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

Recommended Posts

Is this a classic movie channel.  All I see is movies from 80s being shown.  Too me a classic film is from the 1920 to the 1950. I use to watch and record movies all the time but  now not so much. Please keep it a classic movie channel.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion a movie should at least be 30 years old to be considered a classic I've been watching tcm for 15 years the problem is competing with streaming 1920s to 1950s movies want cut it with main stream audiences who seem to only care about blockbusters these days.

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

Is this a classic movie channel.  All I see is movies from 80s being shown.  Too me a classic film is from the 1920 to the 1950. I use to watch and record movies all the time but  now not so much. Please keep it a classic movie channel.

You may be confusing age with the definition of classic.

Some newer films are instant classics with audiences.

Also not every film made between 1920 and 1950 is an automatic classic. Some of the output during those years was quite frankly, junk.

It should be about how resonant and interesting the film is, not whether it was made a hundred years ago or a hundred days ago.

And I think TCM's programmers know that.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So a movie needs to be at least 30 years old to be a classic, but TCM should only show films made between 1920-1950.

Before 1991 or a movie that is between 71-101 years old, which is it?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Never said they should only be from 1920-1950 I said in my opinion a film should be a least 30 years old a true classic stands the test of time Casablanca is a classic  but these days must people would rather watch superhero movies without something drastic a fear for tcm's future that's all I was saying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, chinaseas said:

Is this a classic movie channel.  All I see is movies from 80s being shown.  Too me a classic film is from the 1920 to the 1950. I use to watch and record movies all the time but  now not so much. Please keep it a classic movie channel.

Personally,.

 

 

Take This.

 

Or Leave This,.

China🌊's ..

_

but (while subjective), - a Classic "Is" More in the Eyes of the Beholder my Good Fellow,.

🙏

 

 

 

For.. ... Opposite Sides of the Spectrum Sake ..

- (i Consider) the Likes of The General,. Sherlock Jr,. .. and Speedy.. ....to be JUST As "Classic" As (this years) News of the World,. Little Fish... and Dreamland,. ..

 

*Albeit For (Mostly) COMPLETELY Different Reasons ...

. ... ..

Plus.

 

 

 

......  .. and i do NOT Mean This .. - ... As A "Richard" ,Either..

 

..but if the current slate is too new for You.... .

 

 

Either,.

     Sit Tight and Wait.

(Im STILL Coming Across Titles (both old and new),, that i Had, NO. CLUE... ...Tcm "Does" .. while "wandering" around, in their labyrinthine library of a Database..

.

..and Or b.

 

look elsewhere... .. .....on other "platforms"...

. ...

(Im STILL Digging and Scratching Around For as Varied (and Eclectic) ah Films as the Karate Killers. Wild Wild Planet,. and (this) years The Wanting Mare ...

 

 

 

..So Far.. ..AsOfyet...-

.. ... .with No luck.

_

But im Keeping my Magnifying Glass to the Grindstone nonetheless..

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

Never said they should only be from 1920-1950 I said in my opinion a film should be a least 30 years old a true classic stands the test of time Casablanca is a classic  but these days must people would rather watch superhero movies without something drastic a fear for tcm's future that's all I was saying.

There is no definition of "classic" and TCM uses this only as a marketing term.    TCM was founded on the idea that most of the films shown would be American Studio-era films.   I.e. America made talking films,  released from 1929 - 1968 (note that the end of the Studio-era can be debated).   This is TCM's branding.

Note that TCM has remained true to this branding:   The vast majority of films shown "fit" the branding.    While special niche type programming  like Women on Film does lead to TCM showing more films "outside" of this branding,   when viewed in the aggregate,  over say a 3 month period,   TCM remains true to their original branding.

TCM will show films outside this branding,  and have always done so since day one.     

Is it time for the branding to change?   I hope not,   and nothing TCM has done recently suggest that it will.

    

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, chinaseas said:

Is this a classic movie channel.  All I see is movies from 80s being shown.  Too me a classic film is from the 1920 to the 1950. I use to watch and record movies all the time but  now not so much. Please keep it a classic movie channel.

