JamesJazGuitar
-
Posts
35,217 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
52
Posts posted by JamesJazGuitar
-
-
I have been waiting decades to see The Constant Nymph and I also found it only 'OK'. It had a great cast but the story just wasn't compelling enough. I didn't view Boyer and Joan as having any type of sexual affair. Instead I saw her more has his muse. Once he is able to express himself through his music she is no longer necessary.
Hold Back the Dawn is a much better film. But yes, Boyer did help each sister out in the early 1940s.
-
-
If Olivia was the madwomen in the attic, Joan wouldn't of been dismayed. Instead she would of used the line Olivia used in The Heiress; *bolt the door, Maria, bolt the door!*
-
Gable got Cukor fired as director after calling him a gay slang term and mocking him. Cukor was well liked by women (hey, like The Women), and what Gable did really turned them off. Gable was insecure and his picking on Cukor was a reflection of that.
-
The first basic question is if in 2032 TCM would show movies made in the 21st century. The concept of a movie network showing movies from 1920 - 2010 (or so), just doesn't work for me.
I would rather there be 2 or 3 'classic' movie networks that focus on specific time periods.
As you noted by 2032 I don't see the need for any networks that show fixed (pre-set) schedules. Instead one will just log on to websites that have specificc libraries and select from them what they wish to watch.
-
You have a very valid point; Only a limited number of people can be prolific at something that takes a lot of training and inherent ability (e.g. having a perfect pitch, multiple octave vocal range, etc..).
But many people can be serviceable. They can perform in limited settings (especially if those around them are masters), and 'pull it off'.
As for Gable as a director, I just don't see it. Gable didn't have an artistic personality and in many ways was somewhat backwards. This became clear to all the gals during the filming of GWTW. Yea, Gable might of looked better than Leslie Howard but in many ways Gable was limited in ways Howard was not. After spending time with each most women fell for Howard.
-
I wonder if you read my entire post. I said that the city contacts with ONE cable company and thus the consumer is locked in. Cities, especially larger ones, have a lot of power when deciding what cable company should service the city. It is during the bidding process and contract negotiation that the city manager needs to do what is best for city residences. But sadly a lot of city managers fail.
I read your other e-mail about more tiers. I agree that this is more workable than 'pure' ala carte service. Maybe there could be 5 or 6 tiers, that lump together difference networks that connect to similar audiences. The sports tier is a no-brainier but after that what networks to group could a challange. But there are some logical groups; new junkie - CNN, Fox, MSNBC, etc..
Food and Travel; etc...
-
I have to admit you confused me since, at least to me, you mixed the personal life of Marilyn with the life of her character in The Misfits. I also felt you were talking about her acting ability. I guess not.
As for the on-screen character, all I can say is that is the type of women I would want nothing to do with. When I was younger and a lot more selfish I would of taken advantage of such a women. Now I would just ignore her. I just don't see much substance there.
-
Cable isn't subject to FCC oversight.
No FCC involvement benefits freedom of expression and of course also allows for corporate profits. But I guess to some profit is a dirty word.
-
So the free market works for the networks but NOT for the cable companies? I only ask because that last paragraph (e.g. the 'should not be allowed' comment in particular), isn't a free market type of comment.
Of course as I said before since each city contracts with a single cable company if there are any restrictions these should be negotiated by the city during the bidding process. Sadly city leaders are often weak in this regard (and in some cases being paid off by the cable company).
-
Not sure what you mean by 'carriage fees'. Is that a fee that is paid to a network station in addition to the fee the station already gets from the cable provider?
The only reason I ask is that you state ',,,charge carriage fees to supplement their income". What other income would a non commercial station have, other than the fee they already charge cable providers? The word 'supplement' got me confused as to what a carriage fee is.
As for your first paragraph. I don't see why a cable company couldn't pay a network the same broadcasting fee they pay today but ONLY charge their customers for only the networks they want. But the network fee per customer would be impacted by the number of customers that sign up for a network. The less customers willing to pay for a network the more there per customer fee (which is the point I was trying to make and why I believe this model is unworkable).
Say a cable company with 100,000 customers pays $10,000 a month today to a network. They could still pay that network 10K a month but if only 5,000 customer are willing to pay for the network the cable company would then charge each customer $2.00 per month for that single network. If the number of customers drops to 1,000 each has to pony up $10.
Again, I think this model is unworkable but I believe that is the point the other poster was trying to make about a system that was revenue neutral in the aggregate. I believe you are making the very sound point of; If only 1,000 out of 100,000 customers want that network why would the cable company continue to pay that network the same $10,000 a month.
-
Marilyn as was very selfish; showing up late, not being prepared, being on meds etc...
What does that say about her? It wasn't only some viewers that couldn't look beyond her body and personality. She couldn't do so either. Yea, like Michael Jackson she never really grew up but that isn't something one should praise, or blame on external factors (that only 'works' for those still in their 20s).
