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

Turner Classic Movies: Enemy of Film Watchers


Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, MusicalsGalore said:

It's not a dumb article whatever that means. It's a reactionary piece, and the author is certainly entitled to feel that way and respond with a thought-provoking article.

As I said yesterday in a post I made, the Reframed series was preaching to the liberal choir. They needed at least one panelist to be conservative. They are alienating half the American population (half their potential viewership) by going too far in a liberal direction. They now are dealing with a huge backlash. They can still promote a woke agenda and still try to educate the audience but need to be a bit more moderate. TCM was never this extreme before and it's to the detriment of the channel when they lose objectivity and balance. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

What?  Are huge crowds going to storm the TCM offices to overturn their programming? 

And what's good about being moderate about racism, sexism, and bigotry?

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

What?  Are huge crowds going to storm the TCM offices to overturn their programming? 

And what's good about being moderate about racism, sexism, and bigotry?

Huge crowds (the twitterati) take to the internet.

Nobody said anything about being moderate about racism, sexism and biogtry. (There is a weird trend on these boards lately to misconstrue posts instead of asking clarifying questions.)

But I think the Reframed series could have been more moderately balanced in terms of representing different political points of view and looking at things more objectively. Specifically, why the films contain questionable material by today's standards and looking at the history of woke-ism. A discussion on the history of woke-ism is where I think a conservative panelist would have brought a unique perspective to the proceedings.

TCM was too busy playing organ grinder and monkey, pushing its own ultra-liberal agenda.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, txfilmfan said:

IMO, he's doing the same thing TCM does often: making a mountain out of a molehill.

Very true, Tex. VERY true.

But then again, molehill-to-mountain fabrication seems to be the order of the day throughout the land now days, doesn't it.

(...I hear it contributes to job creations...especially in the punditry field)

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

Very true, Tex. VERY true.

But then again, molehill-to-mountain fabrication seems to be the order of the day throughout the land now days, doesn't it.

(...I hear it contributes to job creations...especially in the punditry field)

Dargo,

I think you're the first person to ever use the word punditry in a post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The enemy of my enemy is my friend, unless they're another enemy. Yeah, America

was more chock full of racists in the 1930s and 1940s than it is today. NSS. It is an

 an article from The National Review after all. Whaddaya expect?

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, MusicalsGalore said:
Quote

Armond White

I literally stopped at those two words.

Even Roger Ebert once publicly gave in to his reader/colleague pressure and admitted that, yes, maybe the,  quote, "persecuted" Armond really was a deliberately provocateur troll critic, and not just a nut, as we'd thought up to that point.  To be honest, I wasn't aware Armond was still employed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, TopBilled said:

It's not a dumb article whatever that means

 

It means that the article is, in fact, dumb.

 

Armond White is the worst.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, TopBilled said:

Huge crowds (the twitterati) take to the internet.

Bunches of people twittering hardly seems worthy of the ominous consequences portended by 32 point boldface type (yawn.)  What a letdown.  I thought at least a Congressional investigation, with the Gang of Four hauled up before glowering Representatives. 

By the way, how huge?  Like, a dozen? 

Again, what's so extreme about saying racism, sexism, and bigotry is bad?  I think you are exhibiting your extremism.

  • Sad 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TikiSoo said:

My thoughts are: Links are lazy....disappointed the OP did not include a response, only asking for ours. 

Do you think it can be inferred the OP agrees with the sentiments expressed in the article? Otherwise, why would it have crossed their radar, why would they take the time to  register on this site and make a thread about it..?

I don't think posting links automatically signifies laziness. That's a bit of a leap.

I was going to copy and paste the article into the thread but wasn't sure if the article was protected by copyright. I would have posted the link as well, just to be 'safe.'

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Vidor said:

 

It means that the article is, in fact, dumb.

 

Armond White is the worst.

I read the article. I didn't find it 'dumb.' I certainly did not agree with 80% of it because it think it used too broad a brush stroke in its condemnation of TCM. But I think some of the basic ideas made sense and more importantly, I can see that TCM has caused a backlash with its Reframed programming. Gone are the days when TCM can operate in a vacuum, using films to support political theses without being considerably challenged. 