TCM isn't what it used to be, and it never was.  This is what Robert Osborne said in his very very very first introduction on the shiny brand new TCM:

Hi, welcome to Turner Classic Movies. I'm Robert Osborne, I'm gonna be your host, right here, as we present some of the best, the--finest films ever made, twenty-four hours a day. We're going to be drawing not only from the great film libraries of MGM and Warner Brothers, but also from other outstanding catalogs, so: Come join us, and see not only great films and stars from the past, but also films from recent years, featuring some of our newest and most watchable stars. (Emphasis mine.)

My impression is people see the word classic and think it refers exclusively to the studio-era.  TCM has never limited itself to that.

  • Thanks 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, TopBilled said:

You may be confusing age with the definition of classic.

Some newer films are instant classics with audiences.

Also not every film made between 1920 and 1950 is an automatic classic. Some of the output during those years was quite frankly, junk.

It should be about how resonant and interesting the film is, not whether it was made a hundred years ago or a hundred days ago.

And I think TCM's programmers know that.

Some old films are great, some okay, and some were not good at all. That's the case in any era in films.

There are modern films that are just as classic as any other films. And there are many good films that were set in the classic era so they would fit also. And of course there are remakes that are good( or not so good). 

The whole idea is very subjective. And you don't want to wall yourself off from the rest of entertainment. The best thing is to show that many of these films can matter today. Not just something that used to be.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, slaytonf said:

TCM isn't what it used to be, and it never was.  This is what Robert Osborne said in his very very very first introduction on the shiny brand new TCM:

Hi, welcome to Turner Classic Movies. I'm Robert Osborne, I'm gonna be your host, right here, as we present some of the best, the--finest films ever made, twenty-four hours a day. We're going to be drawing not only from the great film libraries of MGM and Warner Brothers, but also from other outstanding catalogs, so: Come join us, and see not only great films and stars from the past, but also films from recent years, featuring some of our newest and most watchable stars. (Emphasis mine.)

My impression is people see the word classic and think it refers exclusively to the studio-era.  TCM has never limited itself to that.

TCM's programming has been consistently over 80% American Studio Era films since the beginning.  That is their branding.    

If TCM's programming was to drop below that 80%,  that would indicate something has changed.    

Curious where you stand on this;  I.e. do you want TCM to change?  I.e. to devote < 80% of their programming to American Studio-Era films?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm saying what I've always said, that TCM is today essentially what it has always been.  Showing what, as you state, is approximately the same mix of studio-era movies and post-era movies.  This is fine with me.  My too clever statement about TCM never being what it was is to chafe people who criticize the channel for falling away from its mission and trying to impose a false one on it.  That's the reason for including the Robert Osborne quote.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, slaytonf said:

I'm saying what I've always said, that TCM is today essentially what it has always been.  Showing what, as you state, is approximately the same mix of studio-era movies and post-era movies.  This is fine with me.  My too clever statement about TCM never being what it was is to chafe people who criticize the channel for falling away from its mission and trying to impose a false one on it.  That's the reason for including the Robert Osborne quote.

That Osborne quote is a good one to bring up since it counters the false narrative that if Robert was still around,,,, well,  TCM wouldn't have changed.   NOT!

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, GGGGerald said:

Some old films are great, some okay, and some were not good at all. That's the case in any era in films.

There are modern films that are just as classic as any other films. And there are many good films that were set in the classic era so they would fit also. And of course there are remakes that are good( or not so good). 

The whole idea is very subjective. And you don't want to wall yourself off from the rest of entertainment. The best thing is to show that many of these films can matter today. Not just something that used to be.

Exactly! Some films are immediately embraced as classics upon their release. This was the case with both TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD and GUESS WHO'S COMING TO DINNER. People did not say, "good film but let's wait 30 years to call this a classic." No, these films were instant classics.

Meanwhile some films can be seen as instant junk and they remain junk no matter how many years pass.

To suggest that every single film released from 1920 to 1950 is worthy of adulation is absurd. I think it may be a case of rose-colored glasses that have a big crack in the lens.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

There is no definition of "classic" and TCM uses this only as a marketing term.    TCM was founded on the idea that most of the films shown would be American Studio-era films.   I.e. America made talking films,  released from 1929 - 1968 (note that the end of the Studio-era can be debated).   This is TCM's branding.

Note that TCM has remained true to this branding:   The vast majority of films shown "fit" the branding.    While special niche type programming  like Women on Film does lead to TCM showing more films "outside" of this branding,   when viewed in the aggregate,  over say a 3 month period,   TCM remains true to their original branding.

