Tikisoo

TheCid said: 24 hours dedicated to one star (or actor) is really too much. TCM needs to offer variety every day. There are some actors that I just do not care for and SUTS blocks a whole day of TCM for me-maybe even several days. Really? You simply cannot DO SOMETHING ELSE for a day (or two) if there's nothing interesting to you on TV? Doesn't TCM show "variety" all the rest of the time? Just because you're not enamored with one actor, you can't find anything else to like about a movie? How limiting. And you're not the only viewer....there are millions of other people who fully enjoy the programming-let them have their fun. It's summer after all (well not in Australia) take a break from TV & enjoy life!

Since you like used discs anyway, you could probably find that one pretty cheap. Criterion releases are the same price as other DVDs at my local used CD/DVD store, $5-10 depending on how many disks in the package. More common titles, such as NBNW or new Spiderman can be as low as $2.99. I watch an awful lot of Criterion Collections from the library too. Since I'm not really into owning DVDs.

Primos said: I watch TCM less, it has less of my type of movies, ergo it has changed. Could it be maybe you have changed? No matter, I give my set a rest. When Chester Morris was on with classically classic movies like TCM used to show in the good old days, I had the set running all day. I used to run TCM all 8 hours of my workday too (I'm a painter) then sit & watch a movie in the evening, just like you. When I look at the schedule these days to plan my recordings, I choose a scant 4-5 titles over the entire month. This is mainly because I've seen most everything (I like to see) at least 3 times. Their library is limited-they're not making "old" movies anymore. So it's wholly acceptable (to me at least) when TCM includes newer truly classic movies into their line-up. But to answer the thread question....is TCM going blah? No, it could be you're simply satiated so it seems different to you.

A nice surprise for me was TCM's showing of First A Girl, 1935, last week, and the female lead, Jessie Matthews. Yeah, she's great, I only discovered her a few years ago too. The only other film I've seen of hers on TCM is EVERGREEN. Delightful. Why DON'T we see her films more often? I'm sure she made a ton of them.

I was about 4 and distinctly remember seeing HELP! with my older brother. He was about 12 and had to babysit with me on Saturdays while our Mom worked and Dad played golf. The theater was in a nearby strip plaza and we must have walked a quarter of a mile to get there-boy do I appreciate how responsible a kid he was now! Once the movie ended, I started to get up to leave. He said, "no, just wait" and the movie & Bugs Bunny short cycled again! Wow! We watched it TWICE! I was amazed! How lucky to be exposed to movies & The Beatles at such a young age! And we still watch movies when we get together.

I am curious TopBilled, as to WHY this kind of information is so important to you. You seem to be really into "numbers" and "popularity". I'm not criticizing you, just curious.... Two answers. The easiest answer: I like to see if my favorites correspond to the general public. (ie general public's favorites) So your fascination with numbers & popularity are just personal quirks.....not professional research or anything of that kind. The harder answer: I think the data can be used to bring about change in terms of programming, or else it can be used to continue current programming. Not sure I'm in total agreement with you on this one. I honestly think TCM's buyers can only choose from what's offered and what they can afford. I doubt very much we, the viewers, have much say in it. As I understand, studios offer "packages" containing a few "desirable" titles along with a group of stinkers. They also dictate how often each title can be broadcast. It's usually not up to the "buyer", but the "seller" to determine what's included in each "package". But, if the "programming changes" you're referring to is TCMs, like Underground or Silent Sundays, then yes, I do think we as viewers have influence. Now if people are asking why this information is important to me to get me to stop posting the top ten each day, that is simply not going to happen. My question was a sincere one & I thank you for replying sincerely. My only beef with your posts is your avatar-and it's wholly personal- you look like a goof I know in the movie industry. (I prefer anonymous representational avatars)

I find ALL these interesting, thanks for posting them. I still can't believe Jean Stapleton & Maureen Stapleton aren't sisters, they look so much alike to me.

