Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

slaytonf

Members
  • Posts

    9,210
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Posts posted by slaytonf

  1. 2 hours ago, Sukhov said:

    Jaguar driven by Franco Nero in a Quiet Place in the Country (1969). I thought this one looked cool.

    i233401.jpg

    A 1959 Jaguar XK 150, according to IMCDB.  Jaguars are overall, the most beautiful cars, though for the last 15 years or so, not so much.

    Good movie btw.

  2. 5 hours ago, Artemus said:

    I don't get the channel anymore, but when I did I recall being frustrated with the channel's repetition. It seems like it only has access to a small fraction of the studio's catalog so after a while I didn't bother much with it since I had pretty much seen everything it had to offer in its rotation. Perhaps things have changed since then. 

    They have.  I remember some years ago the mind-numbing repetition of a handful of titles (when I had a different TV supplier and I got the channel).  But there is now a greater variety of movies being shown.  Although still plenty of repetition to satisfy anybody's tastes.

    5 hours ago, LsDoorMat said:

    Before Fox Movie Channel divided into two, it showed classics 24 hours a day. Back before - I think it was January 2012 - you could see all kind of weird and wonderful films from 30s Fox onward. After they divided in two parts , the "classic" section only plays from 3AM to 3PM. But what the channel considers "classic" is bewildering. Sure, they will show "The Razor's Edge" occasionally. However, for the most part, they neglect anything before 1958 and instead show films that are exhibits on the mediocrities that Fox produced in the late 50s through the early 60s that almost put them in bankruptcy.  Tons of them are barely over an hour and appear to be made for TV productions that are 5/10 stars at best in many cases.

    It's not so bad as that.  There's, for example:  Dragonwyck (1946),  I Wake Up Screaming (1941), Les Miserables (1935), The Snake Pit (1948), Backlash (1947), The Man Who Never Was (1956), The Man Who Wouldn't Die (1942), The Model and the Marriage Broker (1951), Stand Up and Cheer! (1934), and others.

  3. For a long time, the Fox Movie Channel (FXM) was not in my DirectTV package.  By accident, a few week ago I discovered that it's been added.  It won't revolutionize my TV experience, but there are movies I look forward to seeing.  The channel is divided in two parts.  From noon to midnight newer movies are aired, mostly post-2000.  From midnight to noon is what is called FXMRetro, when studio-era Fox movies are aired.  It has a lot of overlap with TCM, with movies like Dragonwyck (1946), and People Will Talk (1951).  But a lot of movies are unique.  On the retro side, coming up is:

    The Big Gamble (1961)

    Peeper (1975)

    Phantom of the Paradise (1974)

    Five Gates to Hell (1959)

    The Wayward Bus (1947)

    The Fury (1978)

    Kagemusha (1980)

    I don't vouch for any of these, except the last.  I started watching Peeper, a noir-detective spoof á la Raymond Chandler, with Natalie Wood and Michael Caine.  But I didn't care for it.  However, it does have Natalie Wood.  Kagemusha is a surprise, but Akira Kurosawa produced it in association with Fox.

     

    Some of the new movies of interest, to me at least, are:

    Straight Outta Compton (2015)

    The Revenant (2015)

    Master and Commander:  The Far Side of the World (2003)

    The Shape of Water (2017)

    Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri (2017)

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 2
  4. It's been an eye-opener to see who got the Introducing credit.  Though some of those mentioned weren't on the same level of stardom as Maureen O'Hara, or Peter O'Toole and the like, they still mostly had successful careers and are somewhat remembered, at least by old film fans.  But I don't know if my impression is still correct or not, and I guess it's almost impossible to find out.  As others have noted, Introducing credits for actors who fizzle aren't remembered.  So there might be dozens of them to each success story.  But I can see how I might get the impression that the Introducing credit was a gateway to nowhere no matter whether it really was or not.  For well-known stars I'd not pay close attention to their credits, because I'd know they were in the movie--probably being the reason I was watching.  And since they each had only one, I may not have even seen it.  But  my eye skimming over the credits for other actors, Introducing credits would stand out.   And associating that with unknown actors would make me form the opinion that actors that got that credit didn't have successful careers.

    • Like 1
  5. This was posted in another thread:

    I saw this posted by someone else in another section.  I haven't tried it myself, though.   I did use the old "suggest a movie" page a few times and the movies would eventually pop-up on the schedule.  