TCM will show films outside this branding,  and have always done so since day one.     

Is it time for the branding to change?   I hope not,   and nothing TCM has done recently suggest that it will.

Okay I have to respectfully dissect this comment a bit, if you will...

Ted Turner acquired the MGM/UA library of films from 1925 to 1986. This means that when he launched TCM in 1994, it was always with the intention of showing films up through the mid-80s. Probably if we go back and look at early schedules, we will find that there were indeed MGM/UA films from the 1980s that were playing on TCM in its first or second year of broadcasting. Something people overlook.

Next, TCM is relying heavily on the films from the 30s/40s/50s for several reasons. One reason is because silent films are not as popular as sound films so that limits what they show from the 20s. Another reason is that when Turner acquired that vast library with the film prints, he also acquired oodles of studio publicity. So TCM staff are using a lot of the old P.R. to write the articles that appear in the database and the articles that appear on the website where they highlight a current month's offerings. This is like being able to reappropriate someone else's old college term papers. It's all right there for the using.

In addition to the P.R. documents, they have all those old photos and images from the films themselves so they can keep playing up these household names (Cagney, Davis, Bogart, Garland, Mitchum, etc.) ad nauseum. It's a lot easier and more convenient for them than having to create this sort of material for the films from the 60s/70s/80s they have in their library where after the studio system collapsed films were not marketed in the same way.

Finally, and this is where we go into the slightly political realm...I suspect that the main reason we see these threads where posters are complaining about the newer films is that a lot of the newer films are made by liberal directors, liberal writers and liberal actors. These movies do not espouse the conservative values that our Republican viewers want to see on TCM, on their precious screens. However, these same people conveniently overlook the fact that many silent films and precodes were not "morally" correct. So there's a bit of hypocrisy going on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

35 minutes ago, TopBilled said:

Okay I have to respectfully dissect this comment a bit, if you will...

Ted Turner acquired the MGM/UA library of films from 1925 to 1986. This means that when he launched TCM in 1994, it was always with the intention of showing films up through the mid-80s. Probably if we go back and look at early schedules, we will find that there were indeed MGM/UA films from the 1980s that were playing on TCM in its first or second year of broadcasting. Something people overlook.

Next, TCM is relying heavily on the films from the 30s/40s/50s for several reasons. One reason is because silent films are not as popular as sound films so that limits what they show from the 20s. Another reason is that when Turner acquired that vast library with the film prints, he also acquired oodles of studio publicity. So TCM staff are using a lot of the old P.R. to write the articles that appear in the database and the articles that appear on the website where they highlight a current month's offerings. This is like being able to reappropriate someone else's old college term papers. It's all right there for the using.

In addition to the P.R. documents, they have all those old photos and images from the films themselves so they can keep playing up these household names (Cagney, Davis, Bogart, Garland, Mitchum, etc.) ad nauseum. It's a lot easier and more convenient for them than having to create this sort of material for the films from the 60s/70s/80s they have in their library where after the studio system collapsed films were not marketed in the same way.

Finally, and this is where we go into the slightly political realm...I suspect that the main reason we see these threads where posters are complaining about the newer films is that a lot of the newer films are made by liberal directors, liberal writers and liberal actors. These movies do not espouse the conservative values that our Republican viewers want to see on TCM, on their precious screens. However, these same people conveniently overlook the fact that many silent films and precodes were not "morally" correct. So there's a bit of hypocrisy going on.

Let's be frank.  TCM was founded so that Ted Turner could make money off his MGM acquisition.   It was not done for artistic, cultural or preservation reasons.   It has grown into that over the ensuing years.  If you recall, Turner was the one behind the colorization efforts in the 1980s, so you could hardly call Ted Turner of that era the guardian of Hollywood's B&W films, though he might be regarded as such today .   That acquisition gave Turner a lot of material, more than could be shown on TBS, or the newly created TNT.

The genesis of the channel was the MGM library.  The branding was built around that.  The "library" grew when Warner bought out Turner a couple of years after the channel's launch.   