..which reinforces my point that I have made in the past that if TCM started showing a lot more foreighn films, viewership would plummet. I agree with that and apparently so does TCM or they wouldn't fit foreign films (like silents, serials & cult films) into their own "niche" scheduling. I like when they sprinkle the more accessible foreign & silent films into their daily schedule just to expose people to them who MAY discover they like them. In my experience as a person gets older, they have a harder time reading the dialogue AND watching the action of foreign films. Even British films with poor sound quality can be a struggle for many to comprehend dialogue once their hearing starts to go.

It would be interesting to see if a station like TCM would survive under a true ala carte system. They might have to (snipped) add commercials to make up the difference if there wasn't enough of a market for their brand. Just an informal poll I often ask those with cable or a dish if they really watch all the channels they receive. The typical answer is "usually the same 10 channels or so" and they list news, sports, and a few "niche" channels along with "that classic movie" channel. No matter what walk of life, 99% say they enjoy "that classic movie channel". Now whether this is true or they'd be willing to pay for it if given a choice, who knows? I'd bet the casual viewer wouldn't mind commercials, whereas the "film fan" viewer would drop TCM like a hot potato if commercials were added. I will be very eager to see tomorrow's top ten database searches... I am curious TopBilled, as to WHY this kind of information is so important to you. You seem to be really into "numbers" and "popularity". I'm not criticizing you, just curious....

Primos....do yourself a favor and invest $100 in a good DVD recorder. It works exactly the same way as the old VCRs and you can record things that broadcast while you're sleeping. It's not giving more money to the cable companies, it's a convenience for yourself. A very good film friend records any "must have" movies from TCM for me, usually 4 or so a month. Paying $75/month for cable to see 4 movies is just crazy. The library has all the movies TCM doesn't, like Disney & Fox films. Saturday night with Svengoolie is a favorite of mine, but they exclusively show Universal films and that's rather limiting too. You can tell a new episode from a repeat by the coffin design. I tune into Batman for 3 minutes just to see if Eartha Kitt may be on, but she never is.

As stated over and over on this thread ME-TV is NOT a threat to TCM,since it mostly shows old tv shows and NOT movies, and has commercials to boot. The title of the thread is misleading, imo. No, ME-TV is no "threat" or competition to TCM. The cable companies are the threat to TCM. The cable companies raised their costs too high for this citizen to afford. (recently reviewed my old check book register & was stunned cable charge was $32/month five years ago-now over $75/month!) Now that I no longer subscribe to cable, I've been enjoying ME-TV, PBS and DVDs from the library. Very often I'll borrow a film after it's been discussed on this forum, after it's been shown on TCM. Mostly though, when I look through TCMs schedule, there are very few movies I actually want to see.

I have received a few biographies of Hollywood stars that were just horrible, simply capitalizing on the "name" for sales. The recent William Powell and Busby Berkeley book (bought from TCM.com) come to mind. They load the book up with photos, synopsis of the films, info taken from the internet that amounts to rumor, that sort of thing. Many are terribly written too - rife with grammatical errors- apparently with NO editor or even proofreader on staff. I'm with speedracer. The library is an excellent source to see if the book is worth owning. Many star/charactor actor biographies come from small independent publishers and aren't available elsewhere. While sometimes interesting, I find these too are often poorly written (by fans with little writing credentials?) and generally not worth the high purchase price.

He leaves because he knows he is not what Georgy truly needs. It is probably the first selfless thing he has ever done in his life. That is what makes the ending so unfulfilling. Not just for James Mason's character but for me as well. That's the crux of the story-selfishness/unselfishness. I like that Georgy is finally receiving the loving support she deserves from the Mason charactor. It illustrates love can take many forms. And yes, men flocked to Meredith only for her beauty (didn't she wear Mary Quant clothes?) because it was the free lovin' 60's and that's what men want. That's the contrast the older Mason charactor illustrates. It's natural that kids want to be the exact opposite of their parents, I know I shirley did. (but fast turning into my mother-eeegah!)

Geez I'm going to have to revisit this movie! I recorded it last time it was on TCM, watched it and liked it ok, but it seems worthy of revisiting based what I'm reading here. One of the most important points to me is that it shows REAL PHOTOGRAPHY, in a real darkroom. Real photographic processing is incredibly difficult to explain to today's kids. Who would have guessed it all would disappear & be forgotten in 30-40 years?

