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

Is TCM Still In Atlanta?


Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, sewhite2000 said:

I believe they are, although I saw at least one poster recently posit that the recent overhaul of the look of the station is just a precusor for a move to LA.  Unsure what the reality is regarding that.

I could see TCM moving out of Atlanta Georgia for political reasons.    L.A.  would be a logical choice;   Texas would not.

 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, unwatchable said:

LA? Yeah, that would about tear it for me.

The list of films I wish to see,  but have yet to see grows shorter each week. I'm coming to a point where I could do without TCM.

Hmmmm...now why do I find it a bit ironic here that you've made this negative comment about Los Angeles, and yet your avatar is a still from one of the greatest films ever made about that very city?

(...or should I now just say, "Forget it, unwatchable...it's L.A." ?)

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, unwatchable said:

LA? Yeah, that would about tear it for me.

The list of films I wish to see,  but have yet to see grows shorter each week. I'm coming to a point where I could do without TCM.

I'm curious how TCM moving to L.A.  would impact your TCM experience.    Of  course it wouldn't change how one views a film and the odds are very low such a move would impact what films TCM programmers select.         

Thus I really just don't understand  how such a move would "about tear it"  for anyone.

But hey,  to each their own.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Dargo said:

Hmmmm...now why do I find it a bit ironic here that you've made this negative comment about Los Angeles, and yet your avatar is a still from one of the greatest films ever made about that very city?

(...or should I now just say, "Forget it, unwatchable...it's L.A." ?)

 

I can't take your question seriously.  You're trying much too hard. I guess that last one stung a bit, huh?   Would it be too much to ask for you to hump someone else's leg for a while? 

 

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

Thus I really just don't understand  how such a move would "about tear it"  for anyone.

But hey,  to each their own.

I know the feeling. There's so much about the world that doesn't make sense.

BTW, around here, "to each his own" does not seem to apply.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, unwatchable said:

I can't take your question seriously.  You're trying much too hard. I guess that last one stung a bit, huh?   Would it be too much to ask for you to hump someone else's leg for a while? 

 

Have no idea what you meant here. I've felt no "sting" coming from you since you've recently arrived onto these boards. And am also wondering why you've become so defensive here. Might it have been what I said to you about "paranoic thoughts" in another thread? 

I have to say that by this strange reaction of yours here I think I'm now beginning to understand why Swithin seemed to be so wary of you within your introductory posting, 

(...and so bottom line here, whatever ya want...from now on I'll refrain from directly interacting with you...you can count on it)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Barton Keyes had posted this a few weeks ago (thanks Barton)

https://forums.tcm.com/topic/268002-time-for-a-refresh/?do=findComment&comment=2443771

If TCM continues to schedule movies that get pulled at relatively the last minute, it would be to their advantage to have studios closer to the hosts so they can come in quickly to shoot replacement intros and avoid the problem they had late Sunday with incomplete/missing wrap-arounds.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Outstanding, Dargo. That would be peachy  It was all in "fun".  Sure, I understand. Really,  I do.

By the way- even though it's really none of your concern, I was born in Pomona and I have strong ties to the Owens Valley, up around Bishop.  My family was involved in the Los Angeles water wars.  That is what I know about L.A. and the events fictionalized in Chinatown.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, unwatchable said:

I know the feeling. There's so much about the world that doesn't make sense.

BTW, around here, "to each his own" does not seem to apply.

Yea,  "to each his own" appears to have diminished across the USA as a whole.     Too many people pushing the concept of conformity on others.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, unwatchable said:

Outstanding, Dargo. That would be peachy  It was all in "fun".  Sure, I understand. Really,  I do.

By the way- even though it's really none of your concern, I was born in Pomona and I have strong ties to the Owens Valley, up around Bishop.  My family was involved in the Los Angeles water wars.  That is what I know about L.A. and the events fictionalized in Chinatown.

