actors replaced when/after shooting starts

In rec.arts.movies.past-films Frank R.A.J. Maloney wrote:

: I will however admit that my first word choice was another Yiddishism of
: a related nature. But I thought I'd be a nice guy and not the curmudgeon
: nature intended me for.

AFAIK (i.e. basing myself on Leo Rosten, not necessarily the most reliable
of sources), the etymology of "shnook" is unknown, but (unlike "shmo") is
almost certainly not a bowdlerization of the Yiddishism that I think you're
thinking of (if you're thinking of the one that's involved in the punchline
of the joke about the camel).

-----
Richard Schultz schultr.RemoveThis@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"It is better to adopt the simplest explanation, even if it is not simple,
even if it does not explain very much."
-- Samuel Beckett, _Malone Dies_
 >> Stay informed about: actors replaced when/after shooting starts 

In rec.arts.movies.past-films Calvin wrote:

: The dictionary that is closest to my hand says that 'schnook'
: means 'an unimportant or stupid person', which is roughly
: what I assumed it meant.

The word "shnook" carries with it a connotation of inoffensiveness --
unlike the other word that Mr. Maloney seems to have had in mind. Jack
Lemmon typically played a shnook, Walter Matthau rarely if ever.

-----
Richard Schultz schultr DeleteThis @mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
The gardener plants an evergreen whilst trampling on a flower. . .
 >> Stay informed about: actors replaced when/after shooting starts 

Richard Schultz wrote:
> In rec.arts.movies.past-films Calvin wrote:
>
> : The dictionary that is closest to my hand says that 'schnook'
> : means 'an unimportant or stupid person', which is roughly
> : what I assumed it meant.
>
> The word "shnook" carries with it a connotation of inoffensiveness --
> unlike the other word that Mr. Maloney seems to have had in mind. Jack
> Lemmon typically played a shnook, Walter Matthau rarely if ever.

I keep associating "shnook" as what the little chicken-hawk kept
mistaking Foghorn Leghorn for.

Derek Janssen (loudmouth, that is)
ejanss1 RemoveThis @verizon.net
 >> Stay informed about: actors replaced when/after shooting starts 

Frank R.A.J. Maloney wrote:
> No Man wrote:
>
>> Marilyn due to her traditional work habits is replaced by Doris Day in
>> *Move Over, Darling* which was originally being filmed as *Something's
>> Got to Give*.
>
> Much earlier she was suspended from _The Girl in Pink Tights_ and then
> _How to be Very, Very Popular_ for refusing to report to work.

Boy, were they slavedrivers back during the Studio Era or what?
Expecting a poor girl to report to work. Weren't there child labor laws?

Meanwhile, up the coast a ways, Brando keeps the entire company of
expensive stars and plenteous extras waiting for the sun off Pfeiffer
Beach to glint against the waves just precisely the way he wanted.
*One-Eyed Jacks* had no eyes left for the budget.

Cheaper to shoot around Marilyn, I think, than hiring an auteur amateur
director.

--
'... my name is Noman; this is what my father and mother and my friends
have always called me.' - Odyssey; Book IX
 >> Stay informed about: actors replaced when/after shooting starts 

In article ,
Madman wrote:

> On Oct 24, 6:33 pm, "Paul B. Thompson" wrote:
> > "Richard Schultz" wrote in message
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > In rec.arts.movies.past-films Calvin wrote:
> >
> > > : Michael Keaton replaced by Jeff Daniels well into
> > > : shooting The Purple Rose of Cairo
> >
> > > Virtually the entire cast of _September_ replaced by virtually the
> > > entire cast of _September_ after the film had already been shot
> >
> > > Roy Thinnes replaced by William Devane two days into the shooting of
> > > _Family Plot_
> >
> > > Maria Schneider replaced by Carole Bouquet replaced by Angela Molina
> > > (or was it Bouquet who replaced Molina) during the filming of _That
> > > Obscure Object of Desire_
> >
> > > Bela Lugosi replaced by Tom Mason during the filming of _Plan 9 from
> > > Outer Space_
> >
> > Well, not really. Lugosi died years earlier. Wood had some silent "home
> > movie" footage he wanted to spin a feature around. Tom Mason is more of a
> > stand-in than a replacement, especially since he got no billing, that I
> > recall.
> >
> > PBT- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Can't believe everyone missed that Tom Selleck was replaced by
> Harrison Ford for Indiana Jones in Raiders of the Lost Ark because CBS
> wouldn't let him out of his contract for Magnum PI. Can't remember
> where I saw it, but someone did a poster from Raiders with Selleck on
> it. Funny how I now look back and mostly can't see the original actors
> in these roles.

