Jump to content

Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About TheSlumsOfSoftFocus

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. I love this movie. Faulkner's book, Sanctuary, is one of my all time favorites, and even during the pre-code era a lot of it is a little too shocking for the screen. But the movie is a really strong adaptation. I run obscureclassics.wordpress.com. Would you care to exchange links?
  2. > {quote:title=goldensilents wrote:}{quote} > Yes. I really do believe that the majority of people who tune into TCM prefer the older classic films. TCM has made a concerted effort to branch out and attract younger viewers by showing newer and newer films, but in doing so they risk alienating their base. Sticking silents and precodes for the most part in the "Graveyard Shift" or other inconvenient hours like early AM when people are getting ready for work or school is in many ways turning their backs on their base. I do agree that they shouldn't be Graveyard Shifting the silents and the pre-codes. This was a BIG complaint I had about a year ago. But recently they've been doing a lot better with showing these movies at better times during the day, in the afternoon or even during prime time. They could still do a little better, but in the past year they've been doing a pretty good job of showing a lot of different types of classics, and at decent times. I mean, we're getting Four's a Crowd today at noon. That's fantastic. A year ago, we wouldn't be seeing this movie until 3 in the morning. Message was edited by: TheSlumsOfSoftFocus
  3. > {quote:title=PrinceSaliano wrote:}{quote} > > {quote:title=TheSlumsOfSoftFocus wrote:}{quote} > > Yes, what makes a movie "classic" can be very subjective. It can mean different things to different people. Which is exactly why TCM shouldn't subscribe to any kind of narrow definition. > Well, the "Big Tent" approach is not working for me. And you're not the only person who watched the channel.
  4. > {quote:title=goldensilents wrote:}{quote} > I wouldn't call anyone a "snob" here just because they have a different opinion as to what is a classic film. I don't care for the James Bond films either. Then again I don't much care for anything past 1966, except for a handful of examples like What's Up, Doc or The Right Stuff. Modern films bore me to death. I'm not really calling anyone here a snob. I do, however, think that the "TCM shouldn't show these movies!" attitude is somewhat snobbish. It's not snobbish to have a different opinion of what makes a classic. Like I said, it's a subjective term that means different things to different people. However, the attitude that (a) a film can't possibly be defined as a classic because it doesn't fit your (and I don't mean "your" specifically, I'm speaking generally here) definition and ( a television network shouldn't show certain movies just because those movies don't fit your (again, generally) criteria is a little snobbish. Like I said, they show many movies on TCM that I don't consider classics. They show a lot of movies that I don't enjoy, that I don't like. So I just don't watch them. I know that I'm not the only person who watches TCM, and I know that not everyone who watches TCM has the same definition of what makes a movie a classic as I do. So I don't get upset or irritated when they show something I don't find interesting. For the most part, at least recently, TCM has been doing a very good job of having a very balanced schedule with a decent amount of pre-code, B-films, well known classics, more modern classics, etc. And that's what really makes the station so great. That it doesn't subscribe to any narrow view of what a classic is, and that it has something for everybody, no matter what their definition of "classic" is. > {quote:title=goldensilents wrote:}{quote} > Have to say that I have absolutely no interest in seeing any of those films again. I think we can include in the definition of "classic" (which of course is subjective to a large extent) films that we like to watch over and over again because they have a timeless, universal, sympathetic, and often uplifting aura and quality about them. Too many modern films lack these qualities, to me at least. Too many modern films are crass and unappealing and unoriginal. There are a lot of movies they show on TCM that I have no interest in seeing again. So I just don't watch them when they're on. Like you said, "classic" is subjective. You even say here "to me at least". To a lot of people, those films have those qualities. These films can easily be considered classics. It's not like TCM is indiscriminately showing more "modern" films, from the 1970s or 1980s. It's not like they're airing Just One of the Guys or Silent Night, Deadly Night. They're showing films like Raging Bull or Annie Hall. There are plenty of films from these decades that have been long forgotten. Like them or not, there's a reason these films are still talked about while other films made at the same time aren't. These films are creatively made in very memorable ways, they remain influential (great romantic comedies like Secretary and Waitress probably wouldn't exist today without Annie Hall) and, most of all, they have themes that are universal and timeless. Whether one or two (or even 100) don't like the movie isn't the point. There are probably a lot of the 1920s-1950s films that are shown that a lot of people don't like. TCM's job isn't to make sure they're only showing films everyone likes. Their job is to show classics, in every form. And to do that, they need to not subscribe to a narrow and shallow definition of the word. > {quote:title=goldensilents wrote:}{quote} > If you allow enough time to go by you can make a better determination as to what is truly a classic film. Maybe in 50 years people will remember a Slumdog Millionaire, but if I were a betting person I would wager they will still be watching Casablanca and forgetting all about Slumdog. I'm not sure people would remember Slumdog Millionaire in 50 years either. Not because it's not a good movie, but I think that there's just something about it that might be a little too inaccessible as time goes by. However, that doesn't mean that there aren't movies being made today that won't be remembered fondly in 50 years, even as fondly as Casablanca. There are many movies from the past few decades that will be remembered then, because of how they're made and because of how universal their themes are. It's not like movie themes stopped being universal after the 1950s. Movies like The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and No Country For Old Men will easily be remembered in 50 years, both because of how they're made and because of their themes. Even films I don't like at all, like Titanic, will be remembered. Would I put them on TCM right now? Absolutely not. But just because they were made after the 1950s doesn't mean they're not excellent movies, and it doesn't, by any means, mean they won't be remembered in the future. Just because you don't feel they're interesting, timeless, an universal, just because you don't like to watch them over and over, doesn't mean there aren't many, many people who don't, and many, many people who will feel they are in 50 years. Message was edited by: TheSlumsOfSoftFocus
  5. Yes, what makes a movie "classic" can be very subjective. It can mean different things to different people. Which is exactly why TCM shouldn't subscribe to any kind of narrow definition.
