daddysprimadonna

Heh heh, I am a movie fan, as opposed to a movie buff(I'm told that there is a distinction), so I don't know from "gaffers",LOL. I love silents, pre-Codes, Technicolor musicals,"Broadway Melody"-style musicals, most anything up to the end of WW2. I'm not crazy about much after that-when the Jayne Mansfield, Marilyn Monroe,"blond sexpot", "battle of the sexes" stuff begins.I LOVE Norma Shearer,Mary Pickford,Lillian Gish, Myrna Loy.Don't care for the "angry young man" stuff from the late Fifties-Sixties,you know "Rebel Without A Cause", that type.They're great movies, but I like escapism a bit more, I guess, though I liked some earlier "message movies"-they were done less earnestly, I suppose, so I can bear them-you know, the James Cagney "gangster" movies,that kind of thing.I like a lot of "shallow" pictures, the glamor and fashion plate stuff,especially in the silents and pre-Codes.I love "The Women",and Joan Crawford silents,with her flappers(Our Dancing Daughters,etc).I love any "jazz baby" movies, or the "sweet silents"-"Student Prince In Old Heidelburg" is a real favorite. Hey, shoot me, I like fluff-as long as it's vintage,LOL. It just wasn't so self-conscious,to me. I like Katherine Hepburn's earlier stuff, even the hammy ones that make me cringe a little. I like the all-star extravaganzas,like "Paramount On Parade", and "The King Of Jazz"(I think it's called, I'd need to look at tape of it).I like the really early silents, Theda Bara vamping, like "A Fool There Was", or "The Sheik"(LOVE that movie! when a man could overPOWER his lady,and she fall in love with him at the end, and the women watching would SIGH, not scream,LOL).Shoot me, I'm politically incorrect:) I love the "One Reel Wonders", they're really surreal sometimes,it's great:)I ADORE all the Andy Hardy movies except the last one, Lewis Stone was great. I love Clark Gable, William Powell, Glenn Ford,Rita Hayworth,Gilbert Roland, Constance Bennett,Douglas Fairbanks(both of 'em),Greer Garson,Garbo in the silents and early talkies, and in "Camille". Oh, now you've wound me up,LOL!

We know that "classic" doesn't literally have to be "old", but I've been watching TCM for a LONG LONG time,and when I began, apparently my defintion of "classic" was the one they agreed with,because that's what they showed. What did most people who saw the "classic" in Turner Classic Movies" expect to see? When I saw "classic movies", I said "hurray!", because I knew that was a code word for vintage movies-good,bad, or indifferent. It's what TCM meant by classic also, because that's all they showed. OK, I'll be realistic and try to accept that only a small percentage(even though in primetime, it seems more) of so-called "modern classics" are shown,but it's also realistic to agree that my(and TCM's original) defintion of "classic" is what drew most of us in the first place. I would never have become a fan of TCM for movies such as "Sleepless In Seattle" or "Moonstruck", and that's not what they meant either. I'll accept that "the sky isn't falling" if TCM shows a FEW newer movies(even if they ARE showing blocks of them in primetime), if they'll be honest and admit that these "modern classics" aren't what they or I meant by "classic" when this network began. That's why they keep telling us "a movie doesn't have to be old to be classic"-because we'd already agreed that classic, in this case, meant older.

Classicsfan1119, you stated that nicely, and I HAVE been in a bit of a snit myself,and what you say is true-it's just hard to remember the big picture when I turn on TCM of a holiday night in primetime hours,expecting to while away the evening with some lovely B&W classic,or a Technicolor musical,and I see-"Sleepless In Seattle"---"Moonstruck"-etc. So being an insomniac, I waited up for "Holiday", and then "Forsaking All Others"(reading in the meantime,I HATE modern movies),and when they came on, I felt like I was watching TCM again:) As far as Silent Sundays,I guess it just FEELS like it gets bumped many times,more than it actually does when I see it on paper.I know I'm only griping and venting,but we fans love our TCM, I've been loyal for many many years(my cable company has carried it forEVer),and feel very "propietary" towards TCM and its classic format,probably because it IS the only place to see movies of this kind,and we don't want it diluted. So, sorry for the wild ranting:)

OOps, Ok, I'll do so:)

...TCM is FINALLY going to show "Chance At Heaven"!!! I've wanted to see this movie again forEVer, I first saw it many many years ago on that OTHER "classic" movie channel(which is classic no more), and I loved it-I've begged TCM to show it for the longest, and they're going to in march!!! Yeeaaayyy!!!! I'll be waiting with bated(but minty fresh,LOL) breath!