Selleck wasn't replaced; CBS wouldn't let him take the part in the first
place. But yeah, that poster is great.

--
Jitterbug phone works! (Third time's a charm!)
 >> Stay informed about: actors replaced when/after shooting starts 

David Oberman wrote:
> No Man wrote:
>
>>Marilyn due to her traditional work habits is replaced by Doris Day in
>>*Move Over, Darling* which was originally being filmed as *Something's
>>Got to Give*.
>
> And, I just found out yesterday, it was the "My Favorite Wife" story.

I saw that on IMDb, but I wasn't familiar with the original story. But,
hey, for every Penelope at her loom for twenty years there is an ex who
moves on. Like in Castaway, and who knows how many other films. Then
there is the other effect, the dubious returnee, as in Martin Guerre.



--
'... my name is Noman; this is what my father and mother and my friends
have always called me.' - Odyssey; Book IX
 >> Stay informed about: actors replaced when/after shooting starts 

On Oct 27, 1:02?pm, No Man wrote:
> So when you beheld Rio out poppin' away by the rocks, did you
> particularly appreciate the glint of the waves offshore? Was it worth a
> few extra thou, you think?
>
> The story as it evolved was all about intense personal rivalry and
> deception.

You got that impression too? Someobody must have doen his job right.


> I wonder how much Big Sur and the Pacific contributed to
> that. Remember the kernal of the story was the Billy the Kid legend,
> transplanted from New Mexico simply because Neider the author of the
> pedestrian novel happened to live in Carmel.

Maybe Lone Pine was booked through '66 by The Virginian and Bonanza.
It sure didn't look like every other western that was being made
around then, and it managed to accknowledge more of the actual
ethnicity of the population than white protestants and white
catholics.

>
> > If the damn thing wasn't in the public domain -
>
> According to Wiki, it both is and it ain't. So which is it?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-Eyed_Jacks#Production


It's on the shelf of dollar stores for 3.99. I suppose that's a sign.
 >> Stay informed about: actors replaced when/after shooting starts 

tomcervo wrote:
> On Oct 27, 1:02?pm, No Man wrote:

>>>If the damn thing wasn't in the public domain -
>>
>>According to Wiki, it both is and it ain't. So which is it?
>>
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-Eyed_Jacks#Production
>
> It's on the shelf of dollar stores for 3.99. I suppose that's a sign.

And I just noticed, right here

http://www.oneeyedjacks.bravehost.com/index.html

that somebody figures it's public domain, because you can watch the
whole blamed thing online, gratis, right now!

Another little side-note while nobody is looking. The history and plot
description is taken by this site directly from Wikipedia. I know,
because I wrote most of it. But before I object, if indeed I have an
objection to work up, I have to note somewhere that the data I used was
from *Brando Rides Alone* by Barry Gifford. I better go see can I do that...



--
'... my name is Noman; this is what my father and mother and my friends
have always called me.' - Odyssey; Book IX
 >> Stay informed about: actors replaced when/after shooting starts 

On Oct 25, 8:54 am, schu....DeleteThis@mail.biu.ack.il (Richard Schultz) wrote:
> ... You also failed to
> keep in mind that Usenet exists primarily as a means of providing
> empirical disproof of the statement "Nobody could possibly be that stupid."

No, from the evidence that you provide, Usenet exists primarily
as a means for people like you to pad their egos by trapping
others into looking foolish. The techniques that you employ
always involve saying something that your intended or unintended
victim will believe, and then pouncing on him for believing it, as
if believing an untruth is a reliable indicator of lack of
intelligence.

The untruth may be in the form of a put-on, or sarcasm, or a
joke. If one is not looking for a joke at the moment, or got
distracted from a joking atmosphere by some word association;
or if the put-on was not given with proper terminology, and so
made the hearer look in another direction; or if the person
uttering some sarcasm is not known well enough for the hearer
to be able to deduce that it is sarcasm; then the person may
believe what is said and become open to the most vicious and
damning condemnation of his intelligence imaginable.

That others sit idly by let people like you and 'No Man' get away
with this hostile behavior, and even pile on and agree with the
hostile person when the victim tries to defend himself, is still
another indicator of what Usenet is apparently all about.