  6. Ginger Rogers... Primrose Path Bachelor Mother Star of Midnight Vivacious Lady I'll Be Seeing You Professional Sweetheart Romance In Manhattan In Person Rafter Romance A Shriek In the Night Robert Montgomery... Lovers Courageous Piccadilly Jim The Man In Possession The Lady of Mrs. Cheyney Faithless Fast and Loose Night Must Fall Rage In Heaven Ride the Pink Horse
  7. There were so many wonderful pre-code women. Great Garbo, Barbara Stanwyck, Loretta Young, Jean Harlow, Kay Francis... But none come close to the incredible Miriam Hopkins. She's one of the all time greatest actress, and she easily takes the prize for greatest pre-code actress. Design For Living, The Story of Temple Drake, Trouble In Paradise, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. There wasn't another actress in Hollywood who was as comfortable with her sexuality, no other actress who enjoyed their sexuality so much. Miriam Hopkins is simple THE pre-code goddess.
  8. They seem to be showing a lot more pre-code films in general lately, which is just wonderful.
  9. The Single Standard is pretty fantastic. I recently rewatched all the Garbo silents, and I had forgotten how good pretty much all of them all. Flash and the Devil is easily my favorite, The Mysterious Lady is my second, and I'd say The Single Standard is probably my third, followed by A Woman of Affairs. She and Conrad Nagel should have made more films together. Their chemistry was HOT in The Mysterious Lady and The Kiss. It wish they had done a sound film.
  10. I love Garbo's pre-codes. Though I'm not fond of Mata Hari. It's an extremely flat film, and as far as Garbo spy romances go, The Mysterious Lady did it much better. I wish they would show As You Desire Me (me second favorite Garbo film, and my very favorite performance of hers) and Susan Lenox (a really great pre-code with a fantastic depiction of really messed up relationship) more often. The Painted Veil, too. It's not a great movie, but Garbo's performance is awesome.
  11. Let's not be complete snobs about this. There are a lot of different ways the word can be defined. Generally, I think people just consider "older" movies, like pre-1965, to be classic. While I'd say this is definitely the "classic era", that doesn't mean that all the movies that come from the time are classics, and that doesn't mean that movies after that era can't be defined as classics. There are a lot of movies that come from this classic era, some of them that are shown on TCM, that I wouldn't consider truly "classic" because they just aren't good. And there are many movies made after that era, some shown on TCM, some not, that should be considered classic, because they're very special films, that have done something unique, or that have truly stood a test of time. A classic film isn't just an old movie. Like I said before, there are a lot of different things that can make a film a classic. I think the most important aspect is that it's managed to stand the test of time. This is what, naturally, makes so many of the films from this "classic era" considered classics. But there are also a lot of movies outside of that era that definitely fit the category. The Godfather, Raging Bull, Annie Hall, Manhattan, Taxi Driver, Blue Velvet. These films qualify as classics because they did something very special in the way they were made and in their themes, and after many years, these things still hold up as interesting elements, and the films still stand up as being wonderful. Personally, I don't know how one can say that the James Bond films (at least the good ones like Dr. No, Goldfinger, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, The Spy Who Loved Me, etc) aren't classics. Whether you like them or not, their cultural impact is huge. That kind of cultural importance is enough to qualify a film as a classic. And, again, these are films that still stand up as wonderful pieces of entertainment. I'd rather they show newer classics like Goldfinger or The Purple Rose of Cairo which are excellent movies, rather than junk like This Man Is Mine, which fits into the narrow idea of a "classic" movie just because of the year it was made. Just because a movie was made in the 1930s or 1940s doesn't mean it's a true classic, and just because a film was made after the 1960s doesn't mean it's not. There are a lot of things that go into making a film classic, and the fact that the staff and programmers at TCM recognize this is a very good thing. It's wonderful that they aren't being completely closed minded and shutting out a huge amount of excellent films just because they don't fit into some incredibly narrow idea of what a "classic film" is supposed to be.
  12. I recorded all the movies except for Star of Midnight and In Person (I already have both recorded), and I can't wait to watch them at work on Saturday. I LOVE Star of Midnight. It's probably my favorite Thin Man knockoff. It's a really funny movie, it has a mystery that's actually very intriguing and engrossing, and Powell and Rogers have all kinds of chemistry. It's just a wonderful movie.
  13. I'm a sucker for classic romantic comedies. It's so hard to narrow it down.... My Man Godfrey Trouble In Paradise Ninotchka The Lady Eve Unfaithfully Yours The Palm Beach Story Tom, Dick, and Harry Rafter Romance Bachelor Mother Libeled Lady Love on the Run Piccadilly Jim The Mad Miss Manton
  14. Anyway, I'd love a Frank Borzage pre-code set. I know a few of his pre-codes (like Liliom and Bad Girl) were already released on that AMAZING Murnau, Borzage, and Fox set. But it would be wonderful to have his other pre-codes like Man's Castle (my all-time favorite movie), Little Man, What Now?, A Farewell to Arms, Secrets, and No Greater Glory.
  15. I kind of agree with the idea that these cases should be dropped after a certain number of years. But at the same time, it wouldn't really be fair. If the cases are dropped, the rights would likely fall back into the hands of the studio. And while that's great for film fans, it isn't fair to the estate of the other party in the case. That's basically just saying that if it goes on for too long then the defendant wins. Maybe if they made the films public domain once a case goes on for so many years.
© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
  • Create New...