I'm going to break from my earlier promise here and just say that this story from where you hail and your ties to the Owen Valley I found most interesting. And especially considering that much of the water that I drank and bathed in in the L.A. Basin during all those years I lived there would of course come via Mr. Mulholland's pipeline...or of course "Mr. Mulwray's" in the fictionalized version of it.

(...well anyway, it's now up to you...should I keep my earlier promise up there or not?)

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's your promise to keep or break, Dargo.

Listen, I realize I've confounded a few people around here. In my first thread in this forum, I got accused of being a banned member, returned. I could not understand this at first, but my scant few days around here have made some things clearer.

I must say, I'm surprised at this forum. I assumed this forum would be busier and would have a greater number of active members. What I see in threads, though, is the same usernames, over and over. It seems I've intruded upon a clique. Most of us have had that experience at some point in our life; usually, early on. Fun, ain't it? It's a laugh-a-minute to be the outsider, and especially to be the outsider who has no real concern for being popular. Cliques don't like that. They are the ones supposed to do the snubbing, yes?   I like the people I like. There's nothing forced about it. Certain people like me, and, again, I don't force it. If I fit in to a group, that's great. If not, well, such is life. To me, this is the only way to be honest and to be genuine. People yammer about "being real". Well, here I stand. It's funny when you see that philosophy being applied, isn't it?

Your buddy, what's-his-name. The one who tried to play Columbo in that first thread. He was  sure I've been here before. Yes, he was so sure about it, he stepped on his own dick.

I'll say it one last time. Before last Friday, I've never before posted here. Before last Friday, I've never before registered here.  Apparently, my chosen username has caused at least a couple of you to suspect there's some hidden meaning in it. Do you know how I came to choose this username? Have you never decided without any forethought to register for something or other on the web, which calls for a username? Well,  that was me last Friday.  I've made no secret of it that I am not happy with TCM right now, and the "drifting camera" has made BM's intros/outros unwatchable for me. Man, it's that simple. And yet, the Troll Patrol decided I was a subversive.

I came here to express my feelings about my beloved TCM and if I managed to not get booted for doing so, I have insights to add to conversations here. I am pleased to say I have seen quite a few sharp comments about the current state of TCM from other members here (this was the thing which compelled me to register) and I'm glad to see a degree of tolerance from forum management. So, I've decided to hang around.  That's all there is to it. Whoever you and what's-his-name suspect me to be, you're just wrong. As I said before, it's not possible to prove a negative, and since I can't prove I'm not what you guys suspect me to be, and since you can't prove I am what you suspect me to be, how about we put that to rest?

Perhaps I've been wrong about you. I've been wrong several times a day since I've been making my own decisions, but it certainly did seem to me that your kidding was not really kidding.  Your last post seems sincere, so, AFAIC, there's no reason for you to avoid me in the forum. I don't expect everyone to understand me, especially when I'm being viewed through the drinking straw of the internet (the reverse is true, of course. I have my own drinking straw, so.... ) If you really want to know my stance on life, just look under "About Me" in my profile. I'm not out to screw with anyone here and I certainly won't stand for such from anyone else. Won't stand it. I expect the overwhelming majority of members here to not care about my personal credo, which is as it should be.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nicely stated. And clearly too there, unwatchable.

Now first I must say, certainly my "kidding" usually has an "edge" about it, however what I could not understand was your defensive reply to my question posed to you about why you said or implied at least that you'd stop watching TCM if their studio was moved to Los Angeles. Clearly this was meant in a negative manner about such a possibily. And so, here's the thing:

That question, albeit more an observation in search of a clarifying answer which I posed was offered up to you in a genuine manner and not in any fashion a comdemnation or as an attempt to "put you down". Yes, I legitimately wanted to know why you felt that way. My signature little parenthetical addendum in which I then paraphrased the closing line of Chinatown was certainly superfluous but was meant as a little humorous take on the film itself. And so, how or why you would then reply with that whole "go hump someone else's leg for a while" reply was, well, pretty darn uncalled for.

