RDeLisle
-
Posts
15 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by RDeLisle
-
-
Personally, I find it fascinating to see whch 4 films that celebrities pick as special to them. It is an interesting look at a side to them we don't know about. .
I suppose. But it is not terribly interesting to find out the famous guest likes what everyone else does , probably me included, unless you hunger for the common touch in the famous.
Do guest programmers live in a vacuum ? Or just their own little world, like me.
One might hope that someone who is an extraordinary observer of the world and known for originality like Bradbury might recall some really good things not stabled with the war horses.
As to looking good with Osborne, that's the dig a little deeper part, most of the guest programmers seem to be people not unacquainted with being before the public.
Guest programmer is not the same as showcase of cinema rarities, that is understood.
Wouldn't it be something if some seemingly great guest whipped out a bunch of Chuck Norris stuff or vintage CB/Trucker flicks because that's what the programmer really enjoys off the platform! Too much information? Give me my third Citizen Kane that month and preserve the facade!
Going another way, I have an acquaintance that if he were guest programmer you might get:
Gallipoli (ok, but wait ....)
Supervixens (a big Russ Meyer fan back in the 70's, nostalgia item) *
Salo, 21 Days of Sodom (he regularly recommends this movie, might be joking, not sure)
* Were you aware that Roger Ebert's only credits in making movies are three Russ Meyer
movies: Beyond the Valley of the Dolls, Up!, and Beneath the Valley of the Ultravixens.
Might get some surprises if HE were to dig a little deeper some night!
If I were guest programmer Grave of the Fireflies would at least make the short list.
and one last thing: , .
If NBC has tied up "It's a Wonderful Life" it is a real shame that is will not be showing without cuts and commercials. Then again if one can afford cable, one can probably afford a few DVDs. How many of you hard core classic movie fans out there depend on TCM for your hard core favorites that are available on DVD? That is why I was so pleased that Brian Dennehy had also noticed the Wrong Box, a movie that is never shown anywhere lately even with commercials and not out on DVD (just checked at Amazon, not there, some aging VHS available at reasonable prices).
-
It certainly doesn't follow the book exactly, and I wish it had even if that would drop it an instant gazillion points on the chickflickometer. In the book Holly runs off to South America with her designated gaucho to raise little brown babies (wasn't that her expression for the skip the jurisdiction option?, its been awhile since I read this) on the pampa to avoid further risk from her criminal connections in New York. Gigolo moves on, looks back wistfully. If there was a cat I have no idea where it went. No big life affirming moral about mutual dependency, just a curious remembrance of a genuine sui generis female in his past. Not nearly as commerical as the movie's weepy finale with gigolo and tramp pledging mutual salvation in the face of ruin while saving the cat from the cold cruel world (even if its not at the Empire State building). Think I'll go wear out a few more hankies on the Dirty Dozen.
A splendid vehicle for the sparkling Audrey Hepburn in her prime, and that, I think, is what carries this well crafted trifle to the popular esteem it enjoys.
Message was edited by: RDeLisle
-
lzcutter - Good to have real information on that point. If the difference between former in-house movies and the rest is small it should help not harm the flexibility for more imaginative selections by the guest programmer.
-
If only Reagan''s Hollywood years had been his only years of importance, the vast majority of us would be better off.
Message was edited by: RDeLisle
-
It was my understanding that Turner's library was something immense (as reported years ago when he was cornering the market at the expense of AMC), perhaps so large that not all the movies could be shown in a single year without one repettion. I also see plenty of great but unusual movies turning up at odd hours and on the international segment Monday mornings (most of these turn up on the Criterion collection DVD line). So the existing potential should cover a great deal of a what a programmer might request not to say that it will cover everything since quite a bit that acquisition is "classic" only in the sense of being old. I am pretty sure that the type of movies I have in mind are not prohibitively expensive anyway but some may be hard to get.
Interesting idea, all the same, although it undercuts the concept of guest programmer more than a little if the selections are strictly limited by existing inventory and minimizing cost. In that case, why bother presenting the program as having that special individuality since we already have the "essentials" format where the value added is entirely in the chat between franchise player Osborne and a co-host, currently Rose McGowan, and the movies are out of the TCM library.
-
How many wish as I do that guest programmers be strongly discouraged, if not actually prohibited (mustn't ruffle those celebrity feathers), from presenting movies, regardless of how indisputably great they may be, that routinely appear on TCM, and have actually appeared within the last six months. The coming Bradbury night is extremely disappointing in this regard as all of his picks get regular exposure on TCM (and most have been shown in the last two months I think). Let them dig a bit deeper to find movies they genuinely admire that are a bit harder to find on TCM or anywhere else.
I was very appreciative when Brian Dennehy presented the rarely seen and never on DVD gem, The Wrong Box. (It's on one DVD now!) Guest programmer night can be more than just a large caliber chat with Osborne around the usual fare.
-
It will be interesting. The list of remakes of great or even near-great movies than even equal let alone surpass their predecessor is very short indeed at least in comparison to the list of opposite results. This has been especially true recently when the emphasis has been on special effects, showcasing expensive (mostly young) talent, showcasing the "brilliant re-imagining" of some auteur or showcasing the big budget, usually compounded by a snarky contemporary writing style that will go stale almost instantly, all at the expense of the qualities and integrity that made an earlier version great.
-
Without disrespect to Mr. Bradbury, I am disappointed that he has chosen to show us a set of indisputable but so thoroughly familiar classics that are so regularly featured on the regular TCM schedule. I am fairly sure that all have been shown within the last year and most of them within the last month or two.