As I have stated several times already in other threads, TCM needs a more moderate panel of hosts or else it continues to alienate up to 50% of its audience. If the current liberal hosts do not care about that other half, then they're engaging in a reckless practice which will eventually put them out of business. They need to tone it down a bit.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, TopBilled said:

I read the article. I didn't find it 'dumb.' I certainly did not agree with 80% of it because it think it used too broad a brush stroke in its condemnation of TCM. But I think some of the basic ideas made sense and more importantly, I can see that TCM has caused a backlash with its Reframed programming. Gone are the days when TCM can operate in a vacuum, using films to support political theses without being considerably challenged. 

As I have stated several times already in other threads, TCM needs a more moderate panel of hosts or else it continues to alienate up to 50% of its audience. If the current liberal hosts do not care about that other half, then they're engaging in a reckless practice which will eventually put them out of business. They need to tone it down a bit.

I'd more say I didn't agree with 60%.  And too, I'm a bit tired of hearing and reading about "woke" this and that.  What's that supposed to mean, anyway?  Seems to me it means something different to each different person who parrots that term. And that's basically what's going on here.   Some wonks on TCM give what's basically their own personal opinions and mask them as "insightful observations" and some people who watch and listen to their tripe  think that because those people are on television and are considered "experts" of something, they'll come in here  fully "pod-like" and parrot what the gathering of hosts said and treat it like chiseled in stone gospel.   Personally, I think TCM  should get out of the "tell 'em what and how to think"  business and get back to the business of  showing movies.  Or, if they feel they HAVE to "educate" us dumb masses, do it on Saturday and Sunday mornings when other cable stations broadcast E/I  programming.  ;) 

Sepiatone

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Sepiatone said:

Personally, I think TCM  should get out of the "tell 'em what and how to think"  business 

Totally agree. I think it's (more than) a bit condescending on the part of the hosts to feel they have to educate viewers through the opinions or beliefs they are sharing in the wraparounds. They are misusing their platform. And the only ones who will not take offense are the other liberals who think exactly like they do.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/1/2021 at 8:32 AM, TopBilled said:

It's not a dumb article whatever that means. It's a reactionary piece, and the author is certainly entitled to feel that way and respond with a thought-provoking article.

As I said yesterday in a post I made, the Reframed series was preaching to the liberal choir. They needed at least one panelist to be conservative. They are alienating half the American population (half their potential viewership) by going too far in a liberal direction. They now are dealing with a huge backlash. They can still promote a woke agenda and still try to educate the audience but need to be a bit more moderate. TCM was never this extreme before and it's to the detriment of the channel when they lose objectivity and balance. 

Two reasons for this:  1) Osborne would not have let it happen; 2) Mank has a agenda and too many axes to grind.   He's been on "mission creep" for quite some time:  "All the Presidents' Men" at the festival with Carl Bernstein and the other two goof-balls who were Hillary cheerleaders (this was in 2016).     Politics (or an official political POV) on the channel should be avoided to the greatest extent possible.   Being Atlanta-based, TCM may be tempted to jump on the Georgia voting laws like Coke and American Airlines, but I would strongly advise against it.  People don't watch TCM for politics, that's what they want to escape.   For that they can turn to that other Atlanta-headquartered  organization that Ted Turner had something to do with, called CNN.   Nuff said ! 

  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, cinecrazydc said:

Two reasons for this:  1) Osborne would not have let it happen; 2) Mank has a agenda and too many axes to grind.   He's been on "mission creep" for quite some time:  "All the Presidents' Men" at the festival with Carl Bernstein and the other two goof-balls who were Hillary cheerleaders (this was in 2016).     Politics (or an official political POV) on the channel should be avoided to the greatest extent possible.   Being Atlanta-based, TCM may be tempted to jump on the Georgia voting laws like Coke and American Airlines, but I would strongly advise against it.  People don't watch TCM for politics, that's what they want to escape.   For that they can turn to that other Atlanta-headquartered  organization that Ted Turner had something to do with, called CNN.   Nuff said ! 

 

fast-forward-button_318-9095.jpg

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...