Look, there's no need to be snitty with me for having my own opinion. I wasn't snitty with anyone here. I read all the opinions, and yes, I agreed with dredagain. Why would you take that personally? I know what I considered to be a "classic" movie when I began watching TCM, and so did they-what did they think I expected to see with "classic" in the label??? I don't need my defintion redefined, it was good enough when I began TCM, because they used it too. You disagree, and that's YOUR right.

THANK YOU dredagain!!! I just ranted in a new topic about this, I'm glad I'm not alone!That's what I'm trying to say, most of us became TCM fans because of the "classic" in the title, and most us tacitly accepted that "classic" meant "old", as in silent or silver screen or studio system, and TCM did too, until recently. They know darn good and well why most of us watch.Silent Sundays has become a joke, and the "classic" in Turner Classic Movies is right behind it!! It's back to my video and DVD collection!

I'm beginning to be SOO over TCM,they look for any reason to not show Silent Sundays anymore,heck, they're getting to where they they hardly show CLASSICS (at least in prime time) anymore-I thought it was Turner CLASSIC Movies,and most of us became fans thinking "classic" was silver screen,and so did TCM, because that's all they USED to show-oh well, back to buying movies and watching my own collection, so I can see OLD movies!! And TCM can just give up this fiction of a Silent Sunday, seeing as they preempt it into non-existance anymore

I agree, I like watching the "One Reel Wonders", and I want to see things the way they were then, geeze,do we have to rewrite movie history or do away with it too??

I've had to skip watching TCM SOOOOO much this month, and lately for that matter, because they're NOT showing "classic" movies-they know darn good and well that people equate "classic" with "silver screen" era movies, when they watch TCM-why are they doing this???!!! I guess, there goes ANOTHER good classic movie channel down the drain. They started with just showing the movie-good,bad,famous,obscure-and I was thrilled to see things,especially silents and early Thirties, that I'd never have had a chance to see otherwise. NOW they're showing all this newer and newer mess-OK< some of it's not TOO bad, but I watch TCM for REAL classics, and they know what that means to most TCM fans as well as those fans do! Yes, I'm really aggravated, had to get this off my chest-they keep adding more "talk" and silly guest hosts, like that silly Sidney Pollack-I liked it better when they just showed the movie(except for Robert Osborne), and back when they used to show what most of us accept to be "classic' movies,as in old! Ok, that's my rant, for all the good it'll do.

"What is on TCM's schedule tonight...Good Lord, the Saturday Night Live cast! Has this network entered the AMC zone? I mean A League of Their Own, Driving Miss Daisy, but Tootsie and Fletch...COME ON! DO NOT WATCH ANYTHING ON TCM TONIGHT. I CERTAINLY WILL NOT BE DOING THAT." cjrogan2003, I agree with you-I know there's an audience for movies of a later era, but I became a TCM fan to see classic movies, and I've definitely not been watching all the later movies TCM's been showing lately.I don't like too many movies made past the WW2 time, and my favorites are from the silent era,pre-codes, and Thirties.It's kind of a shame to get sucked in by the "good" stuff, only to have the old "bait and switch" pulled.There are other channels for those movies-TCM is all there is,in my area anyway, for the old truly classic movies.

This isn't about them just putting on "what I want". THEY are the ones who have so-called "Silent Sundays", and THEY are the ones who make it a regularly scheduled thing to look forward to-and then THEY are the ones who pre-empt it more often than not. They could STILL show the dum 60s-70s movies(and compete with AMC), and not mess with Silent Sundays. I'm not saying they have to do something THEY haven't already implicitly promised to do by CALLING it "Silent Sundays"!