    From another section under Technical Issues posted by "Liz Warren":

    http://forums.tcm.com/topic/261460-suggest-a-movie-log-in-is-broken/

    I found a way to suggest a film as follows:

    1. At the bottom of TCM's main page, click on "Contact Us" (it's in very tiny font to the right of "Home").
    2. At the bottom of the page that comes up, click on "Have More Questions?," then click on "Contact Us."
    3. Under "Submit a Request," click "Choose your category."  "Request a Movie" is one of the options; choose that one.
    4. Fill out all the message information and submit your message

    Here's the thread:

    https://forums.tcm.com/topic/48238-movie-requests/page/2/?tab=comments#comment-2157722

     

  6. Watching Jamaica Inn (1939) this morning, I was surprised to see Maureen O'Hara not at the head of the credits, but in that strange specialized place at the end we sometimes see cast as "And Introducing. . . ."  It's unusual to see a real star come out of that place, as its inhabitants mostly don't even make brilliant debut from which they can fade to nothingness.  That credit has always seemed to me evidence of an attempt by a producer, or somebody to manufacture a movie star.  Almost universally a futile exercise, embarrassing to watch.  I wonder if any other big stars have come from that peculiar credit.

  7. 14 hours ago, TopBilled said:

    Well if that was the case then she definitely lacked respect towards Robert Osborne and the previous hosts since they didn't select "better" more "woke" films. But I think you're giving her too much credit. She was merely someone that was recruited to tick specific boxes, the way Tiffany Vasquez had been, and she was encouraged to make specific selections. They probably had considered other people for this role and I doubt that she was entirely unique here. In her excitement or enthusiasm, she may not have been aware of how this would pan out. She seems to have been without the wisdom or prudence to make more balanced selections. The agenda was transparent in the most off-putting way possible.

    That's a lot of idle speculation, which serves no purpose.  It is disappointing to see people disparage another person's abilities because they disagree with their positions.  As has been mentioned repeatedly, and repeatedly ignored, Ava Duvernay is an accomplished filmmaker, producer, and director.  In her conversations with Ben Mankiewicz , she displayed a mastery of her craft.  To portray her as not knowing her own mind, or a pawn of the programmers at TCM, is a rhetorical ploy to discredit her without addressing the substance of her commentary.  People use this unworthy tactic when they know they can't refute the assertions of others, but still persist in opposition based on other factors.  Which brings me back to my earlier statement that objection was raised to her because she was African American, and a woman, and she was unapologetically making comments striking at people's complacency, and the way they think.

  8. 1 hour ago, TopBilled said:

    Many of these are not regarded as Essential by some viewers, and therein lies the problem. 

    I think the biggest mistake she made is that she was not color blind when making selections. Certain issues are wide-ranging and can be addressed in a film about people other than her own culture, but still cover issues faced by her culture. But it seemed as though she was often using the films to spotlight her culture and that was off-putting to people from other cultures. So ultimately we might say she was not inclusive enough. Maybe she didn't care about that, didn't want to be inclusive of all cultures?

    Also it seemed like she was chosen to be a host to tick a few politically correct boxes then encouraged to make these selections to fit with those PC motives. In my view it was an experiment that went awry. I can see why viewers were unhappy and why this thread was originally created. It makes sense to me. It was not a properly conducted experiment in programming and in stretching the boundaries of what an Essential could be. It went too far left. It resulted in a backlash by a percentage of viewers that were not intolerant, as much as they were alienated by this entire approach.

    My view.

    One could make the same observation/accusation about any other host and their movies.  The only difference would be the boxes ticked.  I think she was completely aware of how off-putting she would be, and intended it to be so.  Perhaps she was sending a message that previous selections were just as off-putting to other viewers. 

  9. 38 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

    I tried to find a listing of them all, but couldn't. I'm not sure if there were any premieres, even among the lesser known titles shown. 

    Some people do not want to see any foreign-language or low-budget independent films, especially on "The Essentials", which many viewers seem to regard as programming that should only be movies they like.

    Here's the schedule.  As can be seen, most of them are standard TCM fare, including repeats.  Of some eighteen unique movies, as I count, five are what I see as pursuing an agenda.  That would be difficult to see as her hijacking the series and turning it into a vehicle for promoting her views. 

    Any selection of movies is an agenda, either for continuity or change.  Ava Duvernay had the temerity to unapologetically challenge people's complacency and put forth her ideas of what is essential film making. 

     

     

     

    • Like 1
© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...