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

"...Time for a refresh?"


Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, JakeHolman said:

If you read the NY Times article and Warner Media, TCM makes it clear culture does change and they must adapt to it. I guess they figure the baby boomers are dying off (which is true) and change is inevitable. Plus the influence of wokeism. It will be interesting to see the percentage of newer films in future schedules (70's plus) going forward. 

If THIS turns out to be the case, then I can't WAIT to see how the hosts will explain Blazing Saddles to all those poor little overly-sensitive wokesters out there in the coming years!

(...hell, THAT would be worth the price of my constantly rising cable bill right THERE!!!)

LOL

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 37kitties said:

There's only one kind.

What you refer to as "the other kind" is just an artificial creation of an unwell, unwise, unexamining mind.

It's really just another example of adding another meaning to an already existing word. Happens all the

time. Wingnut, screwdriver, snowflake, etc. The other meaning of wingnut is no more artificial than other

words with multiple meanings. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 I don’t mind the updated set, when TCM said a refresh I was expecting something like that, didn’t know they were going to redo the logo but I don’t mind that either. But the rest of it is a debacle.  If TCM wanted to modernize it’s understandable but the film intro is so  detached, disjointed, and frankly unimaginative (another debacle like hiring tiff). The b/w Rube Goldberg intro was so appropriate and cohesive. Love the set, logo acceptable but the rest 86 it!

Link to post
Share on other sites

To the TCM hosts:  If I want a film studies course, I will enroll in a film studies course.  But I have no interest whatsoever  to do that.

 I just want to watch some d*** movies!   Leave me alone.

 

 

  • Like 5
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mr6666 said:

:huh:

If this guy spent 3 months creating this promo, he must be the slowest producer/editor on earth.  I figure once you had the script recorded it should take you a few hours to put this together.  Of course, if you had to get approvals for every single shot selected (and I assume that was the case) that would take some time.  

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mr6666 said:

:huh:

Let's see.  This promo introducing the new TCM versus this work of genius introducing TCM when it first became a network.  You make the call.

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, brianNH said:

To the TCM hosts:  If I want a film studies course, I will enroll in a film studies course.  But I have no interest whatsoever  to do that.

 I just want to watch some d*** movies!   Leave me alone.

 

Well then Brian ol' boy, once again, the ANSWER to this little issue of yours can be found RIGHT HERE, dude...

2-66.jpg

Ya see, all ya gotta do is push that button on your remote control just as you start seein' one of those hosts introduce themselves to ya while they begin their little intro and VOILA, all your troubles will be over in a flash!

JUST be sure to hit that button AGAIN when see that MGM Lion or that big Warner Brothers logo beginning to appear on your TV set.

(...and 'cause ya see, I PERSONALLY only ever use that button on MY remote control during election years, and because I DON'T want MY intelligence insulted by those damn POLITICAL ADS they run all the damn time on other TV stations during those years...nope, ya see, I can LIVE with Ben's nasally voice and what he's sayin' MUCH better than I can THOSE damn things!!!)

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, TikiSoo said:

I loved the original TCM charactor logos:

b3d49fe295de70ae5fefeaa930f47a8c.jpg

th?id=OIP.ZcNINdAdvqMym4j0o1jSpQHaEE&pid

They were of their time, but paid homage to classic movie genres. I especially loved the animated ones.

I do like these logos, and so far am not fond of the new logo. But the programming--as of right now--is sufficiently unchanged that I can live with it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, lydecker said:

If this guy spent 3 months creating this promo, he must be the slowest producer/editor on earth.  I figure once you had the script recorded it should take you a few hours to put this together.  Of course, if you had to get approvals for every single shot selected (and I assume that was the case) that would take some time.  

Oh but surely they must have focus-grouped it, tweaking it ever so incrementally, until they got the desired response.

(When I see other items that I know have been heavily focus-grouped, I assume the selected focus group has absolutely nothing in common with me.)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

https://pressroom.warnermedia.com/us/media-release/where-then-meets-now-turner-classic-movies-unveils-new-look-meet-moment

I don't mind the "refresh."  It's colorful, it has a retro, yet modern vibe, I like it.  

I believe all the abstract designs are supposed to be various C's that match the "4 key C's of the brand" curate, context, connection, culture.  

A while back, when TCM changed the website to black and white, everyone complained about that.  Now they add color and everyone's complaining about that.  They change the font from one with serifs, to one without.  They literally just changed their slogan (from the "let's movie" slogan that everyone complained about) and gave their marketing a new look as an attempt to give Classic Hollywood a modern, fresh look, yet everyone's complaining.  TCM tries new things and continues to evolve to attract new audiences and people complain.  However, if TCM were to keep their 1994 look and never change, people would complain that they've gotten stale and refuse to update.

The way that everyone on social media (Twitter and Facebook included) are carrying on, one would have thought that they had added commercials.

Frankly, I'm just sick of the constant complaining about things that are so innocuous like a channel's attempts to keep up with modern sensibilities even though at the core, they still have the same mission they had 27 years ago.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, speedracer5 said:

https://pressroom.warnermedia.com/us/media-release/where-then-meets-now-turner-classic-movies-unveils-new-look-meet-moment

I don't mind the "refresh."  It's colorful, it has a retro, yet modern vibe, I like it.  

I believe all the abstract designs are supposed to be various C's that match the "4 key C's of the brand" curate, context, connection, culture.  

