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

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Sepiatone said:

If that was so, likely something like THIS might be playing in the background!  ;) 

Far OUT, man!  :D

Sepiatone

People find sitar music relaxing??

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Mr. Gorman said:

I'M SITTIN' DOWNTOWN IN A RAILWAY STATION . . . HOPING THAT THE TRAIN IS ON TIME! 

(I'm goin' to Tarkio Road, btw). 

ONE TOKE OVER THE LINE was sung on the Lawrence Welk Show way back when.  Believe it or not.  It's hilarious!  The Maestro said it was a "modern spiritual", I believe. 

 

LOL

Yep, I remember this too, Mr.G.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Alicia Malone.  Some of the comments on this post about her seem harsh.  I like the way she shares interesting information before/after films and she's a good host.  Some of the other hosts are amazing especially Eddie Muller and Jacqueline Stewart but that doesn't mean Alicia Malone isn't good.  Muller and Stewart have a wealth of knowledge and share great insights on classic movies.  I've rented noir films that include commentaries by Eddie Muller that show his expertise and really enhance your appreciation of the film.  Jacqueline Stewart knows the history of film and goes the extra mile to help people understand the beauty and artistic quality of silent film.    I like the other hosts too.  Let's be a little more kind.  We're all part of the same classic film community.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Toto said:

I like the way she shares interesting information before/after films and she's a good host. 

Yes, but her insights aren't exclusive the way Ben Mankiewicz's are.

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Toto said:

I like Alicia Malone.  Some of the comments on this post about her seem harsh.  I like the way she shares interesting information before/after films and she's a good host.  Some of the other hosts are amazing especially Eddie Muller and Jacqueline Stewart but that doesn't mean Alicia Malone isn't good.  Muller and Stewart have a wealth of knowledge and share great insights on classic movies.  I've rented noir films that include commentaries by Eddie Muller that show his expertise and really enhance your appreciation of the film.  Jacqueline Stewart knows the history of film and goes the extra mile to help people understand the beauty and artistic quality of silent film.    I like the other hosts too.  Let's be a little more kind.  We're all part of the same classic film community.

Yes yes, Toto. I agree with everything you said here.

Still though, isn't it a shame that Ben and Alicia (wait for it here...and I KNOW you know what's comin' here, don't YA) both talk through their noses???!!!

LOL

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked Alicia at first, until we got to know her. The original post is right about the constant preaching with a "woke" analysis for seemingly half the movies she intros. My money says that the Astrology segments are her idea as well. As far as the sex appeal, she's pretty cute, but she's not a smoke show. I'm sure TCM could find another cutie to replace her, and I wouldn't miss her a bit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, David Proulx said:

I liked Alicia at first, until we got to know her. The original post is right about the constant preaching with a "woke" analysis for seemingly half the movies she intros. My money says that the Astrology segments are her idea as well. As far as the sex appeal, she's pretty cute, but she's not a smoke show. I'm sure TCM could find another cutie to replace her, and I wouldn't miss her a bit.

None of us know for sure, but knowing the way corporations work, I'd wager the people you see on camera have very little input in the final say as to what goes on air.  AT&T/WB/whoever won't take the risk.  Rest assured that everything that you see has been blessed by higher-ups and lawyers.

The on-air talent may suggest ideas in meetings and whatnot (perhaps even more so for Muller and Stewart), but by and large it's the unseen programmers who do the heavy lifting in that department.

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

None of us know for sure, but knowing the way corporations work, I'd wager the people you see on camera have very little input in the final say as to what goes on air.  AT&T/WB/whoever won't take the risk.  Rest assured that everything that you see has been blessed by higher-ups and lawyers.

The on-air talent may suggest ideas in meetings and whatnot (perhaps even more so for Muller and Stewart), but by and large it's the unseen programmers who do the heavy lifting in that department.

Since TCM doesn't resemble the size of the big networks, my vision of how things work there is that the on air talent (along with background writers, producers, etc) does come up with the ideas for themes & segments, a la SNL. I'm sure all ideas have to meet with approval from the producers and maybe higher-ups in some cases, but I see her fingerprints all over every sappy movie she introduces, and the woke intros & analyses are her supervised discretion, in my view.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, David Proulx said:

Since TCM doesn't resemble the size of the big networks, my vision of how things work there is that the on air talent (along with background writers, producers, etc) does come up with the ideas for themes & segments, a la SNL. I'm sure all ideas have to meet with approval from the producers and maybe higher-ups in some cases, but I see her fingerprints all over every sappy movie she introduces, and the woke intros & analyses are her supervised discretion, in my view.