I'm MAD-why even BOTHER with a so-called "Silent Sunday" if you're not going to even HAVE it half the time? Why pretend it will be a regular thing, instead of just honestly scheduling silent movies now and then? I'm SO mad! I look forward to a silent movie on Sunday ALL WEEK, and then-NOTHING! Plus they're showing all this 60's-70's mess lately-are we losing yet ANOTHER "classic" movie channel? God, how I wish I had the money to begin my own classic movie channel-I'd know how to do it right, and when I regularly scheduled silent movies, it would be more often than late Sunday night, and I wouldn't CHEAT the viewers out of them when I did! Like they show SUCH a variety of silents as it is-Chaplin, Lloyd, Keaton, the so-called "landmark" silents- and that's usually about it. Hardly ever any Joan Crawford or Clara Bow "jazz baby" silents, hardly any Mary Pickford or Lillian Gish, hardly EVER any Gloria Swanson, or the society or "tea time" high society silents that people then AND now loved to see for the escapism and glimpse of an enviable fantasy life. i just can't BELIEVE it-WHY WHY WHY?

I think he came into his own as an older man. Kind of like, in John Wayne's REALLY early stuff, he too looks like just another pleasant young actor, but became an icon as an older man. Ronald Reagan was just-pleasant-as a young man, but he had plenty of charisma and character as President. The self-confidence they acquired, I suppose, as they grew older,brought out the strong qualities.

I'm with you, I can't stand "Citizen Kane". I LOVE Doctor Zhivago, I'd have to love it for the camera work if nothing else. I couldn't say, as far as new release movies go-I never watch them, haven't watched one, except for "Titanic" in years. (Those good films on "A&E" don't count, LOL). I hate Westerns where the women's hair is too obviously an anachronism(which I guess is a LOT of them!), and most movies starting with the Fifties(I have exceptions of course). I LIKE those strange Harryhausen movies-especially "Clash of the Titans" and "Atlantis". The Fifties and Sixties seem like the worst for shoving their style aesthetic into movies where it didn't belong-no matter WHAT, the female has a variation of a cinched waist in the Fifties, or a teased poofy backcombed hairstyle in the Sixties. It aggravates me to death! But I just a Western where Lana Turner had as Forties a pompadour as she could have-that was aggravating too.

Yes, he gave a GREAT "performance", as President, and I don't think he needed to forget anything he did-he was a MEMORABLE President, in a positive way,and it's sad that he, or anyone else for that matter, gets Alzheimer's, it's sad for their families, and I would have loved to have heard or read his stories of his acting days or White House days, if he hadn't been stricken with this awful disease.I wouldn't have glee for anyone getting Alzheimer's, and certainly not merely because I disagreed with their politics.

Vivien Leigh! A gorgeous classic beauty, and from what I've read, just as beautiful "behind the lights", minus the max Factor Pancake and special lighting-a "daytime beauty" also. I would LOVE to have seen her in the flesh-true classic beauty is a rarity, especially these days-Vivien Leigh, the "pocket Venus"

Of course he was no Lawrence Olivier or Jimmy Stewart,but I think he was perfectly competent, and in the mid-range level of actors-there WEREN'T that many who were up there with Olivier for acting talent, or Gable for charisma,or John Wayne for force of character. There were many actresses and actors who were attractive,pleasant, and competent, and I think he he's in that range.

Thank you, you explained it well! It rather correlates to the way that I don't think children of today(speaking generally) can appreciate the old fairy tales(especially The Brothers Grimm)in their unadulterated form,without them being made "cutesy". Of course, that's the adults' fault,for thinking that the stories are too "above" the children's grasp,or dumbing them down in the name of making them "politically correct". The sheer fantasy, and the naked struggle between good and evil isn't acceptable anymore.I'm still not able to articulate exactly what I feel about it, but this little gem of a movie is a perfect example of it.The story is almost Wagnerian,only with the aesthetics of Erte'. And I think the concept of "charm", in its old-fashioned sense, is a long-lost anachronism.