I would appreciate it if the guest programmers would consult the TCM schedule and dig a bit deeper to find movies they really admire that are not already staples on the TCM schedule. We all know these are great cinema and Mr. Bradbury does not have to prove he has good taste by picking them.
As an example of more imaginative guest programming, I was most appreciative when Brian Dennehy brought out The Wrong Box, a fine comedy that I have not seen broadcast in many years and never out on DVD or even recent VHS. It is also the next best example, after Bedazzled (1967), of Peter Cook and Dudley Moore working together.
Is there a guest programmer contest yet, that mere mortals can enter?
-
I remember it and recall it being excellent.
-
I liked Cable Guy but I have no use at all for Ace Ventura (especially the sequel), Carrey films are either interesting or really dumb it seems. Truman Show - good. Bruce Almighty-waste of celluloid (poor story development, lame obvious gags, trite and corny (guy with sign bit is worst). Man in the Moon - good or at least nice try. Majestic - nice try but fades into a kind knee-jerk anti-McCarthy line that is ok except it has been done, and much better.
-
I think her ego and careerism has gotten in the way of whatever ability she has for acting in cinema. She did her part admirably in League of Their Own, an excellent performance, no scene stealing, real ensemble work, as it should be, shows potential. Beyond that I must agree with you, Case in point: Evita where she has the show itself altered so that no one but her sings a female part. Other cases: all those really bad vehicle movies. Capper: truly rotten remake of Swept Away (but then we could go on for days about the miles of wasted celloid spent on unnecessary and awful remakes (and a few seconds on the handful of worthwhile ones, is there a rotten remake thread here somewhere?).
-
There is definitely some adjustment in Spirted Away. In the American version, the young woman working in the furnance room has a tone of skeptical practicality with an edge of sharp wit. My impression of the Japanese version is that her tone is a traditional assertion of her superior position with a scolding tone (and the response is always "hai" in keeping with this impression). I think it worked well, but it is a definite change with cultural implications.
This is no particular reason that good anime should be regarded differently from other distinguished foreign films, or the work of Japanese speaking voice actors inferior to their visible counterparts. My best argument for that is Grave of the Fireflies, which is of such power that it is stands as a great movie that was made with animation rather than genre anime (and I have only seen the subtitled version of this one).
Just the same, it appears to me that a well written dubbing and the right choice of voice actors is usually less damaging to animated features than to movies using filmed actors. The matching of words to mouth movement is much less demanding for animation, allowing a freer use of effective language without the choice between bad and jarringly obvious lip synchronization, or terrible and awkward lines chosen only to match the actors mouth on film. The great thing is that with DVD technology one can have it both ways in the same package.
-
Missed this one, but I am pleased to see TCM give time to such anime works, and I hope they keep it up on a limited basis (just like the silents and lofty subtitled European works (Bergman etc) are pretty limited to few hours and remote times).
Not sure where to stand on the subtitling issue with these works. Spirted Away seems to be very well dubbed, there seems to be much opinion that the others are usually less well served, and no one advocates running non-animated foreign movies with dubbing in a serious venue like TCM at least. (StarZ runs a dubbed King of Hearts once in a while, yuck).
-
Did I miss something? From the intro on TCM I understood there is no valid "original two hour version" of Greed. There was an original nine hour version that was brutally edited to get the two hour version as ordered by studio head Irving Thalberg (whose name is now attached to an award for movie excellence, ironically in view of this case). Further to directly insult, punish and crush Von Stroheim, the cut footage was not just omitted but ordered destroyed. Thus we have no valid "original" nor much hope of assembling a much of a real restoration. I have not seen the two hour version, but I regarded this attempt as successful since I enjoyed it and it held my attention, and was worth the time. Putting in stills is hardly ideal, but to regain something of the scope and continuity of Von Stroheim actual original justifies the unfortunate compromise forced on us by power struggles and personal feuds long past, at least when it works as well as this one. And the "original" is all nice and restored ready to watch for anyone who disagrees.
Great Guest Programmers, Really Dull Programs. Please dig a little deeper.
in Hot Topics
Posted
I am the enemy of all the progressives here that desire everything new under the sun to be aired on TCM.
I often cringe when anything past the 70's appears on TCM without a clear special purpose. I think the little anime segment a while back was about as far as that sort of thing should go. If done at all it should be done sparingly and with something definitely extra interesting about it (or the whim of the guest programmer). If someone wants mainstream stuff of recent vintage on a regular basis, even if inarguably a future "classic", that is what Encore and the rest of the premium channels are for, not to mention NetFlix or purchase. TCM has a some definite roles to play. The primary role being continuing exposure for movies of a certain age and older right back to Edison's lab, not all masterpieces as we see quite often (they have shown Plan 9 from Outer Space at least twice in the last year or two, and that is a borderline call at any age). Next comes their fine work in restoration and scoring silents. Last is a minor film education role with features of special interest with some more recent than usual. Movies like Adam Sandler's Mr Deeds should NEVER appear on TCM, ever.
This raises the question of when stuff that was new when I was a child becomes "classic" in the same sense that much (but less than half I think) of what is on TCM is, which is to say. OLD, just OLD. Assuming that the basic format of cable TV does not change much, there will have to be a TCM-2, to do for a later era what TCM does now for its main body of work from the 30's-50's. I don't want TCM to turn into AMC or any of the other Turner channels for that matter. TCM has class and I hope it can stay that way and be economically viable at the same time going forward.
On the other hand, if TV becomes a vast On Demand system then the discussion above and many others here will be moot. TCM will not be a channel, but just the best menu out of many for vintage and quality, that you can make what you want it to be.