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

A film we don't talk about, a film TCM will never be able to air?


Recommended Posts

Thanks for explaining all of it, but it still sounds confusing. When you say Alan Ladd Jr. bought the rights to the 1977 film, are you saying he bought the rights for Fox or for his own company?

 

 

Think he was still working for Fox at the time, not sure, but he bought the '77 film for Fox.  And Fox still has it.

Fox licensed the rest of the sectology from Lucas, but Lucasfilm was independent after the first movie.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Think he was still working for Fox at the time, not sure, but he bought the '77 film for Fox.  And Fox still has it.

Fox licensed the rest of the sectology from Lucas, but Lucasfilm was independent after the first movie.

 

Okay, thanks. But what still doesn't make sense is why FXM/Retro doesn't air it if they own it. And why it's never been leased to TCM.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know another film we will never see again...SONG OF THE SOUTH...that's for certain...we'll never see it anywhere.

 

Basically, most of Disney's archive now wants to release it, but top-man Bob Iger doesn't.  

(Because he believes the same urban legend that Remus was a "slave", even though the movie is ambiguously set in sharecropper Reconstruction.)

 

After Iger first joked, then insulted ,and then ignored, the regular stockholder-meeting questions on it, the release has now become a Retirement-Watch for when Iger says he's going to step down, and he keeps pushing back the date.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically, most of Disney's archive now wants to release it, but top-man Bob Iger doesn't.  

(Because he believes the same urban legend that Remus was a "slave", even though the movie is ambiguously set in sharecropper Reconstruction.)

 

After Iger first joked, then insulted ,and then ignored, the regular stockholder-meeting questions on it, the release has now become a Retirement-Watch for when Iger says he's going to step down, and he keeps pushing back the date.

 

Sharecropper in the south at that time weren't much better than slaves. They still couldn't just up and leave at will. They still had to sneak away in the middle of the night. Its not as if conditions changed the moment the civil war was over.

 

That is simply an era many do not wish to revisit. Its not really a political correctness issue. its simply a business decision. People look to classic film to be entertained. Not too many are tuning in to be depressed.

 

Warner Bros. caught a lot of heat when they released a box set of Bugs Bunny cartoons. And didn't notice all the older, rarely seen episodes with very negative stereotypes. There were lots of complaints and they ended up pulling the box set back and editting out those offense episodes then rereleasing them.

 

So to go along with the thread, those offensive episodes will probably never be seen on TCM or anywhere else for a while.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
....

That is simply an era many do not wish to revisit. Its not really a political correctness issue. its simply a business decision. People look to classic film to be entertained. Not too many are tuning in to be depressed.

 

Warner Bros. caught a lot of heat when they released a box set of Bugs Bunny cartoons. And didn't notice all the older, rarely seen episodes with very negative stereotypes. There were lots of complaints and they ended up pulling the box set back and editting out those offense episodes then rereleasing them........

So, are you saying most people wouldn't be entertained by seeing Song of the South? I think most people would , especially since they have had no say in the matter for years....

And that's great that the talentless hacks at WB feel no shame in basically permanently chopping up the works of actual artists, with you know, real talent, cuz a few people complained...

Hey, Martin Scorsese , and Sam Peckinpah films are really violent, they may be promoting violence as a solution, let's edit the violence out of those films...Isn't there a violent attack on a woman in Hitchcock's Frenzy? That might promote violence against women too. Let's just ban that film from ever showing on tv or ever being released on any other formats. Then every thing will be great.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't make sense to me, with practically the entire nation on some cable or satellite television service that provides  up to 400+ channels of alternatives for someone to get so upset and demand some channel or other to quit showing what THEY feel is offensive content, when all it takes is a tap of a finger to find some INOFFENSIVE entertainment.

 

IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE?  Seems to me that ONE network controlling the rights and not letting some OTHER network show it really doesn't subscribe to the Christmas spirit, doesn't it?

