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

"...Time for a refresh?"


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, TopBilled said:

Because people who behave this way feel self-important, that they know what is best for everyone...so they try to transfer this on to others. They have little respect for the choices of others, choices that may not be in alignment with their own. 

I think some may do it as a form of validation rather than self-importance.  Most people like to be part of a group.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, LuckyDan said:

Right, but in my experience with millennials, less so with X'ers, there is a suspicion about the world that preceded them. They consider the times leading to their birthday to be dark ages filled with all kinds of mean and nasty things. (Racism, sexism, bigotry, Islamophobia, homophobia, xenophobia - they heard it all day in school.) 

For the most part they are tolerant of boomer co-workers, who are most likely in positions of authority over them, but there is an underlying hostility - and it doesn't help matters when boomers complain about millennials always being on their phones and listening to crappy music. 

I seriously question if it is possible for anyone born in this century, or the last decade or so of the twentieth, to find anything to appreciate in America's past, including it's movies. Especially it's movies. 

Other side of the coin: Ask yourself, over 40 people, how much of the current culture are you consuming? Can you name a song recorded in the last year or two? One that you truly enjoy? How many newly released movies have you seen? What are your favorite tv shows that are currently in production? If those questions give you trouble, do you think you are missing out on anything? 

Point: The more open you are to current cultural trends, the more receptive younger people will be to your recommendations. Just be ready to hear complaints about what was once acceptable, and be prepared to give them a hearing. They're not just looking for things to be offended about. They sincerely find much of it distasteful.

Boomers just need to remember how their parents and elders reacted to their pop culture choices: music, clothes, films, television.  At one time they were the rebels.  It's the same with every generation...

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, txfilmfan said:

Boomers just need to remember how their parents and elders reacted to their pop culture choices: music, clothes, films, television.  At one time they were the rebels.  It's the same with every generation...

I had this discussion with someone a couple of years ago - an X'er - who observed that the reason boomers and millennials don't get along is because ... they are exactly alike.  I'm not sure I agree but there are similarities, especially comparing how abruptly the world changed when each generation came of age.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LuckyDan said:

I had this discussion with someone a couple of years ago - an X'er - who observed that the reason boomers and millennials don't get along is because ... they are exactly alike.  I'm not sure I agree but there are similarities, especially comparing how abruptly the world changed when each generation came. 

The world changes, but then it always does.  My parents were pre-teens and teenagers during the Depression and WWII, and those were definitely world-changing events.  I think it's hard to talk about generations in the modern sense much before that, because our modern perception of generations is largely shaped by mass media, and particularly, electronic media.  The current concept of the teenage years, and the defining of their particular generation, is largely shaped by their consumption of electronic entertainment and their clothing and hairstyles (influenced by the media).

Before the 1920s or so, many teens were thrust into adulthood working either on the family farm or ranch, or in more urban settings, as newsboys, seamstresses, office runners, factory workers, mines, etc.  Only about 10% of people in 1910 had a high school diploma.

I think young people are very much alike from generation to generation - wanting to separate from their parent's ideas and ways, to establish their own identity.   It's probably been this way since civilization began.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, txfilmfan said:

The world changes, but then it always does.  My parents were pre-teens and teenagers during the Depression and WWII, and those were definitely world-changing events.  I think it's hard to talk about generations in the modern sense much before that, because our modern perception of generations is largely shaped by mass media, and particularly, electronic media.  The current concept of the teenage years, and the defining of their particular generation, is largely shaped by their consumption of electronic entertainment and their clothing and hairstyles (influenced by the media).

Before the 1920s or so, many teens were thrust into adulthood working either on the family farm or ranch, or in more urban settings, as newsboys, seamstresses, office runners, factory workers, mines, etc.  Only about 10% of people in 1910 had a high school diploma.

I think young people are very much alike from generation to generation - wanting to separate from their parent's ideas and ways, to establish their own identity.   It's probably been this way since civilization began.

Yes but ... The changes wrought by the boomers were much bigger than prior generations. Same in the early oughts by the millennials. If you were born in the twenties, you were a kid during the depression. Fun times. Not much you could do to rebel. Then you stormed the beach at Normandy. If you survived that, you came home, got married, moved to the burbs, and raised a boomer. 

By their sheer numbers the boomers and millennials wrought changes to accommodate them, and I mean political and institutional as well as cultural. It wasn't just love beads and weed for the boomers, or tats and piercings for the millenials. Both changed higher education to suit their desires, for example, then the workplace, and to a far greater degree than any prior generations. 

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

Because people who behave this way feel self-important, that they know what is best for everyone...so they try to transfer that on to others. They have little respect for the choices of others, choices that may not be in alignment with their own. 

Well, I'll give Lydecker and Overeasy the benefit of the doubt and not presume that they feel self-important.

Pardon my neurosis (or don't), but my undies tend to get bunched when I hear or read someone trying to impose their likes/dislikes/preferences/opinions/ideas/beliefs/whatever on others.

I periodically re-read Harlan Ellison's Watching (a collection of Ellison's movie reviews and essays on cinema), which I enjoy because of his P.O.V., scriptorial artistry, and acerbic wit. Ellison's failing as a movie reviewer, IMO, was his puerile compulsion to demand that the reader align with -- or adopt -- his singular perspective and sensibly cultivate his impeccable tastes. If you didn't share his passion for whatever he was touting, you were a cretin. If you didn't drink from the same cup of joy that he drank from, you had no soul, no pulse -- you were brain-dead.

