fxreyman

While reading The Bridges of Madison County in the early 1990's I sat there reading it as if I had already cast the film. The more I read the more I got used to seeing Robert Redford as Photographer Robert Kincaid and Angelica Huston as Francesca Johnson. Unfortunately the film starred Eastwood and Streep.

You've got to be kidding me. Can't get enough threads out there everyday so now you are inventing what to this reader is just another glorified thread just to get your daily posts up? This has got to be the most pointless idea you have ever had for creating yet ANOTHER thread.

As has been written about this subject ad nauseam around here especially when talking about more recent fare on TCM, where should the "classic" start and end for films to be shown on TCM? 1968? 1978?? 1988??? 1998???? 2008????? Any ideas? Because as far as I am concerned if a movie which was released a scant 7 years ago is as well made as 1942's Casablanca, then why can't that movie be shown on TCM? I am NOT suggesting that TCM show many more recent films. All I am suggesting is that people loosen up a bit when thinking that TCM only show films from a certain period of time. TCM has always said that they show films made from every time period. There are many films made today that could qualify for inclusion for viewing on TCM. Not every film mind you. Maybe a few each month. Eventually many of the films that many fans who write about here at the Message Boards will be gone forever until more money is poured into research and restorative efforts to save those films. I know many lament a lot of the same films being shown on TCM, but I can understand that TCM has only so much $$$ to spend each month on the titles they get. It is hard I am sure for the programmers here to do their jobs. But under the current economic climate imposed upon TCM by their parent, I think it could have been far worse.

As William Shatner once said... "Get a life".

One of the better "behind the scenes" movies about movies is 1980's The Stunt Man directed by Richard Rush and starring Peter O'Toole as director Eli Cross, Cross's leading lady Nina Franklin played by the beautiful Barbara Hershey and Steve Railsback as Cameron, the fugitive on the run turned unexpected stunt man... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BesLJgU0ZBs

This film is available online. Check out the following website: http://www.truetvmovies.net/store/p615/Lad%3A_A_Dog_%281962%29_Peggy_McCay%2C_Carroll_O%27Connor_|.html

Am I simmering? I don't think so. As far as looking for fights, you seem to be channeling another poster who writes gobs full of nonsense around here as well. Are you two related? As far as your example of Darling Lili, have you ever seen that film? I bet that if you had, you would notice at least one thing wrong with the film. As far as writing that IMDB has a goofs section, I would have to say that just based on everything I have ever read about IMDB, you can not trust everything that has ever been reported on that site.

Yes, it is sad isn't it? But as some folks I know who are of an older generation this should come as no shock to many of you who write on these pages. Older people get older and unfortunately for many of them they aren't in the best of shape as they do get older. Some are more well preserved than others, but I would have to say that from my vantage point and or my experience the older people I know have many issues that younger folks do not have to contemplate. Lets face it, as much as everyone loves Mr. Osborne, the day of his retirement is getting closer. There is a reason why older people get sick or have additional medical situations later in life. It is because of mother time. They do get older. Their bodies are not the same as it was 10, 20 or 30 years earlier. Whatever is happening to Mr. Osborne is probably something that he should have taken care of long before now, but that is conjecture on my part. The day Mr. Osborne retires will probably be the saddest day for not only him and his close friends but everyone who has watched him over the years. That is why I think the sooner they get Ben Mankiewicz to take on additional duties at TCM, the better it will make for a smoother transition. Don't get me wrong. I think and hope that Mr. Osborne will be with us for many more years. As we have all seen over the past few years, Mr. Osborne has started to slow down or at the very least start curtailing many of the duties we have loved seeing him perform. But even he will need to stop all together eventually. The man has got to be tired. Maybe even worn out to a degree. And a lot of that mileage is apparently catching up to him now with this latest news of health issues. At present I am not subscribing to TCM, but I do recall with fondness everytime I was able to catch Mr. Osborne on TCM. Luckily for a lot of us, he can be seen on YouTube and other places, like that wonderful podcast he did with Alec Baldwin a few years back. Hopefully whatever he is having done to him will allow him to continue what he does best. But I can also see a major downturn if and when he steps down. There will be doom and gloom here at TCM City with many folks turning into schizophrenic idiots, going on and on about the impending departure of Mr. Osborne and how it all will end up becoming a discussion of further proof that TCM will be going down the drain. So everyone who has written about Mr. Osborne better have made some thoughtful musings about what he has meant to you all and that the day of his retirement is approaching and that whomever takes over for him whether it be Ben or someone else, they better get accustomed to not seeing Mr. Osborne on TCM. Because that day unfortunately is going to be here sooner than you all think. Just some musings from one fan of Robert Osborne.