 

Not showing SONG OF THE SOUTH because it displays what some consider a "politically incorrect" image of African Americans is kinda dumb.  Perhaps then, we should excise the facts and any mention of the Antebellum South from all American History textbooks.

 

Since "free" TV is pretty much dead in the water these days, I feel anyone who pays for television service should be able to see anything they wish to see.  And as I stated, with so many areas to choose from, to see it or not should be left up to the individual, and NObody should be afforded the right to decide what EVERYONE ELSE should be "allowed" to watch.

 

You know...."land of the free" and all that....

 

 

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites

IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE?  Seems to me that ONE network controlling the rights and not letting some OTHER network show it really doesn't subscribe to the Christmas spirit, doesn't it?

 

Interesting comment. I wonder what NBC pays to keep IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE each year, and how many years the deal runs for...if someone has information on it, please share.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It doesn't make sense to me, with practically the entire nation on some cable or satellite television service that provides  up to 400+ channels of alternatives for someone to get so upset and demand some channel or other to quit showing what THEY feel is offensive content, when all it takes is a tap of a finger to find some INOFFENSIVE entertainment.

 

 

You answer your own question right here. Because there are so many channels, now is not the time to give a viewer a reason to tap that remote. The idea of programming is to get people to watch your programming. Not turn away. 

 

There are many films not shown by TCM and other because offensive content. And many groups besides blacks who get offended. Consider yourself fortunate they do show films like "The Sheik (1921)" or "Breakfast at Tiffany's(1961)"  because there are those who wish otherwise. 
 

 

IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE?  Seems to me that ONE network controlling the rights and not letting some OTHER network show it really doesn't subscribe to the Christmas spirit, doesn't it?

 

Most movies' rights are controlled by ONE network. Not sure what the point is here. There are plenty of other christmas films to watch. Or you could "tap that finger" and tune over to that network that is showing it . 

 

 

 

Not showing SONG OF THE SOUTH because it displays what some consider a "politically incorrect" image of African Americans is kinda dumb.  Perhaps then, we should excise the facts and any mention of the Antebellum South from all American History textbooks.

 

For all the comments I read on this site about SOTS, you would think this must be up there with Citzen Kane and Casablanca. I don't see the big to do about this film one way or the other.

 

And speaking of facts ? I would love to see this history book article about the kindly old man

who was always grinning, happy to be poor living in a shack. Not quite sure what school teaches that. 

 

Since "free" TV is pretty much dead in the water these days, I feel anyone who pays for television service should be able to see anything they wish to see.  And as I stated, with so many areas to choose from, to see it or not should be left up to the individual, and NObody should be afforded the right to decide what EVERYONE ELSE should be "allowed" to watch.

 

Anyone who pays for a  service should watch what they service is showing. Or choose not to pay.

 

The American way is to start one's own service and show whatever you like to show.  And deal with whatever backlash comes with it. And there's lots of people doing just that. Many showing the offensive content others will not show.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There are many films not shown by TCM and other because offensive content. And many groups besides blacks who get offended. Consider yourself fortunate they do show films like "The Sheik (1921)" or "Breakfast at Tiffany's(1961)"  because there are those who wish otherwise. 

 

 

 

But how do they choose which ones are allowed to air and which ones are not, when they all contain offensive stereotypes? The programmers occasionally schedule DRAGON SEED, presumably because it stars Katharine Hepburn and is in the TCM/Turner library.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But how do they choose which ones are allowed to air and which ones are not, when they all contain offensive stereotypes? The programmers occasionally schedule DRAGON SEED, presumably because it stars Katharine Hepburn and is in the TCM/Turner library.

 

Does TCM really not show films because of offensive stereotypes?   I don't recall TCM management ever acknowledging this.   Of course there is a gray area here;  the cost of leasing the a film with offensive stereotypes combined with the limited appeal of said film, could be the reason TCM doesn't lease it.   In this manner being 'PC' does impact the final decision but it isn't the leading driver (which is what I meant by 'gray area').