I believe the brand really took off once AMC decided to migrate to their current format, whatever you might call that, leaving TCM as the only basic cable channel airing films uncut and commercial free.  Some time after that, TCM (and its subscribers) came to regard the channel as the protector of "classic" films, with that definition left ambiguous.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, txfilmfan said:

 

 

Let's be frank.  TCM was founded so that Ted Turner could make money off his MGM acquisition.   It was not done for artistic, cultural or preservation reasons.   It has grown into that over the ensuing years.  If you recall, Turner was the one behind the colorization efforts in the 1980s, so you could hardly call Ted Turner of that era the guardian of Hollywood's B&W films, though he might be regarded as such today .   That acquisition gave Turner a lot of material, more than could be shown on TBS, or the newly created TNT.

The genesis of the channel was the MGM library.  The branding was built around that.  The "library" grew when Warner bought out Turner a couple of years after the channel's launch.   

I believe the brand really took off once AMC decided to migrate to their current format, whatever you might call that, leaving TCM as the only basic cable channel airing films uncut and commercial free.  Some time after that, TCM (and its subscribers) came to regard the channel as the protector of "classic" films, with that definition left ambiguous.

Good point(s).

I'd like to add a few things, though. I think TBS was envisioned to show classic television as well as new television programming created by Turner and they did that (Atlanta Braves baseball as well as first-run syndicated comedies and talk shows). I think TNT was devised to create made-for-TV movies, miniseries dramas and the like, which they also did. The Turner Classic Movies "brand" was his designation for the classic film library he acquired.

They borrowed a page (multiple pages) from the American Movie Classics book. They took AMC's idea of a monthly magazine as well as AMC's Star of the Month idea and used those marketing concepts. They also borrowed the concept of wraparounds with at the time white male, middle-aged hosts. 

I think AMC was forced to change its business model because when Turner started TCM he stopped leasing his MGM/UA titles to AMC. Suddenly AMC could no longer show GONE WITH THE WIND or the many MGM musicals it had aired. AMC continued on for a few years in the mid-90s showing classic films from other studios as well as some original programming. Then by 2000-ish AMC had reformatted, reinvented itself. Basically Turner took their ideas and then forced them out of business, or at least out of the classic studio era movie broadcast business.

I love what you say about Turner not caring much about b&w films and about putting commercial goals ahead of artistic/preservation goals. Part of it was Turner's ego...look at me, I own GONE WITH THE WIND and I own CITIZEN KANE. Etc.

Oh we should add that a key aspect of AMC's old business model was using the broadcast of films to push sales of VHS copes of the movies. TCM took that idea and refined it, and so Turner's library was used to push the sales of DVDs which is what they did through the 90s and early 2000s. Now the DVD craze is over or at least not what it once was, so TCM is required to branch out into streaming platforms, something the old AMC never did.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TopBilled said:

Good point(s).

I'd like to add a few things, though. I think TBS was envisioned to show classic television as well as new television programming created by Turner and they did that (Atlanta Braves baseball as well as first-run syndicated comedies and talk shows). I think TNT was devised to create made-for-TV movies, miniseries dramas and the like, which they also did. The Turner Classic Movies "brand" was his designation for the classic film library he acquired.

They borrowed a page (multiple pages) from the American Movie Classics book. They took AMC's idea of a monthly magazine as well as AMC's Star of the Month idea and used those marketing concepts. They also borrowed the concept of wraparounds with at the time white male, middle-aged hosts. 

I think AMC was forced to change its business model because when Turner started TCM he stopped leasing his MGM/UA titles to AMC. Suddenly AMC could no longer show GONE WITH THE WIND or the many MGM musicals it had aired. AMC continued on for a few years in the mid-90s showing classic films from other studios as well as some original programming then by 2000 had reformatted. Basically Turner took their ideas and then forced them out of business, or at least out of the classic studio era movie broadcast business.

I love what you say about Turner not caring much about b&w films and about putting commercial goals ahead of artistic/preservation goals. Oh we should add that a key aspect of AMC's old business model was using the broadcast of films to push sales of VHS copes of the movies. TCM took that idea and refined it, and so Turner's library was used to push the sales of DVDs which is what they did through the 90s and early 2000s. Now the DVD craze is over or at least not what it once was, so TCM is required to branch out into streaming platforms, something the old AMC never did.

Agree.   TCM basically copied AMC and beat them at their own game, and they had a built-in advantage by the mid-90s because of the MGM and WB catalogs.