I'm glad about this too. For any film buff, Douglas somehow wriggles his way into our hearts. He doesn't HAVE to be the lead actor, he adds strength & often charm to supporting roles, not easy to pull off. James Gleason comes to mind as another oft supporting actor who we always notice & love. What IS it about him? He's handsome, has a great voice, seems "everyman" but usually very thoughtful & mannered. Hey, Garbo falling for him is wholly believable!

it WAS Ms. Barrymore's pick) & Mr. Osborne politely disagreed Comedy is so subjective. I could see 30-40 y/olds diggin' this film much the same way their parents enjoy stuff like Laurel & Hardy. It affords a glimpse of what was considered funny by previous generations. I bet when my Mom laughed at L&H her mom rolled her eyes & said "that's just silly." I loved Toklas but my Mom thought it was awful, and she loves Sellers. But then again, my Mom was a Mom in the 60's whereas I was under 10. I only saw "hippies" at my older brother's school and on TV. THE ESSENTIALS at best exposes you to try out some good films you may enjoy. You can't see the same 50 film "super classics" forever.

My theory is that it is someone who was banned long ago on the old boards, and this is their long-term revenge. Because you really have to know how to get past all the safe-guards to get on here and post spam. TB, you're thinking all wrong...spam is not posted by people. Plus it is the same kind of spam from the same kind of source. And it is only posted on the General Discussions board. Wouldn't it be appearing on all the boards? No, the spiders search for boards that get a certain amount of daily activity. It has been increasing. No doubt to the "new improved" boards now allow easier access. Who'd spam an old fogies dead board? They want to be seen & hoid!

While you're always welcome at our house, we are seeing these in a theater-a grand picture palace. In a nutshell, the "gods/aliens/human forebears" chose Frank Bowman to be the first human (Adam) to start life on the next inhabitable planet. Whomever arrived to Jupiter's moon first. They allowed him to live out his earthly existence, and upon death was reincarnated as the "star child". I also think this imagery was used to compare the fetus in a womb to the contained "soup of elements" beginning of life in the vastness of the universe.

Another film that chokes me up in many scenes is Lassie Come Home. Hah, I won't even watch a "dog" movie. No way, I know it'll be a heartbreaker.

On the other hand, if threads always started with the original posting, posters would be forced to scroll down to see the latest comments if they wanted to see to where the thread had evolved before they make their own posting. And that would be annoying, particularly if it's a long thread. No, you can just choose which PAGE you'd like to view. If a thread is say 10 pages long and I've been following it, I just click on "Page 9" under the thread title. Often, when first reading a thread that's multiple pages long, I look at the original post's page (page 1) then the last page (page 10) to see where it's evolved. If I want to add my thoughts, I look through every page to make sure it hasn't already been covered. Yes, I still hate the web designers haven't figured this out. (and the light gray page numbers I can hardly see)

Of course all of this depends on answering the question of who, exactly, is the target audience for "Essentials Jr."? Is it 8 year olds or 18 year olds? Or is it that the whole family will be watching? I'd like to see EJr focus towards 10-16 year olds. Younger kids are still watching "little" kids movies like mindless fantasy cartoons. When I think back to what I watched as a kid, nothing comes to mind before about 10 yrs old or so, so this seems to be the beginning of kids following a real story. Many films I saw as a kid hold up pretty well for me as an adult- early Disney, Abbott & Costello, the "Road" movies, It's A MMMM World. And then, is the purpose of these movies purely "entertainment", "education", or a mixture of both? Depending on the movie, it should be "both" in different degrees for EVERYone, shouldn't it? At almost 17, my step kid is rounding the corner to seeking out films on her own. Last night we saw ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOOS NEST and she completely followed the story & charactor development. We then talked about the history of insane asylums, lobotomies, and other themes the movie presented. (we are showing her movies based on books to get her interested in reading something meatier than juvenile fantasy fiction) Last year when we saw pure fantasy Harryhousen films, we discussed stop motion animation, so everything is a teaching/learning experience. If EJr focuses on 10-16 y/o with a really good host & even teacher packages (as I mentioned they did in the past) not only can it illustrate historical stories, but gives an opportunity to teach visual arts (composition/lighting/costume/sets) music, story arc, acting skills, and the like. The poor kid has been dragged along to movies WAY above her head so I've learned to include focus on other these aspects. This upcoming week we'll be attending the screening of WEST SIDE STORY and 2001 A SPACE ODYSSEY. (I'll have to sit in the middle and explain what's happening to BOTH of them for THAT one) Then a week after, we'll see YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN, a family favorite needing no explanation!