 

Dragon Seed looks like a good example of this 'gray area';    The film is inexpensive to lease and has a major star (TCM is clearly star driven);  These factors trump any PC concerns.  

 

The Charlie Chan films fall on the other side of this gray area;  They are Fox Films and the cost to obtain these films (assuming Fox would even lease them to TCM),  along with the PC concerns leads to the final decision NOT to lease them.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dragon Seed looks like a good example of this 'gray area';    The film is inexpensive to lease and has a major star (TCM is clearly star driven);  These factors trump any PC concerns.  

 

The Charlie Chan films fall on the other side of this gray area;  They are Fox Films and the cost to obtain these films (assuming Fox would even lease them to TCM),  along with the PC concerns leads to the final decision NOT to lease them.

 

But remember there were Charlie Chan films made at Monogram in the 1940s, and those are in the TCM/Turner library. Therefore, it would be easy for the programmers to squeeze some of them into the schedules without having to worry about leasing anything from Fox.

 

I agree about why DRAGON SEED is played. It's the same reason THE GOOD EARTH is frequently broadcast.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But remember there were Charlie Chan films made at Monogram in the 1940s, and those are in the TCM/Turner library. Therefore, it would be easy for the programmers to squeeze some of them into the schedules without having to worry about leasing anything from Fox.

 

I agree about why DRAGON SEED is played. It's the same reason THE GOOD EARTH is frequently broadcast.

I could be wrong (I frequently am ;)) but it's been awhile since they have aired the Monogram Charlies, hasn't it? I think IF they were to run them again, it would have to be with a warning from the host(s) that there were some offensive racial stereotypes in the following film. Meaning, they would have to show them between 8 PM and 2 AM, if they ran them in the say, 3 to 8 AM timeslot, people would complain since they had not been warned...I think several hosts have mentioned issues in upcoming films...Michael Feinstein said something like this before a film recently, but can't remember what film it was....

 

Many Years ago when FMC ran some of the Oland/Toler Chan films, they had a panel of Asian-Americans talk before the films. And that's what TCM, Disney, whathaveyou should do If they were ever crazy enough to show Song of the South. Let people decide how to handle the material today...instead of keeping it from people. Heck, I remember reading , shoot, in the late 90's? that Disney was going to do something very similar for the DVD release of Song of the South, have an expert panel discuss the film and all it's flaws. It was expected to be the biggest DVD release of the year then...now folks wouldn't be able to handle the film being released....boycotts, hacking attacks....safe spaces needed in every city.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

But remember there were Charlie Chan films made at Monogram in the 1940s, and those are in the TCM/Turner library. Therefore, it would be easy for the programmers to squeeze some of them into the schedules without having to worry about leasing anything from Fox.

 

I agree about why DRAGON SEED is played. It's the same reason THE GOOD EARTH is frequently broadcast.

 

It would be great if we could ask TCM management (and they would reply) if there is some specific reason why those Monogram films are NOT shown. 

 

I really hope it isn't because of PC reasons;  But if TCM feels those are legit concerns have an intro that shows that TCM is sensitive to such concerns.  BUT SHOW THE FILMS! 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be great if we could ask TCM management (and they would reply) if these is some specific reason why those Monogram films are NOT shown. 

 

I really hope it isn't because of PC reasons;  But if TCM feels those are legit concerns have an intro that shows that TCM is sensitive to such concerns.  BUT SHOW THE FILMS! 

 

I intentionally avoid talking about politics on here, but I think you guys have hit the nail on the head.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm guessing that's also why they don't show the Mr. Moto films, another series that i'd like to see all of. (I've seen one.)

 

They also aren't showing any of the public domain Boris Karloff Mr. Wong mysteries tomorrow during his SUTS spotlight, but they are showing The Mask of Fu Manchu, which is a fun movie that I recommend, with a great supporting turn for Myrna Loy, but it's steeped in negative Chinese stereotypes, and the Fu Manchu character in print, film and television has been routinely derided by Asian Rights groups as perhaps the most obvious example of "Yellow Peril" racism that was rampant when the character was created originally.

