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

"...Time for a refresh?"


Recommended Posts

Using MovieCollectorOH's  September schedule, this is the distribution of offerings. I don't differentiate between shorts and features.

1910s -1 (Chaplin short)
1920s - 20  (TCM seems to be having some kind of silent film festival at the end of the month.)
1930s -73
1940s - 88
1950s - 106
1960s - 70
1970s - 28
1980s - 12
1990s - 8
2000s - 0
2010s 7 (mainly documentaries)
2020 - 1 (documentary)

That doesn't mean that TCM couldn't slowly "creep" forward with the age of the films until the majority are from the 60s instead of the 1950s. The only thing that really holds TCM back from pretending that films pre 1970 do not exist is cost. It is far cheaper to show lots of B films from what Warner Brothers owns from the 30s and 40s than it is to go out and buy films from the modern era. The cost would simply be prohibitive. 

That being said, I would be willing to bet that no film featuring anybody in blackface with the exception of the Jazz Singer because of its place in film history or negative black stereotypes such as those with Willie Best will ever be shown on the channel again, unless it features a stern lecture pre-film from some Zoomer with body art on his/her forehead.  

Wonder Bar (1934) was last shown in June  2007at 3AM as part of the Screened Out: Gay Images in Film festival. And Golden Dawn (1930) - last shown in May 2005 - forget about it. 

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

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.

"Younger" audiences aren't attracted by logos, typefaces, colors...branding. They are attracted to the station by hearing directors they admire (ie Cohen Bros, Tarantino, Spielberg, Scorsese, etc) talk about the classic films that influenced them & checking them out. Ask any teen if they want to see a "Hitchcock film" and they know it's old but should be good.

I don't know about you, but I enjoy the inclusion of the past "incorrectness" shown in movies. Nothing is more shocking than seeing how women, non-whites and kids were acceptably treated 100 years ago. Seeing it in a movie where you're emotionally involved in the story is a much better historical context than some talking head dweeb 'splainin' it away.

What TCM (and any classic movie fan) needs to do instead of trying to smooth over the "political incorrectness" of old movies, is to reassure younger people black&white, foreign & silent films can be worth watching. Personally, that's the prejudice I'd like to see "awakened".

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course this is how I learned about how such treatment existed long before any host at TCM began talking about it. And I think there has been promotion of the value of films outside of these depictions.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

No matter what, ***big thanks*** to whomever spared the MESSAGEBOARDS during this reinventioneering and to everyone who manages and moderates them.
 

(Believe it or not, I would miss most of you very much were they to go away a la IMDb)

  • Like 12
Link to post
Share on other sites

The TCM logo has changed in the upper left hand corner with the new double-C, and the logo on the tab looks different when I'm away on another webpage (I'm one of those types who keeps 15 or 20 windows open at the same time), so different I couldn't find it for five minutes just now trying to get back to it.

Too much baseball to watch last night, so I haven't seen the "new" TCM yet, but I'm planning to watch tonight.

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

No matter what, ***big thanks*** to whomever spared the MESSAGEBOARDS during this reinventioneering and to everyone who manages and moderates them.
 

(Believe it or not, I would miss most of you very much were they to go away a la IMDb)

Right back at ya!

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TikiSoo said:

"Younger" audiences aren't attracted by logos, typefaces, colors...branding. They are attracted to the station by hearing directors they admire (ie Cohen Bros, Tarantino, Spielberg, Scorsese, etc) talk about the classic films that influenced them & checking them out. Ask any teen if they want to see a "Hitchcock film" and they know it's old but should be good.

I don't know about you, but I enjoy the inclusion of the past "incorrectness" shown in movies. Nothing is more shocking than seeing how women, non-whites and kids were acceptably treated 100 years ago. Seeing it in a movie where you're emotionally involved in the story is a much better historical context than some talking head dweeb 'splainin' it away.

What TCM (and any classic movie fan) needs to do instead of trying to smooth over the "political incorrectness" of old movies, is to reassure younger people black&white, foreign & silent films can be worth watching. Personally, that's the prejudice I'd like to see "awakened".

