 
| Sender: |
|
| Date: |
Sun, 4 Dec 2016 18:33:03 +0000 |
| Reply-To: |
|
| Subject: |
|
| MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
quoted-printable |
| In-Reply-To: |
|
| Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=UTF-8 |
| From: |
|
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
I'm reading Holbrook's autobiography now; thus, I differ with that assertion, because Holbrook had years of stage experience before "becoming" Mark Twain.
If anything, Kilmer is a cub in comparison to Mr. H. - B. Clay Shannon
From: Alan Kitty <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Sunday, December 4, 2016 9:24 AM
Subject: Re: Brief Movie Review
... or it is an early interpretation of Twain's reported slow drawl delivery=
.
I submit that Holbrook might have had a similar interpretation in 1954. IHe M=
AY NOT HAVE BEEN AS GOOD, since Kilmer's film experience when he started doi=
ng Twain was deep and Holbrook's was not
AK
Sent from my iPhone
> On Dec 2, 2016, at 3:19 PM, Scott Holmes <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>=20
> For whatever it's worth, Kilmer was a great Doc Holliday, in an
> otherwise ridiculous movie. I've seen a couple of clips of Kilmer as
> Twain and they all seemed to represent Twain as a drunkard.
|
|
|