Could be, but I doubt it.  I think a lot of people give the on-air talent more credit for any influence on what you see on TCM.  She is probably given the "sappy" assignments because of where they're slotted on the schedule (i.e., they fall during her normally scheduled time) and her scripts are written that way.

Even though TCM itself may not have a staff the size of the old mainline broadcast networks or larger cable outfits, it's still part of a very large corporate organization, and its image and, in part, the images of the hosts,  are carefully crafted by people we never see on the air.  They won't take the risk to have an on-air presenter go rogue and potentially damage that image.  The "woke-ness" of TCM, however one may perceive it, comes from above, not from the on-air hosts.

This LA Times article might give some insight.  In it, Charles Tabesh, TCM senior VP of programming notes that when Mankiewicz first started on TCM, they asked him to grow a goatee and they made his scripts less reverential.  It's all about an image and tone.  

I do think Muller and Stewart likely have more input on their scripts because of their in-depth knowledge of their specialties.  But all the hosts have other jobs, and doing research on the number of films they intro, writing the scripts, and getting them approved would likely take more time than the 3 regular hosts have to devote to TCM, as they record these intros/outros in big batches.  For example, they usually do the entire "Summer Under The Stars" intros in one batch.  They have staffers to do all of groundwork so that they can come in, record their segments, and get on with their other jobs (none of them live in Atlanta).

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/classichollywood/la-ca-mn-classic-hollywood-mankiewicz-20150802-story.html

Here's an excerpt, if there's an issue getting to the article:

When Mankiewicz began, noted Charles Tabesh, TCM’s senior vice president of programming, “we really emphasized the differences [between them]. We asked him to have a goatee. We had him in a set that was a downtown loft, and his scripts were much less reverential.”  

 

But now, Tabesh said, “he’s a beloved member of the family.”

“People grew to accept him and trust us that we weren’t changing the channel or getting rid of Robert,” he added. “There was an evolution in terms of the intros. We changed his set and didn’t make him have a goatee.”

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, I have a feeling that all the hosts, with the possible exception of Eddie who will occasionally make some sort of offhanded comment about it, side with the whole "woke-ness" issue. And personally I have NO issue with this.

Nope, the ONLY "issue" I have with this whole thing is with people who get THEIR damn noses bent all out of shape because one of the hosts have attempted to provide what is ACTUALLY some short of historical context and who as I have noticed are NOT supplying  "revisionist history" to those viewers out there who might NOT be familar with the era that these old classic films were made and released.

OR in other words, I'm getting PRETTY damn SICK and TIRED of "One Post Wonders" coming on these boards and complaining that they were "offended" that their strongly held beliefs were being challenged by something one of the hosts have said during one of their wraparound segments, and as if what the host has said will somehow lead this country down some "path to ruin" and/or will "poison the minds of the young and impressionable".

(...YEP, pretty damn sick and tired of THIS and NOT with any of the hosts personally...and yes, okay, even though I WOULD prefer that both Ben and Alicia possessed a little more resonance in their voices and were a little less nasally, and say, had as mellifluous a sounding voice as MINE, but hey, one can't have everything they want in life, RIGHT?!)  LOL

 

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

Could be, but I doubt it.  I think a lot of people give the on-air talent more credit for any influence on what you see on TCM.  She is probably given the "sappy" assignments because of where they're slotted on the schedule (i.e., they fall during her normally scheduled time) and her scripts are written that way.

Even though TCM itself may not have a staff the size of the old mainline broadcast networks or larger cable outfits, it's still part of a very large corporate organization, and its image and, in part, the images of the hosts,  are carefully crafted by people we never see on the air.  They won't take the risk to have an on-air presenter go rogue and potentially damage that image.  The "woke-ness" of TCM, however one may perceive it, comes from above, not from the on-air hosts.

This LA Times article might give some insight.  In it, Charles Tabesh, TCM senior VP of programming notes that when Mankiewicz first started on TCM, they asked him to grow a goatee and they made his scripts less reverential.  It's all about an image and tone.  