Absolutely right and brilliantly expressed!

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm...Seems I should purchase some 'Swag' while it still is available. (with the old Logos of course)

A few Shirts, Socks, and what not.  I hope they are of good quality.

I bought my wife one of those stand alone Record Players from TCM a few years back and it was a POS.

The records would simply warble and sound horrible.   I should of returned it but I did not feel like standing in line to do so.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours 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 (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.

My complaint is the cost. All that money for a refresh could've gone to lease films that have never been shown on TCM (and there are many). They waste all this money on "looks" and not content.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel people are over thinking and over analyzing these recent TCM changes (and I say the word changes lightly).

Yes I know, I over think and over analyze too...but I save my over thinking and over analyzing for movies and television shows. I never analyze the hosts because I consider them temporary in the long term scheme of things (the movies will be around 50 years from now, the hosts won't be). And I try not to analyze the channel too much because it's not the only channel around and likely it will continue to evolve and change (there's that word again) whether people like it or not.

You cannot cling to TCM circa 1995 for the rest of your days. What is happening is that people are trying to superimpose the word classic on to the hosts and the channel itself. The hosts and the channel (and its sets, politics and themes) facilitate classic film, they in and of themselves are not classic things.

My view.

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

I feel people are over thinking and over analyzing these recent TCM changes (and I say the word changes lightly).

Yes I know, I over think and over analyze too...but I save my over thinking and over analyzing for movies and television shows. I never analyze the hosts because I consider them temporary in the long term scheme of things (the movies will be around 50 years from now, the hosts won't be). And I try not to analyze the channel too much because it's not the only channel around and likely it will continue to evolve and change (there's that word again) whether people like it or not.

You cannot cling to TCM circa 1995 for the rest of your days. What is happening is that people are trying to superimpose the word classic on to the hosts and the channel itself. The hosts and the channel (and its sets, politics and themes) facilitate classic film, they in and of themselves are not classic things.

My view.

Very well said!!!

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Hibi said:

My complaint is the cost. All that money for a refresh could've gone to lease films that have never been shown on TCM (and there are many). They waste all this money on "looks" and not content.

Why are you holding back;    You really wanted them to use that money on leasing Joan Bennett 20th Century Fox films.

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Why are you holding back;    You really wanted them to use that money on leasing Joan Bennett 20th Century Fox films.

 

 

HELL, YES!!!!! Among others. Sofas and graphics are more important. :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

If TCM is able to increase revenue via increasing their audience and offering wine club, store, swag, etc. etc., this is where funding for leasing lesser seen or never seen titles can come from. 

All of this complaining is much ado about nothing, imo. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK.  I wanted to let at least 24 hours pass while I digested the "new look" along with the new slogan, etc. etc. before I commented on anything.  Here's my humble opinion:

The Good.  Love Ben's new set.  The old set was dated and looked like it existed in the heart of darkness most of the time.  The new set is lighter, larger, more open, more versatile and definitely better to look at.  I will be very interested to see what they do with Eddie Muller's Noir Alley set.  Will they go "modern" or stick with the noir-esque vibe?

I also appreciate TCM finally unifying all of the on-air graphics.  When TCM premiered, not only were the graphics superb, they also appeared consistently on the channel and the website, even if it was a variation on the central retro theme.  (See MovieCollectorOH's post showing all of the original icons --  from tough guys to robots -- but all part of a unified illustrative style.)  As time marched on and ownership changed, the channel's look became a hodgepodge of different graphic approaches  --  mostly extremely mediocre graphics  --  which had nothing to do with a unified look.  So, whatever I think of the graphic approach this time around, at least they are using it channel-wide so everything "matches."