I'd go along with your era, if I was just FORCED to choose one-the few films I've seen from that era are just AMAZING, especially often in the choice of subject. But on the other hand I love Joan Crawford's flapper movies. People often think of Mary Pickford/Lillian Gish when they think of movies from that time(the earlier silent era), and those are just GREAT-I love both of those actresses-but some of the lesser known films from that time are fascinating for their gritty subject matter and the adult handling of subjects. But I also love the ones that still have a Victorian/Edwardian sensibilty. Also, when I saw "Les Vampires" on TCM, it was a revelation!

Did anyone else watch it last night? That movie was COMPLETELY charming! I loved it! it makes me so sad that there could never be a film like that again(as with so many others:( )-the innocence of the story, with the sophistication of the technique! I can't explain it very well, but it was just so...charming! Were the children of yesteryear more-dare I say-no, I'll put it this way-were the expectations of their intellect higher,combined with more of an assumption of innocence? I just can't explain-this movie was SO appealing on a level both children and adults could appreciate-without the false sentimentality or garish effects(not to mention the "smart-alecky all-knowing" juvenile characters)of modern "family" movies. Does anyone know what I mean(in spite of myself,LOL)?

I don't have anything at all against TCM having a "showcase" month for the Bollywood films, I like the chance to see other films-HOWEVER, I have a big disagreement with those few who've said they'd like to see this become a regular thing on TCM-TCM is the only channel out there where you can see classic HOLLYWOOD films,and TCM has let a lot of us long-time fans down as it is, showing movies that couldn't be called "classic" by any stretch of the definition. I know they like to say that a movie doesn't have to be old to be a classic, but in general, that is the accepted definition of the word,and for those of us who consider anything later than Hollywood's "Golden Era" to be beyond "classic", TCM has fallen down on the job a bit. There are other places to see these other movies! There are SO many silent films out there that TCM could be showing(and they aren't consistent with "Silent Sundays" as it is),and we became the loyal fan base because of CLASSIC HOLLYWOOD, SILVER SCREEN movies.It's not a question of being closed-minded,but that's not what made us fans of TCM. This isn't directed at the Bollywood showcase, actually it's interesting to see the film style of another culture, but more at some here who are saying it should be a regular feature. NO, not on TCM! There could be more "showcase" type events, or another channel, but TCM is not the place for it, on a regular basis! The films of the silent era and the Silver Screen era have barely had the surface scratched,showing a completely different genre on a consistent basis would crowd them out even more!And PLEASE don't misunderstand-NOTHING against this showcase, or any that may be in the future-but keep them SHOWCASES, a once-in-a-while thing, NOT turn them into a regular feature! Why, even in the "Complicated Women" showcase last month,which featured films that are "classic Hollywood" by any criteria, there were SO many films that could have been included beyond the ones that were. If TCM begins to "fudge" on its classic Hollywood focus,many of us will need to return to what we did before-seeking these films out on our own and watching them on VHS or DVD,because TCM just won't fill the void anymore. And this is NOT a slam against a "Bollywood", or any other "different" showcase-just don't forget to "now return to our regularly scheduled programming", LOL.

And here's a great article on flappers from "The New Republic" magazine published September 9 1925. Really funny and informative:)

If you want to hear some really good tunes from the Jazz Age, before the Big Band Sound came in(I love that also though), go to Live 365, there are about three stations that play all Jazz Age music. I'm listening to the station "Sweet & Lovely" right now, it's great! To find the others, just do a search with the term "twenties"

I love the flapper fashions, especially the debutante dresses-I always thought that "flapper" style meant the shortish straight dresses, but now that I know better, I LOVE those feminine dresses with the fuller skirts, the sheer delicate fabrics, and often many layers-some of the skirts were fashioned like hundreds of little flower petals making the skirt. They are just beautiful! And the hats-why oh why don't we wear hats anymore, I mean REALLY wear hats, not just now and then, but regularly!Women were so elegant then, and dainty,and perfectly groomed-nothing these days or for a long time since then comes even remotely close! I even like the hair styles-marcelled or curls or rolled under in the back, or ANY of the styles:)