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

Over and out - cancelling streaming TCM


Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, speedracer5 said:

We also have idiots throwing Molotov cocktails into the streets in downtown Portland.  So there's that.

Oregon is in shambles right now.  My blue sky is turning orange, so I suppose that means that the smoke from the nearby fire is coming over here.  These are shots of the sky around my parents' house in South Salem, OR.  These photos were taken at about 9am.  The fire in Santiam Canyon is about 30-35 minutes east of them.  This fire has devastated this community that is about 30 miles long and contains tons of small towns.  Thousands of people have been displaced and are currently waiting at the Oregon State Fairgrounds in Salem waiting to find out if their house is still standing.

fire.jpg    fire1.jpg

Hey, stay safe out there!!

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sewhite2000 said:

By the way, did threads get combined? Did one get eliminated? What happened to "oao"? Curiously, "over and out" is now in the title of this thread? Are Martha My Dear and the person who so upset about the concert films the same person?

I don’t think the threads were combined as I don’t see my response to OAO. I did find it rather curious that a post with the same acronym would pop-up at the same time. OAO seems to have gone by the wayside. 

Perhaps the OP changed their moniker and is trolling all of us and we’ve been bamboozled? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, speedracer5 said:

Perhaps the OP changed their moniker and is trolling all of us and we’ve been bamboozled? 

The other thread has dropped to p.2. I believe the originator of that thread goes by lmc. But it feels a little weird that they would both say "over and out".

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, MovieMadness said:

Can anyone honestly say that the current line-up of the movies as described by the OP are classic movies? They are fringe movies at best, but still need to be played every so often. The point is many classic movies are not getting played, and instead we are getting these oddballs films that have little interest. Modern movies about the classic era should not offend anyone, but having sexual freak movies will. I saw the gathering storm, made in 2002, and had to pull it at the start when they showed a naked Winston Churchill of all people. There is a line that has to be drawn, and that one crossed it.

Ya know what, MM? You ought'a search out Martha.

(...you two conservative-minded people sound like a match made in heaven)

LOL

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dargo said:

Ya know what, MM? You ought'a search out Martha.

(...you two conservative-minded people sound like a match made in heaven)

LOL

There's nothing conservative about not wanting to see Winston Churchill naked. Which reminds me of the time FDR accidentally walked in on him when he was in the bathtub and Churchill said, "As you can see, I have nothing to hide from you."

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, MovieMadness said:

Can anyone honestly say that the current line-up of the movies as described by the OP are classic movies? They are fringe movies at best, but still need to be played every so often. The point is many classic movies are not getting played, and instead we are getting these oddballs films that have little interest. Modern movies about the classic era should not offend anyone, but having sexual freak movies will. I saw the gathering storm, made in 2002, and had to pull it at the start when they showed a naked Winston Churchill of all people. There is a line that has to be drawn, and that one crossed it.

"Classicness" is a quality which we (as viewers, as film buffs, as aesthetes) can play a direct role in determining by helping mold the cinematic canon in real time, i.e. by watching/discussing/engaging with films from any point in the past which might have been ignored at the time of their release, or have been neglected since, but which have been judged by some in the interim to be significant in some way. There have been countless examples of organizations like TCM — and, indeed, TCM itself — bringing films "back from the dead," so to speak. That is, they've introduced hitherto forgotten or obscure films — "fringe films," if you will — to modern audiences; many such films, through repeated airings, have come to be considered minor classics, or cult favorites, or paragons of their genre. I'm sure the programmers at TCM understand this.

What about It's a Wonderful Life, for example? Had it not been for the fact that broadcast networks in the seventies decided to take a chance on airing this public domain curio that no one remembered (or even cared to) enough times, then what eventually became one of the most beloved films of all time might've long faded into obscurity by now, or worse.

"Classicness" is not static, nor should we think of it that way. Besides, if we're talking about Women Make Film specifically, it's a once weekly, twelve or so hour-long programming block (an overnight block, no less), which will be on the air for four months. The rest of the programming, by and large, is the same old Gable, Garbo, Bogart, and Bacall, so if that's what you're looking for, you don't need to look far, because you've found it. Otherwise, I don't think there's anything wrong with TCM diversifying their programming and stretching the limits of the word "classic" (even though TCM has long been home to art-house fare, international cinema, older independent films, and the occasional avant-garde or cult film, even if the majority of their programming focuses on Hollywood's Golden Age). In fact, I welcome it.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Dargo said:

Btw, ya know who Martha reminds me of here?

The old bitty . . .