-
I do agree that Marilyn had an IT factor and that she projected this very well on screen. There is also the fact that viewers, especially many male ones, have a thing for blond bombshell types. This has been true during every era. That just isn't my type (give me an Ava Gardner type or even an Audrey Hepburn type).
-
Deciding between Captain Blood and Robin Hood has always been hard for me. Others here have already pointed out their differences. I really love both but I would likly pick Robin Hood because of its epic quality, but Blood does have more grit.
-
I agree that Marilyn was perfect fit for her role in The Misfits but in may ways being the perfect fit for a role does NOT qualify one as being a great or even good actress.
A great actor tackles roles (characters) that may not fit their own personality and is able to convince the audience that they are that character. So I'm not sure she would of had a great career ahead of her unless producers were going to cast her in similar roles again and again.
Of course all actors get typecast to a degree and both their studio and them will 'milk' this for maximum box office profits, but the greats breakout when given the chance. Take Olivia DeHavilland; She started out mostly as a damsel in distress and light comedy, becomes Melodie in GWTW and then moves on to roles like The Heiress and The Snake Pit. Marilyn doesn't have that type of range in her career and nothing suggest she would of if she didn't die after making The Misfits.
Edited by: jamesjazzguitar on Jan 30, 2012 12:50 PM
-
I second your choice; Veronica Lake has the best hair for an actress.
As for guys; I'd give it to Lancaster. Those waves would cause waves in the hearts of young women.
-
Others have posted that TCM didn't participated in the Nielsen rating system.
You say 'the info is there'. Can you post a link to this 'info'? I would be interested to know the average number of hours per month, households in the USA are watching TCM based on the Nielsen ratings (estimates).
-
I think there are at least 3 categories of actors; Stars, co-stars and character actors (supporting players).
To me Malden was a co-star more so than a character actor supporting player. But of course these categories are subjective. One's co-star is often a star to someone else. I can understand why a character actor wouldn't make a good SOTM since they were never a star in any of their movies. But I could see a group of character actors (say one featured per week) being SOTM. One idea would be to do this by studio; The supporting players of Warner, etc...
-
The Great Garrick is a Warner movie and not MGM. But I do agree the film doesn't have a Warner feel to it and it lacks many of the standard Warner character actors of the 30s. Add in Whale as director and one gets a unique movie. I really like it but hey, I'm nuts for Olivia.
-
Thanks for posting this link. I wondered about this comment:
"TCM has a loyal following — some 86 million homes".I assume that most of these homes don't have a say about getting TCM or NOT. i.e. TCM is part of an extended package. Just because someone gets this extended package doesn't make them a loyal fan of TCM anymore than they are a loyal fan of Bravo or the Food network.
Since TCM has no rating info that I'm aware of, I really wonder how anyone can determine how many loyal fans TCM really has. I know, I'm one but other than people I meet here, I rarely meeting anyone else that is. (loyal to me would be watching the station at least 25% of the time one watches TV).
Edited by: jamesjazzguitar on Jan 29, 2012 3:29 PM
-
If they have Ward Bond or Thomas Mitchell for SUTS someone will complain why they are repeating the movies that will feature these two. Both of these guys are shown a lot on TCM since they co-stars in so many fine movies. But giving them their due would be great especially if they featured some of their lesser seen known movies.
-
Based on TCM's business model, I don't think they need to attract new viewers. They don't participate in any rating system, since they are commercial free, and it is my understanding they don't know how many viewers they have. They only know how many cable networks carry them. i.e. the number of households they are shown in. Now if cable had an ala carte type system, number of viewers would matter.
Also, how (where), would NON viewers of TCM find out TCM was showing a certain star? Does TCM place ads in certain mags or on Internet sites? I guess it could us social media for a fairly low costs to get the word out, but I still wonder if that would make much of a difference (either one is a fan of TCM already or one doesn't know or care much if they even exist).
As for Malden, I think he belongs as SOTM. He was in many, many great movies. Of course in many of these he wasn't the lead male star but so what. He was a leading player and always a very intense one.
-
Olivia calls the movie 'I came back to this'! Yes, after GWTW Olivia hoped for better parts but Jack put her in this to keep her head from getting too big. He already had Bette on the lot.
-
I would pick another 40s film: The Letter.
Where are the Bette Davises & Spencer Tracys today?
in General Discussions
Posted
Well there are a lot of myths with regards to Gable and calling gay men fags. e.g. the one about the making of The Misfits. It is my understanding Gable didn't like that the movie was becoming too much of a women's picture. On this I agree, but Selznick keep most of the scenes Cukor filmed with just the women since Cukor was very good at getting the most from women in those type of scenes.
But it isn't a rumor that women that meet both Howard and Gable typically fell for Howard.