Yes of course it was a mistake. I’ll tell you what the toughest mistake is… Creating a thread where it is the job of the posters you have asked for to come up with anachronism’s in three period films when everyone probably knows that there is probably not one single film that has ever been made that did not have at least one example of an anachronism in it. Not one. The ultimate problem with your thread here is that in EVERY film ever made has had some sort or type of anachronism in it. Every film. From every time period. So to sit here and ask members to come up with three films that do not have any anachronisms, is pointless, don’t you think? Unless it was your desire to create another pointless thread? Of course I did reply to it now didn’t I? And so has a few others. Probably not as many as you thought originally would respond.

Wow. Now I can rest easy considering you are channeling TB.

Oh, don't worry I am NOT in your league.... the king of one-liners, nor do I want to be.

You know what they say... opinions are like a******'s, everyone has them.

Thanks. Makes sense considering I AM a production designer. It is one of my favorite films of all time.

You might want to rephrase this comment somewhat. The flag that Kevin Costner's character flies while he is stationed at Fort Sedgwick and later takes with him on his horseback ride is a US Army flag of 30 stars. At the the time of the film 1863 or 1864 the American flag had 34 stars on it. And that included all eleven states that had seceded from the union in 1860 to 1861. The flag Costner used was close to being accurate. It was off by 4 stars. But, not too bad considering many other elements of his movie were fairly accurate. It was not a 50 star flag.

Here is a specialized website dealing with lost films of the silent era: http://www.silentera.com/lost/index.html The first paragraph includes the following: "Educated guesses estimate that only 10 to 15 percent of the films made during the silent era survive today."

Again Fred prove this statement of yours. You really are an alarmist aren't you?

Truly amazing how far off the tracks this thread has gone and yet no one either cares nor seems to want to revive the OP's question which I attempted to answer the other day. Any thoughts or are you all just going to continue with reckless abandon the continuation of this thread going to "hell in a handbasket"? And here is the original questions and or thoughts from Ivutcm posted on February 27 at 04:37 AM:

I think you were referring to me. And yes I do reply sometimes with longer responses. This is just the way I write. And to my friends over on the Favorites forum, they don't mind the way I write there! Just to be more specific, my second reply to you was in the neighborhood of 430 words. Not 1500 words. As far as characters, you would be close if you wrote over 1,600.

Prove it.

Unfortunately, your words are going to fall on deaf ears. Or worse, non-responsive responses.