The Who Cares?  When you are given the assignment to come up with a "look" for a client's business, you generally take into account what that business is.  For instance, if you were to design a graphics package for a chain of florists, the utilization of something "floral" or "green" would, most likely, be where you would start when you created logos, graphics, etc.  The new TCM on-air and website graphics are about as boring and generic as you can possibly get. I've had interns who, on their very first day on the job, could have done something far more creative and appropriate.  While not specifically offensive, the graphics appear to have absolutely nothing to do with a channel whose core product is classic movies.  Talk about a missed opportunity.  They have traded the iconic logo and graphics  for a TCM logo which could work for Tiny Cement Movers, Three Corporate Mavens or any company which had those particular initials.  To say it's not memorable is to barely scratch the surface of what it is not.  Can you imagine anyone actually buying a t-shirt, mug, or any other product with this logo on it??? Personally, I am going to start buying more products with the old (original!) logo on eBay as soon as I finish writing this post.  The original graphics were memorable, evocative and unforgettable.  The new graphics are so inconsequential they are barely worth comment.  As for the new slogan, while I applaud anything that eradicates the stupid "Let's Movie" slogan, "Where Then Meets Now" seems to be one more desperate attempt to make a classic movie channel "relevant" to a younger generation.  I wish TCM management would get it.  While many of us loved "old" movies (as in movies which were made 30-40 years before we were born)  when we were mere kids,  the vast majority of folks under the age of 40 have absolutely no use for anything "old" and consider an "old movie" to be one which was made prior to 2015.  Deal with reality, TCM and stop pandering to would-be viewers you will never get.

The Bad.  The new animation of the TCM logo has me scratching my head.  What in the world are those various scrawls which eventually form the "C" meant to be??  If there is some actual meaning to those images, (preferably something that has relevance to a classic movie channel or the making of movies or SOMETHING THAT MAKES SENSE . . . ) please enlighten me.  

The Hope.  If the rumor that they are moving all of the production from Atlanta to LA is true,  that has the potential to be very good news for viewers.  Perhaps if it is easier for current-day directors, producers, actors, authors, etc. to find their way to the TCM studios, they will appear on a more regular basis.  I have a feeling that budget and time constraints (not to mention the inconvenience of getting on a plane and flying to Atlanta)  kept a whole lot of people we would have loved to hear from away.  For a long time the directors and stars of the 1980's - 1990's films have been underrepresented on TCM.  If they are shooting everything in LA now, we may see a renaissance of interviewees and guest programmers.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, speedracer5 said:

If TCM is able to increase revenue via increasing their audience and offering wine club, store, swag, etc. etc., this is where funding for leasing lesser seen or never seen titles can come from. 

All of this complaining is much ado about nothing, imo. 

I wouldnt count on that. Hasn't happened yet!

Link to post
Share on other sites

 "Where Then Meets Now" seems to be one more desperate attempt to make a classic movie channel "relevant" to a younger generation.  I wish TCM management would get it.  While many of us loved "old" movies (as in movies which were made 30-40 years before we were born)  when we were mere kids,  the vast majority of folks under the age of 40 have absolutely no use for anything "old" and consider an "old movie" to be one which was made prior to 2015.  Deal with reality, TCM and stop pandering to would-be viewers you will never get.

TOTALLY AGREE. But they keep trying! LOL. I guess they have to. We can't live forever.......

  

The Hope.  If the rumor that they are moving all of the production from Atlanta to LA is true,  that has the potential to be very good news for viewers.  Perhaps if it is easier for current-day directors, producers, actors, authors, etc. to find their way to the TCM studios, they will appear on a more regular basis.  I have a feeling that budget and time constraints (not to mention the inconvenience of getting on a plane and flying to Atlanta)  kept a whole lot of people we would have loved to hear from away.  For a long time the directors and stars of the 1980's - 1990's films have been underrepresented on TCM.  If they are shooting everything in LA now, we may see a renaissance of interviewees and guest programmers.  

Lets hope this is true.

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

I must wonder how many people here have not in the last twenty-five years painted their living room and purchased new drapes. 

It is my estimation that that is all that TCM has done. A little freshening and moving furniture. 

There may be a stubbed toe or two because the coffee table is in a new place but it is not as if they knocked through a wall to turn the dining room into a combination kitchen and master bath.

