Cinemascope
-
Posts
5,161 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Cinemascope
-
-
Well I'm glad he wasn't, I like Mr. Keel just fine!
-
stoneyburke,
Contrary to what you think, I couldn't possibly have anything against people speaking their minds, if there was no doubt that they were doing so honestly and without any shred of malice. And while I'd like to give everyone the benefit of the doubt, don't you think we've had too many threads about "the downfall" and "the destruction" of TCM?
Why is it that these people never post a thread with a level-headed title like "What does everyone think abou this year's Oscar programming?" No, it's always some title that spells certain doom, it's always the "downfall" or "the destruction" of TCM. It's always the "sky is falling!". And while we may not be 100% sure, it remains possible many or all of these threads might have been started by the same person under different usernames.
It's OK if you honestly think the sky really is falling. You're entitled to post your opinion and say as much. And so is everyone else who doesn't think the sky is falling and who thinks TCM is still the best there is when it comes to showing classic movies. We can all keep going with these circular debates until the end of time, or of TCM.
But honestly, what TCM does during Oscar time I don't see as somehow threatening to my way of life. So they showed a few new movies? Cool. Awesome. Better to show new stuff than to limit themselves to showing the same schedule every year, with only a few titles switched around.
I don't think the sky is falling and I don't see it happening in the near future. But thanks for keeping your eyes peeled for all of us.
-
Those are very good points, too, sjack. So many things have changed in the last 50 years, we can't expect Hollywood to stick to old forumulas that don't work so well anymore. From their end, it's a business and they just look at the bottom line.
It's only us movie buffs that can afford to look at the movies and ponder their artistic value.
-
Sorry that you weren't able to record it... have you thought about TiVo or some generic DVR? Life is so much easier for a dedicated film buff because it allows you to time-shift very effectively and with dual tuner, even record two different channels at the same time (I've occasionally recorded movies on TMC and FMC at the same time).
I TiVo'd the movie but probably won't watch it until the weekend, it's been a while since I saw it and I want to watch it with as few distractions as possible
-
I already asked you, if the difference between a steady stream of musicals and what we have today isn't big enough for you to consider the musical a dead genre, that we should just agree to disagree.
Was that enough for you?
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!
You have to have the last word!!!!!
-
I didn't say that you didn't like your thoughts, did I?
-
Yes, but I'm not really interested in passing judgement on the Academy's choices, you are!
-
Well I'm sure the Academy isn't very interested in your opinion, either, which is why they give Oscars to the movies they choose.... if you aren't interested in the Academy's opinion, why care who they gave Oscars to?
-
Well but the Academy didn't agree with you.
-
There were other movies, too, even if you don't count him as an uncredited director on Mr. Roberts
-
Well then all the Best Picture winners are excellent!
-
Ah, but what makes it excellent?
-
Sorry but I would have to disagree with both assertions. Yes, there *are* movies today that really appeal to a broad number of filmgoers. Or at least a broad enough number to get box-office figures like those of Titanic or LOTR or Spider-Man. Had any one of those movies appealed to a smaller percentage of moviegoers, their box-office results would have been significantly smaller.
And sorry, but the music as a genre with a steady stream of movies is dead, period. You have some movies that have some music in them, but not a steady stream of all-out, sing-and-dance musicals. Maybe that difference doesn't mean much to you. In that case, let's just agree to disagree. But even taking into account the movies you've mentioned, musicals of any kind are few and far between, considering the thousands of movies that have been released in the last few decades.
There isn't a steady stream of musicals in the sense of having maybe a dozen or two dozen each year, and a steady number of singers and dancers whose primary appeal is their ability to sing and/or dance. What we have today is *nothing* like what there was in the 30's, 40's, and most of the 50's.
-
Ah, so you are saying they weren't "Best Movie of the Year" material. So, what are the qualifications that a movie should have for being chosen "Best Movie of the Year"? Where exactly did Academy voters go wrong? Did they not follow the instructions they were given? Why did they vote for the wrong movie? Why didn't they get kicked out of the Academy for not following the instructions given?
Well?
-
This is not impossible, but not any more likely than any other unknown actor giving suggestions to any director.... unless you showed an actual example of an "Eastwood" trait from before he filmed the Leone westerns, and we could establish that he took something he'd done before and did it again in these westerns.
Other than that, it's just too much speculation. Maybe he was just happy to have the job and was happy to do whatever they told him to do.
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure that Eastwood has grown prodigously both as actor and director since that time, I just don't see what's so hard to believe about an unknown actor showing up for work and doing what the director wanted.
-
Sure, don't tell us, we know -- the sky is falling, so we better run for our lives.
-
I think that although the majority of epics were the result of studios and producers trying to compete with TV, there were certainly films of epic scope and length before television.
Intolerance and Abel Gance's Napoleon would be two examples. Maybe we could include Gone with the Wind among the pre-TV era epics.
-
Ah, I thought when you said "depict" it could be an artistic rendition... so you're limiting the scope of the thread to "natural-looking" depictions?
-
The problem is that there's always plenty of trolls ready to start another "sky-is-falling-because-TCM-plays-different-movies-during-Oscar-month" thread...
-
Surprised you left out Who Framed Roger Rabbit for L.A. (for at least trying to depict L.A. when it still had "the best public transportation system in the world").... and One From the Heart from your Las Vegas list...
-
He's not that good-lookin', is he?
-
> People are entitled to their likes and dislikes. You
> may not always agree with them and you may not like
> the way they word it, but they are entitled to their
> opinion.
Of course we are... which is why I always give my honest opinion.
-
Let's be honest here, the Academy does this -- Hollywood does this -- to drum up some publicity and because more often than not, it's good for business.
If we weren't suckers for it, there wouldn't be threads like this... so, first we fall for it like suckers, then we complaint about how silly the awards are. Doh! Either we take them for what they are, and contribute to the Hollywood publicity machine, or ignore them altogether.
-
I dunno, I detect some sarcasm there...
What the Blue Blazes- The down fall of TCM
in General Discussions
Posted
Well sorry for calling 'em like I see 'em and always shootin' from the hip when these folks (whether it's several people or the same person under different usernames) continually come and forecast "downfalls", "destructions" and the end of Western civilization as we know it. Maybe you'd prefer a lot of phony politeness?