 

Personally, I wish they'd just show them all. Add disclaimers if you feel uncomfortable, but show the original, unedited movies, cartoons, TV shows, etc.  

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

I could be wrong (I frequently am ;)) but it's been awhile since they have aired the Monogram Charlies, hasn't it? I think IF they were to run them again, it would have to be with a warning from the host(s) that there were some offensive racial stereotypes in the following film. Meaning, they would have to show them between 8 PM and 2 AM, if they ran them in the say, 3 to 8 AM timeslot, people would complain since they had not been warned...I think several hosts have mentioned issues in upcoming films...Michael Feinstein said something like this before a film recently, but can't remember what film it was....

 

Many Years ago when FMC ran some of the Oland/Toler Chan films, they had a panel of Asian-Americans talk before the films. And that's what TCM, Disney, whathaveyou should do If they were ever crazy enough to show Song of the South. Let people decide how to handle the material today...instead of keeping it from people. Heck, I remember reading , shoot, in the late 90's? that Disney was going to do something very similar for the DVD release of Song of the South, have an expert panel discuss the film and all it's flaws. It was expected to be the biggest DVD release of the year then...now folks wouldn't be able to handle the film being released....boycotts, hacking attacks....safe spaces needed in every city.....

 

The Monogram titles, which were made later, seem a bit more watered down and less offensive than the Fox titles. Yes, the stereotypes are still present but they're not exactly hurtful or done to deliberately harm anyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm guessing that's also why they don't show the Mr. Moto films, another series that i'd like to see all of. (I've seen one.)

 

They also aren't showing any of the public domain Boris Karloff Mr. Wong mysteries tomorrow during his SUTS spotlight, but they are showing The Mask of Fu Manchu, which is a fun movie that I recommend, with a great supporting turn for Myrna Loy, but it's steeped in negative Chinese stereotypes, and the Fu Manchu character in print, film and television has been routinely derided by Asian Rights groups as perhaps the most obvious example of "Yellow Peril" racism that was rampant when the character was created originally.

 

Personally, I wish they'd just show them all. Add disclaimers if you feel uncomfortable, but show the original, unedited movies, cartoons, TV shows, etc.  

 

One of the MOTO films does air on TCM, probably because it's in the public domain (MR. MOTO IN DANGER ISLAND). 

 

I posted in a thread at the horror sub-forum that three of the FU MANCHU films with Christopher Lee will be airing in October, so TCM is not afraid to show those.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They also aren't showing any of the public domain Boris Karloff Mr. Wong mysteries tomorrow during his SUTS spotlight, but they are showing The Mask of Fu Manchu, which is a fun movie that I recommend, with a great supporting turn for Myrna Loy, but it's steeped in negative Chinese stereotypes, and the Fu Manchu character in print, film and television has been routinely derided by Asian Rights groups as perhaps the most obvious example of "Yellow Peril" racism that was rampant when the character was created originally.

I remember seeing Mask with the Warner disk commentary that it was created back when Citizen Hearst was playing around at being a studio producer, and deliberately DID want the movie to be his own statement on the Yellow Peril.  

And he was not known for his subtlety, in journalism or movies, a line he frequently blurred--Imagine Donald Trump deciding to make a movie about Pancho Villa...

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember seeing Mask with the Warner disk commentary that it was created back when Citizen Hearst was playing around at being a studio producer, and deliberately DID want the movie to be his own statement on the Yellow Peril.  

And he was not known for his subtlety, in journalism or movies, a line he frequently blurred--Imagine Donald Trump deciding to make a movie about Pancho Villa...

 

Yeah, well, ya know Eric, the "Yellow Peril" WOULD get the last laugh eventually on Mr. Hearst.

 

(...uh-huh, word is radioactive debris from that tsunami damaged Japanese nuclear power plant is now washing up along the California coastline at San Simeon State Beach as I type this!) ;)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Monogram titles, which were made later, seem a bit more watered down and less offensive than the Fox titles. Yes, the stereotypes are still present but they're not exactly hurtful or done to deliberately harm anyone.