TBS started out life as the uplink of WTBS, Channel 17  in Atlanta (SuperStation WTBS).   Back in the early days of satellite distribution, the satellite feed was the same as the local broadcast of WTBS in Atlanta.  The early fare was typical of independent stations of the era - lots of syndicated TV show reruns and movies.  WTBS also had a few locally produced shows like Bill Tush's shows.  As you noted, WTBS was also the local broadcaster for the Atlanta Braves.

WGN in Chicago and WOR in NYC were also prominent superstations that were carried nationwide by cable systems.

I believe WTBS was the first basic cable channel available nationwide.  The concept really didn't exist before that.  Before that, cable systems carried mostly local stations over the air or stations imported via microwave relay, and satellite-distributed programming was limited to add-on pay services like HBO and Showtime.  Many others followed quickly though, with Madison Square Garden (now USA), Pinwheel (incorporated into Nickelodeon), ARTS (now A&E) and an early-day ESPN.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Millenniumman said:

In my opinion a movie should at least be 30 years old to be considered a classic I've been watching tcm for 15 years the problem is competing with streaming 1920s to 1950s movies want cut it with main stream audiences who seem to only care about blockbusters these days.

I quoted this post and "bolded" that part to help me point out that "30 years old"  means 1991!  So I'm not sure if this guy agrees with the OP or not.  Due to movies from the '80's being older than 30 years old now. 

Plus, I'm not sure when the OP limits his viewing times, but I've noticed, in recent weeks, I've seen MANY movies from the '30's and '40's being shown.  But then possibly, this person's problem could have been admitted in his screen name.  ;) 

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites

People on this site keep complaining about my post but I'm not hearing what they think about what I was actually saying does tcm  survive the streaming wars what does that look like because how many topics now have there been of people complaining about tcm programming.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Millenniumman said:

People on this site keep complaining about my post but I'm not hearing what they think about what I was actually saying does tcm  survive the streaming wars what does that look like because how many topics now have there been of people complaining about tcm programming.

TCM will change/evolve because of the "streaming wars." But that does not necessarily mean TCM will go away or cease to exist.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the TCM linear channel goes away because of the demise of the cable/satellite economic model, then most likely what we'll see is a section of HBO Max reserved for "classic" properties.  We're already seeing a bit of that now.  I wonder how long before AT&T changes the name of their streaming service to something like WB Max (similar to what CBS just did with their streaming service)

TCM's linear channel & brand has life in it because they've branded it as a whole "lifestyle" with the Wine Club, festival, cruise and all the merchandise (books, DVDs, clothing, mugs, etc).  People must be buying the stuff, otherwise they'd drop it and move on to something else (as they've done with Backlot)

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, txfilmfan said:

If the TCM linear channel goes away because of the demise of the cable/satellite economic model, then most likely what we'll see is a section of HBO Max reserved for "classic" properties.  We're already seeing a bit of that now.  I wonder how long before AT&T changes the name of their streaming service to something like WB Max (similar to what CBS just did with their streaming service)

TCM's linear channel & brand has life in it because they've branded it as a whole "lifestyle" with the Wine Club, festival, cruise and all the merchandise (books, DVDs, clothing, mugs, etc).  People must be buying the stuff, otherwise they'd drop it and move on to something else (as they've done with Backlot)

The Backlot scheme (and that's what it seemed like from the beginning, a scheme) was bizarre to say the least. I always felt it was a way to gain political and economic information about viewers with the enticement that these people could win contests. 

Trying to tie classic films with lifestyle choices is not why these films were created in the first place. They went off track with the business model.

They should have been using  their catalogue to promote film preservation and to bring classic film to younger viewers (getting rid of Essentials Jr. was a mistake). 

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

I always felt it was a way to gain political and economic information about viewers with the enticement that these people could win contests. 

And revenue?  Wasn't there a membership fee?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the original poster even referring to programming on TCM?

By their "All I see is movies from 80s being shown"  comment I think not.

Possibly (likely?)  they are talking about the MOVIES! TV network.  The title of the thread after all is "Movies."

Not too long ago someone posted a complaint on the  TCM boards about a movie being scheduled in "parts"  and they were actually talking about something scheduled on MOVIES! *

 

*The exclamation point is part of the network's name; it's not my emphasis.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/8/2021 at 10:45 AM, chinaseas said:

Too me a classic film is from the 1920 to the 1950. I use to watch and record movies all the time but  now not so much.

The station should conform to your tastes & wishes? Are you their entire audience?

  • Thanks 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...