And regarding your surprise to learn of so few regular members at this website. You must have forgotten that these sorts of message board forum sites are a dying breed in the world of the Internet, and so the idea of more than even a couple of newbies signing into this site per day and then becoming involved with the goings-on around here would not be likely. Pretty much everyones now going to the social media sites that Eddie Muller mentions during his outros.

And sure, by now I've gotten the sense that you are both extremely intelligent and are able to use the English language expertly and which are two things I admire in people, but also have now gotten the sense that you tend to lean to the negative/cynical side of things and which does indeed seem to be your unabashed style.

(...and so because I tend to try to keep my distance from people who tend more toward the negative/cynical side of things or at least more so than to my personal tastes, I think I am going to keep that aforementioned promise I made...I must say it's been nice..err..let says "interesting" conversing with you, sir...I wish you well)

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

I could see TCM moving out of Atlanta Georgia for political reasons.    L.A.  would be a logical choice;   Texas would not.

 

What "political reasons" would TCM have for moving from Atlanta to LA?  Yes, I understand that GA is a very conservative Red state and that CA is a liberal Blue state.  Of course, Atlanta is actually the most liberal part of GA.

As I said on another thread, GA (as well as other Southern states) are a significant part of the motion picture industry now.

What effects do politics have on what TCM shows?  Seriously.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ElCid said:

What "political reasons" would TCM have for moving from Atlanta to LA?  Yes, I understand that GA is a very conservative Red state and that CA is a liberal Blue state.  Of course, Atlanta is actually the most liberal part of GA.

As I said on another thread, GA (as well as other Southern states) are a significant part of the motion picture industry now.

What effects do politics have on what TCM shows?  Seriously.

Yeah, that whole premise on moving for "political reasons" sounded pretty unlikely to me too.  That explains some of the angst in this thread though I think.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Movie Collector OH said:

Yeah, that whole premise on moving for "political reasons" sounded pretty unlikely to me too.  That explains some of the angst in this thread though I think.

I agree that it is unlikely and I should have stated that,  but it wouldn't surprise me.    In the Chit-chat forum Cid has been pointing out the Georgia election law  bill (he calls it a voter suppression bill).    I think we can agree that TCM leans-left;   E.g.   take all of the hosts - I think it is fair to assume most,  if not all,  are not members of the GOP.

As for Cid's question of:  What effects do politics have on what TCM shows?  Seriously.

Very little from my point of view,  but as we see from the angst,  others likely believe a lot.

The very little from my POV being the commentary the host are discussing related to a host of issues before films which is causing a lot of angst in many other threads related to TCM and politics,  the cancel culture,  blackface,  etc.....    These don't impact my viewing but again,,   some people have threated to boycott TCM if they don't cut this out.

 

 

 

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

I agree that it is unlikely and I should have stated that,  but it wouldn't surprise me.    In the Chit-chat forum Cid has been pointing out the Georgia election law  bill (he calls it a voter suppression bill).    I think we can agree that TCM leans-left;   E.g.   take all of the hosts - I think it is fair to assume most,  if not all,  are not members of the GOP.

As for Cid's question of:  What effects do politics have on what TCM shows?  Seriously.

Very little from my point of view,  but as we see from the angst,  others likely believe a lot.

The very little from my POV being the commentary the host are discussing related to a host of issues before films which is causing a lot of angst in many other threads related to TCM and politics,  the cancel culture,  blackface,  etc.....    These don't impact my viewing but again,,   but some people have threated to boycott TCM if they don't cut this out.

 

 

 

I'm probably not the person to try to convince.  As stated elsewhere, I'm mainly just opposed to the logo change.  From my 35,000 ft. view, that usually doesn't bode well for a brand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 minutes ago, Movie Collector OH said:

I'm probably not the person to try to convince.  As stated elsewhere, I'm mainly just opposed to the logo change.  From my 35,000 ft. view, that usually doesn't bode well for a brand.

The upcoming merger with Discovery would concern me more.  AT&T didn't know enough to try to mess with the media end of their business - they pretty much left that up to Warner. 