It always seemed to me that Charlie and his sons were presented in a pretty modern way in the 30's and early 40's. The kids were as American as apple pie...It was others that seemed to think Charlie couldn't be too sharp, but fairly quickly they learned he was smarter than everyone else in the room...

The  Monograms, with Mantan Moreland, I could see offending some, but that's a shame...he was a big star in films shown just to African-American communities, and was of course in a fair number of A and B big studio films....

Now, Roland Winters on the other hand , I am very offended that he was ever Charlie Chan ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it’s a disservice to not show these films. Surely people know movies of a certain time were racially offensive and sexist. If you’re watching TCM, you should expect to see those type of films I think with or without forewarning of a host. If local channels forewarn the audience saying the thoughts and opinions of the following program do not reflect the people of this station, why can’t TCM do the same for these controversial movies?

 

For me, these controversial movies are a reflection of how things were in the time it was filmed. It can be sad and very cringe worthy but the positive spin shows how far we’ve come. If you have a good sense of humor, you can laugh at the ignorance. I have several times. I’ve never understood the need to vow to not watch the channel anymore because of a controversial film. You can’t please everyone. While some are offended by racist and sexist content in movies, others can be offended by extreme cursing and violence, bodily humor or an actor. Recently TCM premiered “Let’s Do It Again” starring Bill Cosby and Sidney Poitier. I think we all know why the movie premiered at 4am.

 

I agree TCM should air these movies with a warning if need be but show it.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it’s a disservice to not show these films. Surely people know movies of a certain time were racially offensive and sexist. If you’re watching TCM, you should expect to see those type of films I think with or without forewarning of a host. If local channels forewarn the audience saying the thoughts and opinions of the following program do not reflect the people of this station, why can’t TCM do the same for these controversial movies?

 

For me, these controversial movies are a reflection of how things were in the time it was filmed. It can be sad and very cringe worthy but the positive spin shows how far we’ve come. If you have a good sense of humor, you can laugh at the ignorance. I have several times. I’ve never understood the need to vow to not watch the channel anymore because of a controversial film. You can’t please everyone. While some are offended by racist and sexist content in movies, others can be offended by extreme cursing and violence, bodily humor or an actor. Recently TCM premiered “Let’s Do It Again” starring Bill Cosby and Sidney Poitier. I think we all know why the movie premiered at 4am.

 

I agree TCM should air these movies with a warning if need be but show it.

 

 

I think so much of the problem that we have today with hatred and racism is that many people want to disconnect themselves or disown our historical past.

 

Anything from the past is a record of where we were at at that time.

 

It's too easy to say that those kind of things werr just in the past and they're not here in the present.

 

The overtly offensive stereotypes that you see in a movie from the thirties or forties are still very much present with us today in more subtle Ways.

 

We all have derived from our history--we cannot decide who we are and who we will become, until we have the courage to face what we were in the past.

 

We learn a great deal about ourselves today by experiencing the popular art forms of our parents and our grandparents.

 

Gone With the Wind was not just any movie - - it was based on the most popular novel of its day and it was the most popular movie of its day.

 

It may just be a fictionalized movie, but it tells us a lot about ourselves even today.

 

Caveats can be used with a film-- like Birth of a Nation - - but these kinds of films must be shown to us exactly as our great-grandparents and grandparents viewed them so that as we embrace what was our ugly past, we will receive the courage to overcome the remnants of that past-- that is alive in our society today.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

GGGGerald wrote:

 I would love to see this history book article about the kindly old man

who was always grinning, happy to be poor living in a shack. Not quite sure what school teaches that.

 

Well, gee, Gerald, all you had to do was ask! Because the textbooks being used by public schools statewide in Texas were teaching that very thing as recently as this year! Here you go!

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/22/opinion/how-texas-teaches-history.html

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...