 

The current term is: Karen.

"Karen - The stereotypical name associated with rude, obnoxious and insufferable middle aged white women. Karens take everything wrong with the typical over-entitled western woman and crank it up by several thousand percent. They are a mutated subspecies that descends from the Soccer Mom, and have many of their traits. Such as a short temper, a crown bowl haircut, an unnecessarily large SUV to take her kids to soccer practice and be a menace on the road, etc etc." www.urbandictionary.com

See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_(pejorative)

Googling "Karen Meme" will send you down the rabbit hole.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, keenimage said:

What about It's a Wonderful Life, for example? Had it not been for the fact that broadcast networks in the seventies decided to take a chance on airing this public domain curio that no one remembered (or even cared to) enough times, then what eventually became one of the most beloved films of all time might've long faded into obscurity by now, or worse.

Good remarks, but I don't agree with this part.  IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE was shown because of its public domain status on many networks and independent stations for decades, particularly in the '50s and '60s, the '70s is getting late for that.  An entire generation of baby boomers grew up with it.   I don't think it would have been forgotten; aside from JIMMY STEWART, it does have the beloved DONNA REED which many TV viewers watched or grew up with because of her TV series. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Allhallowsday said:

Good remarks, but I don't agree with this part.  IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE was shown because of its public domain status on many networks and independent stations for decades, particularly in the '50s and '60s, the '70s is getting late for that.  An entire generation of baby boomers grew up with it.   I don't think it would have been forgotten; aside from JIMMY STEWART, it does have the beloved DONNA REED which many TV viewers watched or grew up with because of her TV series. 

From all I've read, it was my impression that the film didn't actually lapse into the public domain until the seventies and was all but forgotten until broadcast networks and local stations began airing it regularly around that time, but perhaps you're right. Nevertheless, the point itself still stands: the obscurities, or "fringe films," of today might be the classics of tomorrow if we would only take it upon ourselves to be a bit more open-minded.

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Allhallowsday said:

Good remarks, but I don't agree with this part.  IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE was shown because of its public domain status on many networks and independent stations for decades, particularly in the '50s and '60s, the '70s is getting late for that.  An entire generation of baby boomers grew up with it.   I don't think it would have been forgotten; aside from JIMMY STEWART, it does have the beloved DONNA REED which many TV viewers watched or grew up with because of her TV series. 

I distinctly remember Andy Rooney saying this about It's A Wonderful Life in his segment on 60 Minutes, in a disparaging way.  Maybe someone uploaded it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, keenimage said:

From all I've read, it was my impression that the film didn't actually lapse into the public domain until the seventies and was all but forgotten until broadcast networks and local stations began airing it regularly around that time, but perhaps you're right. Nevertheless, the point itself still stands: the obscurities, or "fringe films," of today might be the classics of tomorrow if we would only take it upon ourselves to be a bit more open-minded.

A lot of it is about visibility and exposure.

If you pulled NORTH BY NORTHWEST and kept it from being seen for 30 years, it would not find a new audience and start to fade into obscurity. And at the same time you can reverse the "experiment." Take something that is relatively unknown and broadcast it fifteen times a year, giving it a primetime 8 p.m. slot each broadcast and build different clever themes around it. Bring on noted scholars and noted directors who extol its virtues. Then people would start to think it's a classic and respond to it accordingly.

It's really about what you put in front of the viewers and how you tout it. 

Typically the audience does not pick classics. The classics are picked for the audience.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, keenimage said:

From all I've read, it was my impression that the film didn't actually lapse into the public domain until the seventies and was all but forgotten until broadcast networks and local stations began airing it regularly around that time, but perhaps you're right. Nevertheless, the point itself still stands: the obscurities, or "fringe films," of today might be the classics of tomorrow if we would only take it upon ourselves to be a bit more open-minded.

The film originally lapsed into public domain in the 1970s,  I'm sure you're right, but it had been broadcast long before that and was a "cheap" property with story copyright attached because of its initial failure (in 1946).  I think ownership was punted back and forth. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, MovieCollectorOH said:

I distinctly remember Andy Rooney saying this about It's A Wonderful Life in his segment on 60 Minutes, in a disparaging way.  Maybe someone uploaded it.

Oh yeah! I remember this. I think Andy started out by sayin' somethin' like, "Have you ever noticed....."

(...oh...wait...he ALWAYS started out that way, didn't he...sorry, never mind)

;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Allhallowsday said:

The film originally lapsed into public domain in the 1970s,  I'm sure you're right, but it had been broadcast long before that and was a "cheap" property with story copyright attached because of its initial failure (in 1946).  I think ownership was punted back and forth. 