A while back, when TCM changed the website to black and white, everyone complained about that.  Now they add color and everyone's complaining about that.  They change the font from one with serifs, to one without.  They literally just changed their slogan and gave their marketing a new look as an attempt to give Classic Hollywood a modern, fresh look, yet everyone's complaining.  TCM tries new things and continues to evolve to attract new audiences and people complain.  However, if TCM were to keep their 1994 look and never change, people would complain that they've gotten stale and refuse to update.

The way that everyone on social media (Twitter and Facebook included) are carrying on, one would have thought that they had added commercials.

Frankly, I'm just sick of the constant complaining about things that are so innocuous like a channel's attempts to keep up with modern sensibilities even though at the core, they still have the same mission they had 27 years ago.

Well said!

I ask myself: do I want TCM to still exist in 20 years?  My answer is, of course, yes.

 The next question is: how does TCM keep adding to its audience over the next 20 years so that it still has a reason to exist?

I’m no expert on such things, but I have a feeling that it must have something to do with presenting the channel in a way that’ll appeal to people younger than me, so that there continues to be an audience for these wonderful movies.

So,  while I already miss the old TCM logo and some of the other aspects of the “old” TCM style (although that style never was static), the reality is that TCM has to change to keep existing.  As long as they don’t change the core mission — presenting classic movies, mostly from the Golden Age of Hollywood, with hosts, commentary, context, and associated shorts and trailers, with no commercials — I can live with changes in the presentation.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I had a look at the new designs, etc., and I like them! I've often felt that much of the TCM design was way too "Noir-centric," meaning it raised the Noir genre to pride of place. I like Noir, I'm just not as obsessed by the genre as some.

I just heard Ben's little reassuring speech, which should set us all at ease. I like the set design, but I want to know if those books on the shelf in the distance behind him are real, and if so, what are they?

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dargo, believe it or not, but my remote control has no mute button!  It really doesn't.  As God is my witness, I cannot mute the TV with the remote.

As always, I appreciate your  ingenuity and willingness to help out fellow viewers.  A great comfort on this dizzying opening night of "Here's Ben" -- all 180 degrees of him.

Thanks.

Brian

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, BingFan said:

Well said!

I ask myself: do I want TCM to still exist in 20 years?  My answer is, of course, yes.

 The next question is: how does TCM keep adding to its audience over the next 20 years so that it still has a reason to exist?

I’m no expert on such things, but I have a feeling that it must have something to do with presenting the channel in a way that’ll appeal to people younger than me, so that there continues to be an audience for these wonderful movies.

So,  while I already miss the old TCM logo and some of the other aspects of the “old” TCM style (although that style never was static), the reality is that TCM has to change to keep existing.  As long as they don’t change the core mission — presenting classic movies, mostly from the Golden Age of Hollywood, with hosts, commentary, context, and associated shorts and trailers, with no commercials — I can live with changes in the presentation.

Thank you! Heck, when TCM debuted in 1994, I was 10.  I loved the old logos that featured the various retro-designed people as part of the logo.  I specifically remember there being a gangster type, a glamorous woman, I think there was a cameraman, and I'm sure a lot more.  What I do remember about TCM during that time, when internet and websites were in their infancy, is that TCM had a TERRIBLE website.  The schedules were very difficult to navigate.  I remember it being easier to look up the schedule in our TV Guide (not the periodical) supplement that came in the Sunday paper.  I remember Robert Osborne when he was "young (relatively speaking, of course) and obviously he was wonderful.  I also loved the guy who hosted AMC, he had a very Osborne-like quality as well, but obviously wasn't the same.  The host of A&E's Biography also had the same quality.

However, I'm sure I was in the minority watching old movies at the age of 10 on TCM.  Even through high school, I knew very few people who watched old movies and old television shows.  However, in recent years, with social media and a focus on making TCM more mainstream and more relatable to the younger demographic, there are tons of people who are obsessed with classic film.  Even the lesser known actors (e.g. not household names), not just Marilyn Monroe or Audrey Hepburn, have devout fans.  People like Reginald Gardiner, Ann Dvorak, Joan Blondell, Jean Arthur, Aline MacMahon, Joel McCrea, Judy Holliday... All have rabid fans online.  These fandoms are directly responsible for more books and articles being researched and written about people who previously had nothing written about them.  How many more Monroe biographies does the world need? However, who wouldn't love a biography about SZ Sakall?!  

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, TikiSoo said:

Hey hey! Art Deco was considered "Streamline Moderne" and adapted in the late 50's as "Atomic". Both are interesting, innovative styles, the difference is Moderne is smooth lines & Atomic is more dynamic. Most big design shifts come center decade- 1965-1975 and 1945-1955.

3e3feb17103a976a26fb92f375b25961.jpg

I've collected Moderne for years and am so glad others have finally come around to liking/appreciating & buying it!

Agreed on dumb "upgrade". Disagree on making it "period" design style. I loved the original TCM charactor logos:

b3d49fe295de70ae5fefeaa930f47a8c.jpg

th?id=OIP.ZcNINdAdvqMym4j0o1jSpQHaEE&pid

They were of their time, but paid homage to classic movie genres. I especially loved the animated ones.

https://moviecollectoroh.com/pics_to_hotlink_on_TCM/tcm-original-clipart-collage.jpg

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 4
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...