The main change under AT&T was that TCM was moved out from under the Turner umbrella (which has TBS, TNT, TruTV) and into the "Kids, Young Adults and Classics" division (with Cartoon Network, Adult Swim and Boomerang).  Maybe being grouped with properties that tend to cater to a young demographic spurred some of these branding changes?  

Now, with Warner and Discovery merging, there's no telling whether the prevailing corporate philosophy will allow TCM to remain as it is today - showing uncut, commercial-free films.  You can see how Discovery has shifted their various networks' programming over the years to chase more $$ (Discovery Channel, TLC, Food Network, HGTV, Animal Planet, Travel Channel, etc)  We'll have to wait and see if they can keep from tinkering with it too much.

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

 

The upcoming merger with Discovery would concern me more.  AT&T didn't know enough to try to mess with the media end of their business - they pretty much left that up to Warner. 

The main change under AT&T was that TCM was moved out from under the Turner umbrella (which has TBS, TNT, TruTV) and into the "Kids, Young Adults and Classics" division (with Cartoon Network, Adult Swim and Boomerang).  Maybe being grouped with properties that tend to cater to a young demographic spurred some of these branding changes?  

Now, with Warner and Discovery merging, there's no telling whether the prevailing corporate philosophy will allow TCM to remain as it is today - showing uncut, commercial-free films.  You can see how Discovery has shifted their various networks' programming over the years to chase more $$ (Discovery Channel, TLC, Food Network, HGTV, Animal Planet, Travel Channel, etc)  We'll have to wait and see if they can keep from tinkering with it too much.

I don't think we disagree.

P.S. They can hire all the new consultants that they want, and every single one of them will take their money.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Movie Collector OH said:

I'm probably not the person to try to convince.  As stated elsewhere, I'm mainly just opposed to the logo change.  From my 35,000 ft. view, that usually doesn't bode well for a brand.

I'm not trying to convince anyone.      I have no issues with the TCM's brand and the latest changes (from the logo,  graphics, special series about problematic films, etc.,) have had no impact on me.    

I view them as much-ado-about-nothing and just enjoy the films,  like I always have.    

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Movie Collector OH said:

I'm probably not the person to try to convince.  As stated elsewhere, I'm mainly just opposed to the logo change.  From my 35,000 ft. view, that usually doesn't bode well for a brand.

Let's see, Ford, Chevrolet, Mercedes-Benz, BMW and a whole lot more have had the same logos for about 100 years or more.   Speaking of which, it TCM logo on Spectrum Guide changed, would viewers skip over as being unfamiliar?  Most of us know it by the channel, but when scanning the guide, I frequently identify the logo more than the channel number.

1 hour ago, txfilmfan said:

 

The upcoming merger with Discovery would concern me more.  AT&T didn't know enough to try to mess with the media end of their business - they pretty much left that up to Warner. 

The main change under AT&T was that TCM was moved out from under the Turner umbrella (which has TBS, TNT, TruTV) and into the "Kids, Young Adults and Classics" division (with Cartoon Network, Adult Swim and Boomerang).  Maybe being grouped with properties that tend to cater to a young demographic spurred some of these branding changes?  

Now, with Warner and Discovery merging, there's no telling whether the prevailing corporate philosophy will allow TCM to remain as it is today - showing uncut, commercial-free films.  You can see how Discovery has shifted their various networks' programming over the years to chase more $$ (Discovery Channel, TLC, Food Network, HGTV, Animal Planet, Travel Channel, etc)  We'll have to wait and see if they can keep from tinkering with it too much.

Unfamiliar with the particulars of all this merger business, but does not bode well for "Classic" TCM.  Of the channels you listed above, I do not watch any of them.  Used to occasionally watch Discovery, but not any more.  Did watch HGTV, but over past few years they have gone completely to selling houses, fixing up houses and similar.   And all of them are filled with silly people, especially the "hosts."  No longer have any landscaping or gardening shows.

However, I am sure TCM will change - and not for the better.

  • 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...