Yep, in fact as I understand it, by 1958, NOBODY cared about the thing anymore, and so even H.B. Warner who played Mr. Gower the druggist, owned it for about six months just before his death. And then HE willed it his secret lover in real life, Sarah Edwards who played Donna Reed's mother Mrs. Hatch, and who THEN had it until SHE croaked in 1965. And then THAT's when it finally fell into public domain.

(...naaaah, not really...I just have way too much time on my hands today)  ;)

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

PLEASE DON’T CENSOR NUDITY.  For every naked Churchill there’s also a naked Fay Wray (or similar beauty).   I want to see & appreciate it.

 

I’ve seen very few post-2000 movies I’d call “classic”.  They are barely watchable.  For example: Slumdog Millionaire was a decent film, but it comes nowhere near the Golden and Silver Age of Hollywood.

Hopefully TCM’s experiment with post-2000 gets low viewership, so they don’t do it again.

(shrug)

We shall see.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, keenimage said:

"Classicness" is not static, nor should we think of it that way. Besides, if we're talking about Women Make Film specifically, it's a once weekly, twelve or so hour-long programming block (an overnight block, no less), which will be on the air for four months. The rest of the programming, by and large, is the same old Gable, Garbo, Bogart, and Bacall, so if that's what you're looking for, you don't need to look far, because you've found it. Otherwise, I don't think there's anything wrong with TCM diversifying their programming and stretching the limits of the word "classic" (even though TCM has long been home to art-house fare, international cinema, older independent films, and the occasional avant-garde or cult film, even if the majority of their programming focuses on Hollywood's Golden Age). In fact, I welcome it.

The entirety of your post makes a lucid and beautifully articulated point!

But why don't they have a "Men Make Film" segment once weekly to showcase male filmmakers? And, Garbo, careful there. She has at least one on-screen lesbian kiss that I'm aware of (Queen Christina), and we know how the OP feels about those.

I'm speaking ironically, here, lest there be any doubt.

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/9/2020 at 3:51 PM, TopBilled said:

A lot of it is about visibility and exposure.

If you pulled NORTH BY NORTHWEST and kept it from being seen for 30 years, it would not find a new audience and start to fade into obscurity. And at the same time you can reverse the "experiment." Take something that is relatively unknown and broadcast it fifteen times a year, giving it a primetime 8 p.m. slot each broadcast and build different clever themes around it. Bring on noted scholars and noted directors who extol its virtues. Then people would start to think it's a classic and respond to it accordingly.

It's really about what you put in front of the viewers and how you tout it. 

Typically the audience does not pick classics. The classics are picked for the audience.

Fair points all, but I think we would be remiss not to recognize our unique (potential) role, as viewers and "consumers," in shaping and reshaping the canon — especially in this current age, marked as it is by the unprecedented democratization of art and entertainment. So many once-forgotten films are constantly being unearthed and reintroduced into the public consciousness, and often times, it's happening thanks to the direct efforts of viewers, rather than (strictly speaking) those of critics, programmers, and distributors.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/9/2020 at 11:16 AM, TomJH said:

There's nothing conservative about not wanting to see Winston Churchill naked. Which reminds me of the time FDR accidentally walked in on him when he was in the bathtub and Churchill said, "As you can see, I have nothing to hide from you."

Perhaps the greatest and most outrageous of British farces is Joe Orton's brilliant play, What the Butler Saw.  One of the subplots involves the missing private part of a statue of Sir Winston Churchill. At the end of the play, a policeman demands the return of the missing member:

Sergeant Match: "Would someone produce, or cause to be produced, the missing parts of Sir Winston Churchill?"

Dr. Rance: "We have no knowledge of such things."

Sergeant Match: "I'm asking your cooperation in a matter of vital importance to this country." (A large box is produced and handed to the sergeant.)

Sergeant Match, opens the box, holds up a huge metal p hal lus: "The great man can once again take his place in the High Street, as an example to us all of  the spirit that won the Battle of Britain."

Dr. Rance:  "How much more inspiring, if in those dark days we'd seen what we see now. Instead we had to be content with a cigar, a symbol falling far short, we now realize, of the object itself."

_______________________________________________________

There was a BBC4 production of the play in 1987, which is now on YouTube. In this montage of photos, the photo on the bottom right is the sergeant as he holds the box with the p hal  lus:

qJqd4zXEORZw4Rm-tHXlmVKn6ho7yYxxi8Dh-VBp

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW how are the hosts not likeable?  Ben’s existed almost 20 years on TCM.  Dave Karger reminds me of a young Robert Osbourne.  