I think that it is possibly time to answer IVUTCM a little more directly. And I am only assuming here but by the time he/she may have posted this there were only a few additional days remaining on the TCM calendar for 31 Days of Oscar. The reason why so many additional 1960's and 1970's and beyond films were being shown was that each year in February, TCM broadcasts it's own special month-long salute to the Oscars (Academy Awards) by showing films that were either nominated for or won an Oscar in any category. If a film was nominated in just one category and still was not awarded an Oscar, then it is quite possible that the film could end up being shown on TCM during this 31 days of tribute. As for the more recent fare, the way TCM decided to show the films this year was in a chronological format during Primetime hours only. The first day on February 1st they showed films from 1927 to 1930 during Primetime hours. So each night thereafter they would show in chronological order films from one year or multiple years only during Primetime hours. During the 31 days any film from any time period would be shown during the daylight hours up until Primetime. So for today, March 2nd, the daytime schedule has films from 1947, 1937, 1960, 1954, 1943, 1978, 1942, 1972, and then in Primetime TCM is showing the Lord of the Rings trilogy which represents the years 2001 to 2003. Tomorrow, the final day of 31 Days of Oscar, TCM will be showing films during the daytime schedule from 1964, 1967, 1941, 1936, 1942, 1939, 1966, and then in Primetime will show films from 2006 to 2011. This was a little bit unusual because even though TCM still programmed more recent films during the day, each night was in chronological order. It was cool that they decided to program the evenings this way. Of course bottom line, you were asking about 60s and 70s films being shown. TCM has from the very beginning of it's programming in 1994 have shown more recent films on it's schedule. Now if you listen carefully to some who write on these boards you will see that there are those who would prefer TCM show nothing after a certain point in time, like the year Hollywood ditched the old Hays Code, 1968. Where as others want no films shown after the 1950's. And then there are those (including me) who see nothing wrong with showcasing films from every time period. If you think about it the films from 1969 are now 46 years old. The films from 1979 are 36 years old. The films from 1989 are 26 years old. And the films from 1999 are 16 years old. When TCM first started in 1994, films from 1969 were 25 years old. A quarter century, and yet TCM was showing those films. In fact if you look at the mission statement from 1994 it says films from the 1920's to the 1980's. So their mission has always been to show more recent films in addition to showing many from the old golden days of Hollywood. Hope this helps answer your original question

As thick as a milk shake at Wendy's.

That was a question. Not me being defensive for TCM. Like I wrote, I think too much attention is given to the supposed mistakes the programmers make around here. It is as if there is a group of posters here who just can not wait to pounce whenever a mistake does take place. It is as if they are treating TCM like the Holy Grail of movie channels or something. And yet angels who supposedly are perfect do not work at TCM, just natural human beings. And guess what? Humans make mistakes all the time. Especially those who work at cable channels. And as far as me going places to respond, why can't I go there and respond? I mean whats the worse that will happen? You'll come along and tell me I am not being real and that I should just accept what is going on and then move on. Wow. What words of wisdom these are.

Me get real??? Your kidding right??? It is not me who comes on here every single frickin’ time complaining about the same old crap that comes up whenever the programmers goof up. You get real and finally realize that these people are human, not super beings. They are trying their level best at what I would think could be a very daunting task. Airing over 350 films each month. And yet that is not good enough for people like you and a few others around here. Oh no. The programmers are not allowed to make ANY mistake. Isn’t that right? This is is all about their gaffes, right? Oh, yeah I am even sure every last one of you who do complain probably thinks you could do a better job than the programmers can do. Why don’t you get real and accept the fact that the programmers ARE human and YES they Do make mistakes from time to time. Accept that. What do you expect? Perfection? I am sorry but TCM is a cable channel run by people who as I have written are trying to do the best they can within a certain amount of budgetary limits. Especially after the Time Warner budget cuts occurred late last year. I guess you forgot about that too, huh?

So as always, I am overreacting here? That is what I do. Yeah, I get it. You are the voice of reason around here, right? It is not being unreasonable, what it is - it is becoming rather boring that this topic keeps rearing it's ugly head whenever an edited film makes it way onto the schedule. The main problem I have is reading threads like this one where to me there is complaining that exists from basically the same people over and over again when the programmers should be doing a better job. The main emphasis is to always blame the programming people at TCM. "Oh, well its the programmers fault that this or that happened". Or, "The programmers should be doing a better job at screening the films before they air". What do think happens at TCM? Do you really think that there is a really big team there in their offices that are supposed to screen each and every film that TCM shows each month to verify whether or not the film is the original film or an altered one. Because I have to tell you, all of the conversations I have seen or read about is that TCM really has little control over the films they receive. And yet there are those that write on these pages who seem to think that TCM has an unlimited supply of time, resources and more importantly people whose only jobs each month is to screen all the movies they show. Get real. I am amazed that they can get what they have on the channel each and every month. Plus all of the other good things they do for fans of the channel. From my conversation with Tabesh last year, they have a very small yet dedicated staff who tries to do their very best. Unfortunately around here people seem to think they have to be miracle workers.