. . . an unfortunate and lamentable flaw in an otherwise exceptional writer and intellectual. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I guess I've been told!  Self important?  Maybe Millstone should remove the millstone from around their shoulders and lighten up a bit! 

I never assume I "know what is best for everyone," but I am sure of what I believe in.  That's just a fact. That's the way I feel and think and believe.

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

I think may some do it as a form of validation rather than self-importance.  Most people like to be part of a group.

Thank you, txfilmfan, for . . .  (Ahem!) validating what I've always thought was the reason why some folks want/need others to think and feel the same way that they do. Being a loner, I have difficulty understanding the want/need to belong (to a group).

On a not altogether different note . . .

Whenever I hear or read someone wax prosaic about the "communal" experience of watching movies, I just don't get it. Sitting in a crowded movie theatre doesn't make, to me, a comedy funnier (because an audience is laughing), a "tear-jerker" more moving (because an audience is crying), a horror film scarier (because an audience is screaming), or a "good movie" better (because an audience is clapping). 

To wit, I don't have the want, feel the need to have my thoughts/opinions/beliefs/likes/dislikes/etc. validated by others. I don't have the want, feel the need to belong.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Eucalpytus P. Millstone said:

Well, I'll give Lydecker and Overeasy the benefit of the doubt and not presume that they feel self-important.

Pardon my neurosis (or don't), but my undies tend to get bunched when I hear or read someone trying to impose their likes/dislikes/preferences/opinions/ideas/beliefs/whatever on others.

I periodically re-read Harlan Ellison's Watching (a collection of Ellison's movie reviews and essays on cinema), which I enjoy because of his P.O.V., scriptorial artistry, and acerbic wit. Ellison's failing as a movie reviewer, IMO, was his puerile compulsion to demand that the reader align with -- or adopt -- his singular perspective and sensibly cultivate his impeccable tastes. If you didn't share his passion for whatever he was touting, you were a cretin. If you didn't drink from the same cup of joy that he drank from, you had no soul, no pulse -- you were brain-dead.

. . . an unfortunate and lamentable flaw in an otherwise exceptional writer and intellectual. 

Harlan Ellison was an a$$hole.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Eucalpytus P. Millstone said:

As well they should.

Why do you feel compelled to "convert folks to the joys of watching black/white [sic] movies from the 1920's - 1950's"?

Movies -- with the possible exclusion of documentaries --  are entertainment. They are recreational diversions, not essential requirements needed for one's existence and survival.

IMO, trying to "convert" (force) someone to do . . . well, anything . . . is a guaranteed, sure-fire way to obliterate the joy from doing the thing -- making it a dreary chore instead of a pleasure and delight.

If it's such a dreary chore, why are you even on this dreary message board???

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the Kate/Spencer rumors. Maybe both could be true. If Kate was bi/lesbian, doesn't mean she couldn't still have loved Tracy. Not saying she was, but there were plenty of lavender marriages or marriages of convenience in the old days in Hollywood. I could never picture Kate having sex with anyone (of either sex). Just something about her chilly personality. And in old age she came off as rather prudish in interviews. Was it all an act? Who knows. I don't think anyone could come up with enough evidence to prove these rumors. And I really don't care one way or another.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hibi said:

If it's such a dreary chore, why are you even on this dreary message board???

I was told that it was a great place to cast pearls.

If what is such a dreary chore? Doing something (such as watching old movies) not for fun, enjoyment, and pleasure but because some taskmaster (like for instance, a "classic film" buff) thinks that you should do it? Having to explain one's comments to prickly remedial school graduates who get snippy when something they read upsets them?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the old TCM logos so much, I make glass charms of them. This "classic movie" charm bracelet is my talisman for film festivals.

TCMBracelet.jpg.0a5b42d321206c04adce2776503f0f45.jpg

Hard to photograph because of the glare, but the first one is the cameraman & the center one is the girl.

  • Like 11
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, TopBilled said:

Probably!

I find it hard to believe that anyone who watches TCM would stop viewing just because they changed the logo.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, brianNH said:

You know, you could probably sell these things!  I think the channel just opened up a huge market for them.

I'd check with a lawyer first.  I assume the TCM promo art is protected. 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, JakeHolman said:

Movies are written in sand: applauded today, forgotten tomorrow. - D. W. Griffith

Probably what he realized is that the movie industry is built on trends. So something that goes over well today may not mean much in five or ten years. Also, think about it, old(er) films have to compete with thousands of new films that come out after it. So it's a crowded playing field!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/2/2021 at 6:57 AM, 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)

I would miss you as well......

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that if boomers had the same technology as young uns today, they would be doing most of

the things that they complain about younger people doing now. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/3/2021 at 10:16 AM, lydecker said:

I totally agree that TCM is for everyone.  I wish I knew a lot of under 40's who appreciate classic movies but, sad to say, I do not.  I've tried countless times to convert folks to the joys of watching black/white movies from the 1920's - 1950's and invariably they look at me as though I am deranged. (I am, but that's another topic for another time.) My point is that in making graphic decisions, it's clear that the current regime feels that the original logo/graphics/slogan were a turn-off to under 40's and that to attract them they need to destroy "the old" and promote how "with it" TCM can be.  They may think "cosmetics" matter when making viewing choices but, no matter what age you are, content is what counts.

 

I know what you mean. It's hard. i tried to get some people in my age ballpark interested in classics, even in films made more recently (70s, 80s and 90s). For the most part, it didn't work out.

  • Like 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...