I’m not a huge fan of the Film Noir guy, but he clearly knows his subject.  I have no objections to any of the hosts.

Yes some subjects like “blackface” get repeated a lot, but for people who only tunein for one movie per day, it might be the first time they’ve ever seen it.   To us it’s old. To them it’s new.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Davehat said:

BTW how are the hosts not likeable?  Ben’s existed almost 20 years on TCM.  Dave Karger reminds me of a young Robert Osbourne.  

I’m not a huge fan of the Film Noir guy, but he clearly knows his subject.  I have no objections to any of the hosts.

Yes some subjects like “blackface” get repeated a lot, but for people who only tunein for one movie per day, it might be the first time they’ve ever seen it.   To us it’s old. To them it’s new.

My guess, Dave? It's that the present younger hosts just aren't "avuncular" enough for Martha, and like she always felt about Bob Osborne.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Swithin said:

Perhaps the greatest and most outrageous of British farces is Joe Orton's brilliant play, What the Butler Saw.  One of the subplots involves the missing private part of a statue of Sir Winston Churchill. At the end of the play, a policeman demands the return of the missing member:

Sergeant Match: "Would someone produce, or cause to be produced, the missing parts of Sir Winston Churchill?"

Dr. Rance: "We have no knowledge of such things."

Sergeant Match: "I'm asking your cooperation in a matter of vital importance to this country." (A large box is produced and handed to the sergeant.)

Sergeant Match, opens the box, holds up a huge metal p hal lus: "The great man can once again take his place in the High Street, as an example to us all of  the spirit that won the Battle of Britain."

Dr. Rance:  "How much more inspiring, if in those dark days we'd seen what we see now. Instead we had to be content with a cigar, a symbol falling far short, we now realize, of the object itself."

_______________________________________________________

There was a BBC4 production of the play in 1987, which is now on YouTube. In this montage of photos, the photo on the bottom right is the sergeant as he holds the box with the p hal  lus:

qJqd4zXEORZw4Rm-tHXlmVKn6ho7yYxxi8Dh-VBp

Sounds like a programming request.  https://moviecollectoroh.com/pics_to_hotlink_on_TCM/forum-wine-drinker.gif

 

forum-rolleyes.gif

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/9/2020 at 11:07 AM, Dargo said:

Ya know what, MM? You ought'a search out Martha.

(...you two conservative-minded people sound like a match made in heaven)

LOL

I cut the cable cord about a year ago, having hesitated for a year or more because I liked TCM. But the OP is right: TCM is not a classic movies channel any longer, and while I miss what it once was I no longer wanted to watch what it had become. 

I notice that no one truly wants to address OP's charges - but rather to justify the ditching of classic films, and more frequently to trash the OP's character based on some  personal or character qualities that are presumed about her (or him.) 

That's enough for me. Since I cut the cord I have read the boards and occasionally commented when I thought I might make a pertinent point. But the boards are for ridicule and trash talking now. I won't be around as it all grows worse.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Brrrcold said:

I cut the cable cord about a year ago, having hesitated for a year or more because I liked TCM. But the OP is right: TCM is not a classic movies channel any longer, and while I miss what it once was I no longer wanted to watch what it had become. 

I notice that no one truly wants to address OP's charges - but rather to justify the ditching of classic films, and more frequently to trash the OP's character based on some  personal or character qualities that are presumed about her (or him.) 

That's enough for me. Since I cut the cord I have read the boards and occasionally commented when I thought I might make a pertinent point. But the boards are for ridicule and trash talking now. I won't be around as it all grows worse.

Well, that's a shame then(that you're not stickin' around for a response to this post of yours here that is) and because despite MY trash talk here, there WERE more than a few OTHERS in this thread who spelled out EXACTLY why TCM is STILL primarily a CLASSIC MOVIE CHANNEL!!!

(...and now I think I'M done with this thread TOO, as NO MATTER how one presents their "case", SOME people will never EVER seem to understand a new and/or different concept, and primarily because their minds are TOO damn closed up to even consider it!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Note to self:

From now on, don't even bother to open the next freakin' thread in which its title suggests it's going to be yet ANOTHER person who's going to whine about TCM showing something other than a Hollywood movie made during the studio era.

(...and because I DON'T need the freakin' aggravation anymore, and because 99 times out of a hundred, they're a lost freakin' cause ANYWAY!...over AND out!!!)

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...