I do think Muller and Stewart likely have more input on their scripts because of their in-depth knowledge of their specialties.  But all the hosts have other jobs, and doing research on the number of films they intro, writing the scripts, and getting them approved would likely take more time than the 3 regular hosts have to devote to TCM, as they record these intros/outros in big batches.  For example, they usually do the entire "Summer Under The Stars" intros in one batch.  They have staffers to do all of groundwork so that they can come in, record their segments, and get on with their other jobs (none of them live in Atlanta).

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/classichollywood/la-ca-mn-classic-hollywood-mankiewicz-20150802-story.html

Here's an excerpt, if there's an issue getting to the article:

When Mankiewicz began, noted Charles Tabesh, TCM’s senior vice president of programming, “we really emphasized the differences [between them]. We asked him to have a goatee. We had him in a set that was a downtown loft, and his scripts were much less reverential.”  

 

But now, Tabesh said, “he’s a beloved member of the family.”

“People grew to accept him and trust us that we weren’t changing the channel or getting rid of Robert,” he added. “There was an evolution in terms of the intros. We changed his set and didn’t make him have a goatee.”

 

Tabesh was there when Robert was.  As long as he is still there now.  Everything else is meaningless.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Sepiatone said:

If that was so, likely something like THIS might be playing in the background!  ;) 

Far OUT, man!  :D

Sepiatone

Here you go.  This time not Eric Carmen - as far as I know.

Relaxing Delta brainwave sound.  "Delta Brainwaves Sound Bath for Deep Dreamless Sleep."

Delta = asleep, is anyone really still asleep?

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dargo said:

Nope, the ONLY "issue" I have with this whole thing is with people who get THEIR damn noses bent all out of shape because one of the hosts have attempted to provide what is ACTUALLY some short of historical context and who as I have noticed are NOT supplying  "revisionist history" to those viewers out there who might NOT be familar with the era that these old classic films were made and released.

 

Thanks for posting this Dargo!  I totally agree.  I really like Malone's comments that put films into historical context and I'm sure many others do as well.  Once again, I think it is unkind to make a personal attack on Malone.  We're all part of the same classic film community.

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

Here you go.  This time not Eric Carmen - as far as I know.

Relaxing Delta brainwave sound.  "Delta Brainwaves Sound Bath for Deep Dreamless Sleep."

Delta = asleep, is anyone really still asleep?

 

 

:D  As I wasn't listening through headphones, that "wave" played equally through each of the cheap PC speakers I have hooked up to my computer.  ;)  Neither can be turned down or off separately. 

Sepia( resonate)tone  ;) 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, txfilmfan said:

Could be, but I doubt it.  I think a lot of people give the on-air talent more credit for any influence on what you see on TCM.  She is probably given the "sappy" assignments because of where they're slotted on the schedule (i.e., they fall during her normally scheduled time) and her scripts are written that way.

Even though TCM itself may not have a staff the size of the old mainline broadcast networks or larger cable outfits, it's still part of a very large corporate organization, and its image and, in part, the images of the hosts,  are carefully crafted by people we never see on the air.  They won't take the risk to have an on-air presenter go rogue and potentially damage that image.  The "woke-ness" of TCM, however one may perceive it, comes from above, not from the on-air hosts.

This LA Times article might give some insight.  In it, Charles Tabesh, TCM senior VP of programming notes that when Mankiewicz first started on TCM, they asked him to grow a goatee and they made his scripts less reverential.  It's all about an image and tone.  

I do think Muller and Stewart likely have more input on their scripts because of their in-depth knowledge of their specialties.  But all the hosts have other jobs, and doing research on the number of films they intro, writing the scripts, and getting them approved would likely take more time than the 3 regular hosts have to devote to TCM, as they record these intros/outros in big batches.  For example, they usually do the entire "Summer Under The Stars" intros in one batch.  They have staffers to do all of groundwork so that they can come in, record their segments, and get on with their other jobs (none of them live in Atlanta).

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/classichollywood/la-ca-mn-classic-hollywood-mankiewicz-20150802-story.html

Here's an excerpt, if there's an issue getting to the article:

When Mankiewicz began, noted Charles Tabesh, TCM’s senior vice president of programming, “we really emphasized the differences [between them]. We asked him to have a goatee. We had him in a set that was a downtown loft, and his scripts were much less reverential.”  