I cry at everything because art moves me. Seeing a charactor your involved with cry will instantly make you cry. The aforementioned BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES is full of "moments", but I lose it when Wilma tucks Homer in to bed and they close in on his face and a tear rolls down his cheek. Bambi? What about the "Baby Mine" scene where Dumbo & his caged Mom caress trunks through the bars? Heck, I cry every time I see the "star child" in 2001 A SPACE ODYSSEY. Ah the humanity!

I think the Essentials Jr. programming needs a complete overhaul. There is no way this series is even half as successful as it could be. Wouldn't it be great to pair up ESSENTIALS JR with the old Cartoon Alley? I'd really like TCM to pair up a couple of comedy shorts or cartoon before EJr to replicate the theater going experience. As for b&w (or even silents) most kids quickly forget about it. And in our case, it was used as a tool to point out frame composition & lighting to the kid. Hopefully, she appreciates the "look" of b&w. Does TCM realize high school teachers often show DVDs in class to "illustrate" history? I wasn't too happy hearing they showed the recent TROY in the classroom, but certainly WAS happy hearing TikiKid saw DIARY OF ANNE FRANK in class. And when the teacher asks which version they'd like to see, MY kid said "the black & white one-it's better because it was made closer to the time it happened!" When she wanted to know more about WW2, WHY WE FIGHT was an easy choice. I can think of a plethora of movies in the TCM library that could be shown to "teach" kids in conjunction with their curriculum. In the past, TCM had set up some sort of "package" available to teachers to assist classroom teaching while seeing classic film. Really, even old comedy shorts contain nifty tidbits of historical information of daily life of interest to kids. Today's kids have trouble learning in the classroom. A classic film gives them a visual story as well as social perspectives on a given subject. Seeing a charactor involved in a situation makes it more "real" than reading facts. AND it nurtures future cinephiles! As you said....an untapped resource. Could be so much better.

I'd go with more slapstick comedies like the Marx Brothers, W.C. Fields and Laurel & Hardy, and less with the sort of comedies with dated cultural references and lifestyle portrayals. Yes to A Night at the Opera, no to My Man Godfrey. I'd then try to put in some films that feature younger actors as central to the plot, but that also have a strong moral component. I have real successful experience getting a typical kid interested in classic film. I agree, the black & white thing was a barrier at first, so I showed her YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN & PAPER MOON early on (when she was like 12-13)... "new" b&w films. Now, b&w is wholly acceptable to her. Many 50's "monster" films are b&w and they are great movies to get kids interested in film. (almost 17, the kid is just discovering Woody Allen and she LOVED PURPLE ROSE OF CAIRO) When I was a kid I loved Abbott & Costello and Jack Benny in THE HORN BLOWS AT MIDNIGHT. These type of films have easy to follow plots with lots of entertaining comedy. Teens & adults can enjoy these too-perfect! There are so many films in TCM's library that would make ESSENTIALS JR a cohesive introduction to classic film, I just don't understand why they make their choices. I tend to think whomever's in charge doesn't have kids, or even experience with kids. I don't know many 11-16 year olds that would get excited over MEET ME IN ST LOUIS while there aren't many who wouldn't enjoy SON OF PALEFACE.

I wanna see 2001: a space odyssey smileboxed for monkey chucks bone sakes. Those are APES, not monkeys. Your analogy is perfect Dargo. IMAX has been really successful. And hamradio-thaks for that picture of the projectionist with the equipment-amazing!