 

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

You cannot cling to TCM circa 1995 for the rest of your days. What is happening is that people are trying to superimpose the word classic on to the hosts and the channel itself. The hosts and the channel (and its sets, politics and themes) facilitate classic film, they in and of themselves are not classic things.

My view.

Yep, good point made here, TB.

But STILL, you DO have to admit that Ben DOES have what could be called a "classic" nasally voice anyway, RIGHT?!

LOL

(...yeah yeah, I know...nobody here is gonna laugh at this one, and basically because I've run THIS little bit of observational humor RIGHT into the ground, huh) 

LOL...some more now

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

 "Where Then Meets Now" seems to be one more desperate attempt to make a classic movie channel "relevant" to a younger generation.  I wish TCM management would get it.  While many of us loved "old" movies (as in movies which were made 30-40 years before we were born)  when we were mere kids,  the vast majority of folks under the age of 40 have absolutely no use for anything "old" and consider an "old movie" to be one which was made prior to 2015.  Deal with reality, TCM and stop pandering to would-be viewers you will never get.

TOTALLY AGREE. But they keep trying! LOL. I guess they have to. We can't live forever.......

  

The Hope.  If the rumor that they are moving all of the production from Atlanta to LA is true,  that has the potential to be very good news for viewers.  Perhaps if it is easier for current-day directors, producers, actors, authors, etc. to find their way to the TCM studios, they will appear on a more regular basis.  I have a feeling that budget and time constraints (not to mention the inconvenience of getting on a plane and flying to Atlanta)  kept a whole lot of people we would have loved to hear from away.  For a long time the directors and stars of the 1980's - 1990's films have been underrepresented on TCM.  If they are shooting everything in LA now, we may see a renaissance of interviewees and guest programmers.  

Lets hope this is true.

 

I am under 40 and there is a large population of others under 40 on social media (other than this message board) that are big fans of Classic film. 

While I understand what is being said here, I don’t think it’s fair that those that are younger than the assumed demographic don’t deserve any sort of consideration.  Not that older demographics shouldn’t be considered either, but TCM should be for everyone. 

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

Yep, good point made here, TB.

But STILL, you DO have to admit that Ben DOES have a "classic" nasally voice anyway, RIGHT?!

LOL

(...yeah yeah, I know...nobody here is gonna laugh at this one, and basically because I've run THIS little bit of observational hunor RIGHT into the ground, huh)

LOL...some more now

Did anyone else notice  that after Guess Who's Coming to Dinner Ben mentioned Tracy and how he was a devout Catholic.    Ben mocked that,  just like I have been doing for years at this forum.     Devout Catholic,,,, can't get a divorce,,,,  but sleeping with Hepburn,,,, well,   can't one still be devout!).

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Did anyone else notice  that after Guess Who's Coming to Dinner Ben mentioned Tracy and how he was a devout Catholic.    Ben mocked that,  just like I have been doing for years at this forum.     Devout Catholic,,,, can't get a divorce,,,,  but sleeping with Hepburn,,,, well,   can't one still be devout!).

 

Good point HERE, James.

BUT (and you HAD to know THIS was comin' here) I can proudly claim to be "devout", and I don't care WHO knows it!

(...no, no, not "devout" in any sense of religiosity, but really more the idea that I DEVOUTLY believe that Ben has a nasally voice...and which evidently I've always been the proverbial "cult of one" about this around here for YEARS now!!!)

LOL

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Did anyone else notice  that after Guess Who's Coming to Dinner Ben mentioned Tracy and how he was a devout Catholic.    Ben mocked that,  just like I have been doing for years at this forum.     Devout Catholic,,,, can't get a divorce,,,,  but sleeping with Hepburn,,,, well,   can't one still be devout!).

I suppose a comment like this is meant to provide "context" to viewers but it also promotes false information. False stories created by publicists and perpetuated by gossip columnist for decades. Katharine Hepburn's life partner was Phyllis Wilbourn for more than 30 years. Not Spencer Tracy.

Hepburn and Tracy were costars and pals. That is all.

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...