FredCDobbs

> For many of you, this will be a rehash of a post I > have done more than once: > > Thirteen years ago when TCM became a network, we were > not in the digital server age but a video tape server > age. > That's a bunch of hooey. TCM is showing more modern movies because of a management decision, just like AMC did. And TCM is losing its traditional viewer base because of all this modern crap they are showing, and because they are putting their old classical films on the air at 3 AM in the morning, when none of us old movie fans can watch them. Then they screw up on the timing of their films and we can't even tape them.

ABOVE SUSPICION RASHOMON FLIGHT TOBACCO ROAD MIRACLE OF THE BELLS DESRAELI SEVEN SAMURAI BLOW-UP JUAREZ THE MAGIC BULLET SVENGALI WHAT PRICE HOLLYWOOD STAR WITNESS THEY WON?T BELIEVE ME TRIUMPH OF THE WILL OLYMPIA UNCLE HARRY MISSION TO MOSCOW OSS THE BLUE ANGEL THE GENERAL DIES AT DAWN STEAMBOAT BILL JR. THE NAVIGATOR CAPTAIN FROM CASTILE THE SEVENTH CROSS PHANTOM LADY STANLEY AND LIVINGSTON NIGHT OF THE IGUANA JOHNNIE BELINDA THE SIN OF MADELEN CLAUDET OPERATOR SORCERER ALL THIS AND HEAVEN TOO LONE STAR THE GENERAL WILD BOYS OF THE ROAD JOURNEY INTO FEAR MIRACLE IN THE RAIN EMIEL ZOLA LOUIS PASTEUR WHITE CARGO MACAO THE SEVENTH VICTIM HOUSE OF SEVEN GABLES PAYMENT DEFERRED SALT OF THE EARTH

> No. By "narrow minded" I meant having an extreme > dislike of anything "new" . I don?t care about the physical age of a film. There are a lot of us who used to like TCM because older films were more artistic. Newer films are less artistic. It?s like people who love listening to classical music and all of a sudden their favorite radio station starts playing punk rock, while there are already half a dozen punk rock stations on the air.

> All of these debates about how the programming sucks > gets on my nerves. I mostly like newer stuff from > after the 50's, You can watch that stuff on half a dozen other channels. AMC started out for people like us, showing older films that are rare and classic. A few years later they decided they could make more money turning AMC into a commercial ?Woman?s Channel?, so for several years they showed many made for TV movies about women, the same thing and the same films half a dozen other women's channels were showing. The AMC profits fell. Now they are experimenting with some older movies again. TCM started by showing older films and classics from several eras. They are tired of that now and they are showing turkeys now from the ?50s, ?60s, ?70s, and ?80s. They, like AMC, are losing their main audience that made them a big network to start with. I don?t watch TCM much anymore. There is not a film showing all day today that I want to see. I don?t post on this board much anymore. If the TCM price goes up on my satellite system, I?m going to drop it altogether.

Ok, now, 6 days after the crash, they finally use their direction finding antenna.

Ok now, 5 days after the crash, John Wayne tells one of his men to go get the flares out of the airplane.

There must be hundreds of thousands of Americans who can see the defects in this film. Military people, boy scouts, lumber men, all Canadians, sailors, etc. The pine trees burn easily, so they should have set fire to the trees. They have a hand-crank generator that can be used to send radio signals. They have emergency flares which they did not use with the search planes flew overhead. There are planes equipped with direction finder antennals, loop antennas, they can track down the exact source of the outgoing SOS signals.

It's on now. Stupid movie. 1 They should have turned around and flown SE as soon as they began to ice up. They flew directly into the ice conditions instead of flying out of it. 2 They should have used 10 gallons of the gas to start a fire among some of the trees, It could have been seen from the air for 100 miles or more. 3 The DC3 batteries would have been good enough for radio transmission for more than a week. An SOS every hour on the hour by telegraph would have taken little electricity. They didn't need to use the power consuming voice transmissions. 4 They should not have moved out of the DC3 and into a makeshift stick hut. The hut is much colder inside than the inside of the DC3 because of the wind flowing into the cracks in the hut. The DC3 was sealed from wind. 5 The hunter should not have gone off alone. He should have carried a compass and gone due North or East or West or South. Every airman has an emergency compass. 6 There should have been plenty of elk, moose, and deer in that area of Canada. 7 The landing scene was not very well edited. The air men should have been strapped in their seats rather than standing up and in the doorway of the pilot's cabin. 8 If they didn't want to turn around, they should have turned South or South West, where there were many populated areas in the Northern US. Flying on Northwest into Canada was a stupid thing to do.

Waaaaa! How sad this movie is, "In Which We Serve."

I think that is just a short, about 10 minutes or less, It has run several times this month.

I just saw "Hero" with Dustin Hoffman, 1992. Very good, interesting, unusual film. Happy ending. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0104412/

Could be. I don't remember the scene.

These were different groups having some of the same members at different times. By the mid 1950s, they were promoted as Johnny Puleo and his group. Puleo can be seen in the second picture down: http://www.harmonicats.com/history1.htm

I haven?t seen the movie in a long time, but she might be making cheese by squeezing the water out of the cheese through cheesecloth.

I think it was just a mix of ?It Should Happen to You? (Gladas Glover becomes a famous nobody and goes on TV promoting stuff) and ?Meet John Doe? (who is a made-up character who disappoints everyone).

The trumpet and the Dixieland jazz music, and the sleazy apartment, and the blond dames, indicates to me that the film was a pure knock-off, an imitation of a sleazy Tennessee Williams play or a William Faulkner novel. This film was made during the same era as the ?It?s Trad, Dad? movie that TCM aired a few months ago, that showed how young British people were fascinated with New Orleans type Jazz music back in the late ?50s and early ?60s. This happened to be a time when the Williams plays and Faulkner novels were being made into movies in the US. I lived in New Orleans in that era and I remember meeting a lot of young British guys who had came over to spend a few months in the city, studying the decaying old-South culture and the jazz music. Even in America back then we had our own imitation Williams/Faulkner movies, such as Young Man With a Horn, Flamingo Road. And of course we had Streetcar Named Desire, but I?ve never thought of Richard Burton playing a Marlon Brando or Kirk Douglas type. Once Laurence Olivier played ?Big Daddy? in ?Cat on a Hot Tin Roof? in a TV production in 1976, but I just couldn?t get used to his British accent, and when he said, ?I gonna knock you in the haid, boy!? I fell out of my chair laughing.

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:j3jsf5WBtC1BqM:http://whatscookingamerica.net/Foto3/RollReady2.jpg

Well, most of the modern movies that are nice to Indians have a lot of cussin', and all the older ones that don't have cussin' tend to make Indians look bad.

This movie, Look Back In Anger, started out with a Dixieland jazz band in a bar in a place that looked like New Orleans. Then it cut to Richard Burton walking around London with a trumpet, but yelling at women like Stanley Kowalski while sounding like William Shakespeare. And hey, look at that poster! Isn?t that Baby Doll there on the left? I guess this is the British version of the old South....... old Southampton. Ha, ha, ha, ha! See poster: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0051879/posters Message was edited by: FredCDobbs

> I missed "face in the crowd" - never saw that film. You haven't missed anything.

http://vinyloddities.blogspot.com/2006/01/johnny-puleo-and-his-harmonica-gang.html

Johnny Puleo http://imdb.com/name/nm0700306/

Me too.

Me either.

That's right.