but sadly they are both black and white. If they had been in colour I would have ordered them.
It was written with Glenn Ford in mind.
Movies today come with warning that it depicts people...smoking! Of all dastardly things to warn people about.
Many of the old stars died from smoking, including John Wayne.
Duke's brother...Bob Morrison...died of cancer...but he was also reportedly an alcoholic which might have contributed to his health issues. If he was like Duke he must have been a heavy smoker as well.
John Wayne was also a heavy drinker.
I wonder how many parents would let their children watch westerns now? All of the old westerns are shown with warnings here.
Had no idea Duke lost his mom and brother so close together.
He said he had expected to die before his mother.
The Deer Hunter
Kelly's Heroes
Schindler's List
Das Boot
The Hunt for Red October
I never understood why Spielberg had to change the story so much for "Schindler's List". An accurate version would have still been more than exciting enough.
When you see Agar in those bit roles in The Undefeated, Chisum and, Big Jake, he looked old, like he was in his 60's. Yet, he was really only around 50 at the time. I really liked him in those early roles in Sands Of Iwo Jima, Fort Apache and, She Wore A Yellow Ribbon and he did another good war movie back then called Breakthrough and, for me, he seemed to disappear from the screen. I don't remember seeing him in anything else till he did a bit part as Dion O'Bannion in St. Valentines Day Massacre. Again, he looked older than his 46 yrs. But, you look on IMDb, and he did alot of roles in both movies and tv. I must have missed all those because I don't remember them.
Agar already looked quite a lot older in "Sands of Iwo Jima" compared to "Fort Apache", even though it was only two years later.
I wonder if Wayne would have made this film if he had known the director and writer were both Communists?
I should have typed Seabees, not Seebees.
Of course it also helped that "Flying Leathernecks" was in colour.
My father thought Agar was wearing a wig in "Big Jake".
He was in an early episode of "Highway to Heaven". He looked very old there and was playing an alcoholic.
"Flying Leathernecks" and "They Were Expendable" were each very good with a minimum of fake heroics. Add to that "Sands of Iwo Jima".
Pretty much all war films have to be looked at in consideration of the era they were produced. Many WWII films were either thinly veiled or outright propaganda for the home front. That doesn't mean they weren't good films...you simply have to take into consideration the message being given. Two very good examples..."Air Force" and "The 49th Parallel"...the former American...the latter British produced. Each is a fine film in its own right but both were pushing the propaganda angle to maintain public support.
Most of the better war films...that is more realistic about war and its costs with less fake heroics...came either late in the war or were filmed post-war..."12 O'Clock High"..."The Best Years of Their Lives"..."Battleground".
I found "The Fighting Seebees" hard to watch due to its blatant racism. Fortunately by the time "The Flying Leathernecks" was made in 1950-51 the United States was at war with China, and so the portrayal of the Japanese was far more balanced.
Of the old war films I liked "The Cruel Sea" most as it did not contain any propaganda or false heroics.
"The Horse Soldiers" was basically a good movie but could have done without the insipid love story...not realistic at all. Otherwise good performances and stuck pretty close to history in many ways even if fictionalized. It was a tragedy about Fred Kennedy's death...it was to be his last gag before retiring supposedly. John Ford pretty much lost interest in the movie after that occurred.
There was no way the soldiers would have let the two women live.
This was his best war film. I liked how it was more favourable in its portrayal of the enemy than earlier war films, and Robert Ryan was always effective.