What you haven't shown, though, is why someone with your
obvious intelligence gets his kicks or ego-gratification by
trying to humiliate those whom he considers to be stupid. I
don't use whatever Intelligence I have to try to humiliate
those whom I might consider less intelligent, so when I'm
confronted with people like you and 'No Man' and others
who do it, not only am I humiliated, as intended, but I'm
dismayed that Usenet presents this unnecessary hazard.
 >> Stay informed about: actors replaced when/after shooting starts 

On Oct 28, 3:15 pm, David Oberman wrote:
> When life gets me down, Calvin, I traipse around YouTube. There are
> lessons to be learned there. For example, sometimes we are Edna &
> sometimes we are Barry.
>
> www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wr7dSk5LI34
>
> It all depends on just what life -- or Usenet -- throws at us.

But it's all so heavy and deadly:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyxPxpSvXQ8
 >> Stay informed about: actors replaced when/after shooting starts 

On Oct 28, 5:11 pm, Calvin wrote:
> On Oct 28, 3:15 pm, David Oberman wrote:
>
> > When life gets me down, Calvin, I traipse around YouTube. There are
> > lessons to be learned there. For example, sometimes we are Edna &
> > sometimes we are Barry.
>
> >www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wr7dSk5LI34
>
> > It all depends on just what life -- or Usenet -- throws at us.
>
> But it's all so heavy and deadly:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyxPxpSvXQ8

At the risk of sounding hopelessly narrow-minded, past-locked, and
Luddite... todays cartoons show me nuttin'...

--

- - - - - - - -
YOUR taste at work...
http://www.moviepig.com
 >> Stay informed about: actors replaced when/after shooting starts 

Calvin wrote:
> On Oct 25, 8:54 am, schu... RemoveThis @mail.biu.ack.il (Richard Schultz) wrote:
>> ... You also failed to
>> keep in mind that Usenet exists primarily as a means of providing
>> empirical disproof of the statement "Nobody could possibly be that stupid."
>
> No, from the evidence that you provide, Usenet exists primarily
> as a means for people like you to pad their egos by trapping
> others into looking foolish. The techniques that you employ
> always involve saying something that your intended or unintended
> victim will believe, and then pouncing on him for believing it, as
> if believing an untruth is a reliable indicator of lack of
> intelligence.
>
> The untruth may be in the form of a put-on, or sarcasm, or a
> joke. If one is not looking for a joke at the moment, or got
> distracted from a joking atmosphere by some word association;
> or if the put-on was not given with proper terminology, and so
> made the hearer look in another direction; or if the person
> uttering some sarcasm is not known well enough for the hearer
> to be able to deduce that it is sarcasm; then the person may
> believe what is said and become open to the most vicious and
> damning condemnation of his intelligence imaginable.
>
> That others sit idly by let people like you and 'No Man' get away
> with this hostile behavior, and even pile on and agree with the
> hostile person when the victim tries to defend himself, is still
> another indicator of what Usenet is apparently all about.
>
> What you haven't shown, though, is why someone with your
> obvious intelligence gets his kicks or ego-gratification by
> trying to humiliate those whom he considers to be stupid. I
> don't use whatever Intelligence I have to try to humiliate
> those whom I might consider less intelligent, so when I'm
> confronted with people like you and 'No Man' and others
> who do it, not only am I humiliated, as intended, but I'm
> dismayed that Usenet presents this unnecessary hazard.


You're disgusting.
 >> Stay informed about: actors replaced when/after shooting starts 

moviePig wrote:

> On Oct 28, 5:11 pm, Calvin wrote:
>
>>On Oct 28, 3:15 pm, David Oberman wrote:
>>
>>
>>>When life gets me down, Calvin, I traipse around YouTube. There are
>>>lessons to be learned there. For example, sometimes we are Edna &
>>>sometimes we are Barry.
>>
>>>www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wr7dSk5LI34
>>
>>>It all depends on just what life -- or Usenet -- throws at us.
>>
>>But it's all so heavy and deadly:
>>
>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyxPxpSvXQ8
>
> At the risk of sounding hopelessly narrow-minded, past-locked, and
> Luddite... todays cartoons show me nuttin'...

Well, that depends on the composer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STlXBJJaDIE

Derek Janssen
ejanss1.RemoveThis@verizon.net
 >> Stay informed about: actors replaced when/after shooting starts