I saw this on AMC yesterday afternoon. She was dancing to this T/O. She is
the squeeze of a thug/mobster trying to buy a congressman in DC. The
setting is a hotel room in DC. She played the dumb blond that signs all the
contracts and business documents as a silent partner to shield the thug.

I tried to fix the time of the movie as compared to the vintage of the
radio. I never could pick up on the settings year. I don't even know who
the actors are. But she played the dumb blond thing to the hilt.

She just made a fool of herself in front of guests. The thug hired an
educated man to help her be more diplomatic and keep her mouth shut. She
and her teacher fall in love as she gets educated on the constitution,
formation of the country, etc, etc as the two visit places in DC.

I picked up the movie in progress and don't know much about it. There was
no summary at the end of the movie. AMC just went into the next movie. I
kept watching for more radio appearances.

I am still a sucker for seeing old radios in movies.

Hey that plot sounds very familiar.
Born Yesterday? With Melanie Griffith?

http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1800187520/info


Seems to me that nothing is ever new.
Ah the good-ole days.

John




Paul P wrote:


She just made a fool of herself in front of guests. The thug hired an
educated man to help her be more diplomatic and keep her mouth shut.
She and her teacher fall in love as she gets educated on the
constitution, formation of the country, etc, etc as the two visit places
in DC.

This is the classic "Born Yesterday". Judy Holliday got the Oscar for her
performance which, though good as it was, was not quite so good as Gloria
Swanson in "Sunset Blvd."

Ignore the remake of a few years ago.

"flipper" wrote in message
...

On the 'dumb blonde' aspect, one of my favorite scenes is
where William Holden reads her an editorial on corruption
he's written and gets a blank stare because it's filled with
allusions and metaphors. "Don't you get it?" .... "No."

Actually, the problem is that it's written at a college-grad level. See
below.


So he proceeds to explain it metaphor by metaphor, then 'wraps
it up' together in summary, and she remarks "Well, why didn't
you say so?"

He gives a puzzled look as if to say "I thought I did" but you get
the impression he just might also be thinking she had a point
(and she did).

As a technical writer, I love this scene. Holden is writing to an "educated"
audience, using long sentences and big words when short ones will do. It's a
classic demonstration that the best way to write is (usually) to simply say
what you mean, in a straight-forward manner.

Fancy writing is easy. Simple writing is difficult.

Nobody noticed that it isn't an 8G500? No TO fans on board? Peter W!

Tio Pedro wrote:
Nobody noticed that it isn't an 8G500? No TO fans on board? Peter W!



You are right its a G500 as the movie "Born Yesterday" came out in 1950
the right year for the G500 Trans O.

Bill Cohn - N9MHT

You are right its a G500

Hard to miss that big, beautiful gold badge inside the flip-up cover.

I consider this the prettiest of all TransOceanics, although the brown
leather 600 is a close second (and no, you can't have either of mine :-).

For the record, I think I got my G500 from the generous Peter W. a few years
ago for an embarrasingly low price.

Giving things away can become addictive, especially when your house fills
up. Pass it along to someone who will appreciate it, before it gets buried
under forgotten piles of other "stuff."

:-)

Regards,

Phil Nelson
Phil's Old Radios
http://antiqueradio.org/index.html

"flipper" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 05:36:15 -0800, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:
"flipper" wrote in message
.. .

On the 'dumb blonde' aspect, one of my favorite scenes is
where William Holden reads her an editorial on corruption
he's written and gets a blank stare because it's filled with
allusions and metaphors. "Don't you get it?" .... "No."

Actually, the problem is that it's written at a college-grad level.
See below.

I think you and I are in basic agreement below but I have a slightly
different take on that point. Yes, it was 'college-grad level' as
measured by the words used but, IMO, the 'fancy words' were there
mainly for the sake of the fancy words. Or, put another way, I think
Holden is so enamored with the words, and his 'mastery' of them, that
he forgets the purpose is to communicate.

Yes. That is the fundamental problem with too much writing. You use big
words, long sentences, and passive voice because they make you sound
"educated" and important. Speaking simply doesn't -- but it's the best way
to communicate.

Mark Twain is often given credit for introducing vernacular language into
American writing. More importantly, he introduced simplicity.

After thinking about it, I realized you were right about Holden't over-use
of metaphor.


After all, isn't "I'm smart, you're not" the crux of the problem
between Crawford and Holiday? The difference is Crawford isn't while
Holden is, and their motives are also different, but I see a humorous,
yet cautionary, tap on Holden's shoulder there..I also think Holden
'gets it' while Crawford never will, 2x4 up side the head
notwithstanding.

Actually, the film's point is a humanist-liberal one. If people -- ordinary
people -- are exposed to good writing and clear thinking, they will alter
their values and behavior accordingly. Billie's change is fundamentally a
moral one, not an intellectual one. She finally understands what is right
and wrong, and becomes willing to act on that understanding.

"flipper" wrote in message
...

When you say "humanist-liberal" do you mean classical liberalism or
modern liberalism?

Classical. Note the lower case.


At any rate, I see this movie as being sort of (early) transitional.
Go back a decade or so and the basic theme is the 'inherent goodness'
of the common man with the sophisticates often getting a lesson. Like
in, say, Mr Smith Goes to Washington.

Here. as you pointed out, Holiday turns on Crawford only after she's
'tutored' on principles by the 'educated' man. Holden, himself, makes
the point with "A world full of ignorant people is too dangerous to
live in." (I do think there's a tinge of intellectual snobbery in
Holden's character.)

I completely agree it's about morals but I don't think it can be
separated from the 'intellectual' argument and seems to me they're
inextricably linked even in your explanation. She becomes 'moral'
as a 'result' but remove the 'intellectualism' and the implication is
she wouldn't.

That's a significant shift from the natural goodness of the common
man theme.

Good points.