 

But now, Tabesh said, “he’s a beloved member of the family.”

“People grew to accept him and trust us that we weren’t changing the channel or getting rid of Robert,” he added. “There was an evolution in terms of the intros. We changed his set and didn’t make him have a goatee.”

 

I think the overall philosophy of the netwok is set from above, no doubt, but the hiring of all, including the on-air talent, is all toward that end. The day-to-day operations then turn to the mechanisms in place. I've always seen it as the monthly themes, etc come from the producers, and the lesser, more specific items, like interviewees, intros, and schedules, comes from the writers, staff, hosts, producers. I would bet there are regular meetings where ideas get presented, then approved, or not. 

Also, why do you include Stewart in mix of influence? I've see less of her than any of them. I see Muller & Mankiewicz being the hosts with clout, although Eddie has his hands full, basically running an entire genre (noir). Mankiewicz was there and starting to establish himself before Robert retired, so I would think his words carry weight. There's a reason they hire hosts with such resumes, which they boasted quited loudly & often for their first several months. They chose them for their film knowledge, which I have to believe is to contribute to the writing, the ideas, suggestions of theme and star spotlight, etc. Otherwise, they could have hired any empty headed readers of teleprompters, who are a dime a dozen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think any host should be off-limits to criticize, but so far I haven't found Alicia to be any worse than the others as far as preachiness.  I will say those blue stretch pants she's wearing today are not flattering, however.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Katie_G said:

I don't think any host should be off-limits to criticize, but so far I haven't found Alicia to be any worse than the others as far as preachiness.  I will say those blue stretch pants she's wearing today are not flattering, however.

She doesn't need flattering.

She's gorgeous enough.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, David Proulx said:

I think the overall philosophy of the netwok is set from above, no doubt, but the hiring of all, including the on-air talent, is all toward that end. The day-to-day operations then turn to the mechanisms in place. I've always seen it as the monthly themes, etc come from the producers, and the lesser, more specific items, like interviewees, intros, and schedules, comes from the writers, staff, hosts, producers. I would bet there are regular meetings where ideas get presented, then approved, or not. 

Also, why do you include Stewart in mix of influence? I've see less of her than any of them. I see Muller & Mankiewicz being the hosts with clout, although Eddie has his hands full, basically running an entire genre (noir). Mankiewicz was there and starting to establish himself before Robert retired, so I would think his words carry weight. There's a reason they hire hosts with such resumes, which they boasted quited loudly & often for their first several months. They chose them for their film knowledge, which I have to believe is to contribute to the writing, the ideas, suggestions of theme and star spotlight, etc. Otherwise, they could have hired any empty headed readers of teleprompters, who are a dime a dozen.

By influence, I mean influencing the content of the scripts she presents, and likely the selection of silent films she presents.  The reason I include her as having more influence in this arena over Malone, Karger or Mankiewicz is that she's a recognized expert in her field, academically.  The others got into the game either because of their other media exposure, or intense personal interest in film that led them up the ladder to their present positions. 

I'm not questioning their credentials in the least, as TCM hired them because of their backgrounds.  It lends more credibility to the enterprise to do so rather than hire just any telegenic presenter, but from the LA Times article, it's pretty clear (to me anyway) that they are handed scripts for the most part, as Ben's early image and scripts were crafted a certain way to create the desired effect (to contrast with Osborne).  I don't think that's changed at all with the addition of other hosts.   If you look at their other projects, I don't see how they'd have time to do the work to write those intros/outros themselves.

Again, I think they have input, but I don't think they have final say by any means, and I still believe that their on-air scripts are written for them.

And, as I said in an earlier post, none of us on the outside will know exactly how it works, unless we ask.  It's all just conjecture on everyone's part otherwise.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Katie_G said:

I will say those blue stretch pants she's wearing today are not flattering, however.

I had a house full of people today for a birthday party. TCM was on in the background and her GOD-AWFUL pants brought the party to a screeching halt. The party girl -her 80th- exclaimed "What is she wearing!" and all heads turned and you could hear a pin drop. 

We haven't seen a worse pair of double knit slacks since Hillary ran.

 

  • Haha 5
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
© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...