Jump to content

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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About gabryant

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. Spectrum, is that Spectrum Internet only, cable only or BOTH?
  2. Fellow TCM fans, thanks for the replies! I've been through everything that each of you suggested. I only have a computer and the streaming box on the network, and I turn off the computer when I try to watch TCM. On my end, it's pretty annoying. Freezing 7-8 times an hour is not acceptable. Might have to start writing some letters to see if I can get attention paid to this. The "bill" was actually an FCC rule change about "net neutrality". NN required ISP's to treat all websites equally. FCC, over much opposition repealed the rule. The quick explanation is that ISP's can now do whatever they want - block sites, charge more for certain sites, give sites more bandwidth than others. Various groups are planning to sue the FCC over the rule change. TCM, part of Warner Media probably wouldn't feel the impact of this as it is a major player on the web. I doubt an ISP is going to try to block them or try to limit their bandwidth speeds.
  3. I have had Sling TV for about three months, mainly because it is a low cost alternate to cable for watching regular cable broadcast TCM. (Not the TCM on Demand service) However, TCM freezes on Sling. The movie will freeze for about 20 to 25 seconds. Then the screen goes blank for two to three seconds. Then the movie plays again. It picks up at where the movie is in the broadcast, NOT where it left off, so you lose the 25 or so seconds. The freeze happens anywhere from two to seven times an hour. I have watched other channels on Sling, such as HDNet, Epix Drive-In, AMC and so on without the same difficulty. I also had my ISP check out my Internet connection and rule that out as the problem. I'm about 99% certain that it's not me. I recorded "That's Entertainment" to the Sling Cloud. That movie also froze. My streaming box wasn't on at the time, so I know that the broadcast stream wasn't going through my box or Internet connection. I have called Sling multiple times, but they have not yet fixed it, and they won't give an estimate of when it will be fixed. MY QUESTIONS: 1. Has anyone else using Sling to watch TCM experienced this problem? 2. If you are not using Sling to stream TCM, what service are you using? And do you experience the freeze there as well?
  4. Maybe the word that I am looking for is "gratuitous." Defined: "uncalled for; lacking good reason; unwarranted." Applied to DePalma, of course. I don't think that I've ever found anything gratuitous in Hitchcock's films. Also, please remember that "Frenzy" was one film where the end of the Production Code and the advent of the ratings system allowed Hitchcock do what he did. Even Psycho occurred as it did because of the loosening of the Production Code. Nowadays Psycho receives an "R" rating, but prior to being re-rated for a re-release was still shown uncut on TV. Throughout the entirety of Hitchcock's career, the Production Code forced Hitchcock to be subtle in his depictions. There's nothing and has never been anything subtle about DePalma.
  5. With the ugly bloody violence of Dressed to Kill (Violent sex in the shower, the razor slashings), or Body Double (with the huge drill), DePalma descends more into a prurient sort of violence porn. No class at all there, as Hitchcock always had. And do I even need to mention the chainsaw in Scarface?
  6. Lang fits very well. And I was surprised (as all first time viewers must be) by Woman in the Window.
  7. I always get irritated when DePalma's name comes up in relation to Hitchcock. (No offense to you.) Which was why I was bound to start a thread on it eventually. Early on, some critic (please don't let it be Roger Ebert) made the first comparisons of DePalma to Hitchcock.This was probably around the time of Sisters and Obsession. (I can't help but wonder that this sort of statement was advanced in party by DePalma using Bernard Herrmann for the music.) While I would agree that Obsession was "Hitchcockian," there all comparisons end. A lot of people fell in love with Dressed to Kill. Me I found it an ugly film full of extreme sexualized violence. Then DePalma descended permanently into hackdom with 1983's Scarface. Another film of extreme violence, endless language and racially stereotyped characters. I think that I have seen one DePalma film in all of the intervening years, Mission to Mars. This film wasn't half bad, but I attribute that more to the screenwriters than to DePalma. We had a couple of early comparisons and suddenly DePalma was the heir to the Hitchcock throne. But his subsequent "product" over the years proves much the opposite.
  8. A few of us in America know of Ron Goodwin. Where Eagles Dare (his best), Battle of Britain (again replacing another composer - this time, Sir William Walton), and Force 10 From Navarone to name a few. Sadly Frenzy has never been released on LP or CD. There is one track, the main title only, which shows up on a number of Goodwin and Hitchcock film compilations, but nothing else. Mancini's rejected main title does show up on a Mancini compilation, "Mancini in Surround." http://www.soundtrackcollector.com/title/23083/Frenzy
  9. Here's are two "25 words or less" descriptions of the rise and fall of the Production Code in Hollywood, which should give you some insight into censorship of Hollywood films. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Production_Code In one way, the Production Code was a response to maintaining the commercial interests of Hollywood films. In many areas of the country, local censorship boards, usually church-based in nature, would cut up or even refuse to show films with "objectionable" content. (See the Production Code list of "Do's and Don'ts".) Another powerful group behind this was the Catholic (later National) League of Decency, representing the interests of the Roman Catholic Church in regards to Hollywood films. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Legion_of_Decency These are the "encyclopedia" entries of censorship in Hollywood. A number of books have been written on the subject, and can be found in the bibliographies of the two entries. Personally, I kind of prefer films made under the Production Code. Nowadays, just about anything goes in films. The Code required filmmakers to be creative and inventive in finding ways around it. Hitchcock did it with the kissing scene in Notorious. The Code required that Cary and Ingrid kiss for no longer than three seconds. So they continued to kiss multiple times with a break every three seconds for some dialogue. Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers in one of their films took a cigarette break after a particularly romantic dance scene. In other words, "was it good for you too?"
  10. You hit on several that I was thinking of - definitely Preston Sturges, and I've seen enough of his films to see him working in a particular genre utilizing a consistent "style." I would guess Lubitsch as well, but I've only seen the three films you mentioned - so I don't have enough information to make any sort of pronouncement. Capra and Ford most definitely. As I tried to think of more people, I kept coming back to novelists and composers. Stephen King as an author, also Isaac Asimov, Arthur C. Clarke and Ray Bradbury. Out of composers, I get Beethoven, Mozart, Aaron Copland, and a great many others, both historical and contemporary (well contemporary for my age - I know about zero about musicians currently working / performing). But of course, these suggestions stray outside of filmmaking.
  11. North by Northwest - the boy in the restaurant who puts his hands over his ears when the gun fires. Can't find any reference to the name of the actor. But he must be in his late sixties by now.
  12. Yes, I would definitely leave Tarantino out, unless you consider plagiarism (as in everything in his movies he's borrowed from some other movie) a "touch."
  13. Yes, I meant their own personal touch, developed through years of filmmaking, as Hitchcock developed his own personal touch.
  14. By way of introducing my question, I have boiled Hitchcock down to two basic ingredients: 1. The much discussed Hitchcock "touch" - which means all of the characteristics we have looked at over the weeks that define the "touch." 2. Hitchcock was at heart always a commercial filmmaker. His films were routinely made to make a return on their production investment. As I have gone through this course, I keep coming back to this question - were / are there other directors who made films in this mode? For starters, in current day film-making, there are few if no filmmakers who fit both of these ingredients. There are directors who are routinely commercial, but have no particular "touch" (IMHO). There are probably directors who have a "touch," but whose films are not generally commercial. There are potentially historical filmmakers whose work might include these two ingredients - that they had a "touch" of their own, regardless of the genre's that they worked in, and that they also made commercial films. What are your opinions - were there directors like this, and if so, who were they?
© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
  • Create New...