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

The sad, slow death of TCM.


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Dargo said:

I dunno, Rich. You tell me. You're the old math teacher here, not me.

I'd say it's probably one of the first two. "Median", maybe?

(...and considering that I didn't put a scoop of vanilla ice cream on it, and so it can't be the last one)

I think the median would be the best statistic to use to demonstrate your case, but I suspect you used the mean. Did you add up all the years, then divide by the number of values (like you were computing an "average" of your test scores)? If so, you used the mean. If you arranged all the years in order from smallest to largest (or largest to smallest, makes no difference) and then found the value in the middle, you found the median. If you used the year that occurred most frequently, then you found the mode.

And what is this "old math teacher" stuff?  I am in the prime of life - well, my age is a prime number anyway.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well i did see a Jean Claude Van Damme movie was airing last weekend and did chuckle and ask when did TCM become the movie channel my stoner college roommates would watch.

For the most part, if the films are ones that i haven't seen before, i am interested, but i would be fine if the hypothetical cut-off was 1979.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, ootsy said:

 

TCM is dead. Long live TCM!

I wouldn't go further than paraphrasing FRANK ZAPPA's  line about jazz....

TCM isn't dead, it just smells funny.  ;) 

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites

Compromises must be made.

  • In order to rent that film fave of yours, (you know, that one you post over and over that they don't play enough), they probably have to take on other B movies that are thrown in the deal. And if they have the film, they certainly are going to show it. And frame it some sort of way (like TCM underground or whatever).
  • In order to keep the channel free, they have to sell wine and call it a club thing. (they should call it "whine" the way people complain about it). Or charge money to get people together for watch parties/clubs.

You can't have a channel locked into a set time era or it gets old quickly. What happens when you've seen all the films from the 50's that you wanted to see ? Do you give up movies ? This channel, like any other has to evolve and adjust to the changing times. I've seen others try this format and fail (AMC, the original getTV), while TCM seems to be still growing with film festivals and cruises.

We should always remember, there's much more to a story than what's reported.

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

I may have enraged a few Millenials by pointing out that film,  and suggesting that as much as they rage against the boomers, they're looking at their future.

Personally, I like that they didn't stop making good films after a certain date, and  that good films continue to be made.   Time will tell if some of them are actually great films.

exactly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find this type of thread VERY disrespectful. 

I've said it before. We are all guests on this site. TCM pays to maintain and moderate this website.

I believe we should provide constructive criticism (helpful criticism).

But to make a thread that talks about the death of the channel on the channel's own site, that's tacky. And not what a good guest does.

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

The original post could have been phrased better, but I'm sure the good folks at TCM want to know what they're doing wrong as well as what they're doing right.

In case case, it looks to me like the responses have been overwhelmingly in support of TCM

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

I believe we should provide constructive criticism (helpful criticism).

Some fans of the channel are frustrated, and it's more than a few.  I feel- and others seem to feel the way way- TCM is not listening to us.  As a result, people are simply venting their frustrations.  If those fans you think are being disrespectful didn't actually care about TCM, would they be complaining?  These disaffected fans do care and this is the reaon they are complaining. They care as much as any of those fans who are expressing their concerns in a politer fashion, with the difference being- it seems to me- the ones who are complaing feel as if noone at TCM is listening to them.  What good would it do to frame these complaints as what you term helpful criticism, if those complaints are not being heard?

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, unwatchable said:

Some fans of the channel are frustrated, and it's more than a few.  I feel- and others seem to feel the way way- TCM is not listening to us.  As a result, people are simply venting their frustrations.  If those fans you think are being disrespectful didn't actually care about TCM, would they be complaining?  These disaffected fans do care and this is the reaon they are complaining. They care as much as any of those fans who are expressing their concerns in a politer fashion, with the difference being- it seems to me- the ones who are complaing feel as if noone at TCM is listening to them.  What good would it do to frame these complaints as what you term helpful criticism, if those complaints are not being heard?

 

Being frustrated doesn't get anyone the right to misbehave. It's just bad manners, bad form.

Can you imagine if a guest came into your house, was frustrated with you, and proceeded to tell you that you are dying a slow death. You wouldn't tolerate it. You'd kick them right out the door!

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You're correct, I would make them exit in a rapid fashion, but the analogy falters a bit. This isn't exaclty the same as someone's private residence. This is a public space. Perhaps it would be better to compare it to, say, a restaurant or a bar. After all, TCM is a for-profit company, are they not? And, being such, TCM relies on the patronage of its customers, does it not?

A person's residence can survive without any guests. A business, on the other hand, cannot survive without its customers, and that is who we are- complaining or polite, we are TCM's customers, and without us, TCM would not exist. So, actually, I do feel I have the right to voice my frustrations in this venue, as long as I don't take it too far. Others here, apparently, feel the same way.

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

As long as the comments remain polite and constructive. No need to stink up the joint. 
 

For me the main rub is that beautiful logo that just was cast aside for something relatively meaningless. Entities spend millions every year developing recognizable identities; maybe a brand new logo works, but most of the time it doesn’t.  And, the content has seemed to shift ever so slightly since the roll out of the “changes”. I hope the wonderful films of the 20s, 30s, 40s, and 50s aren’t sacrificed for the sake of 70s and 80s films that are shown everywhere else. What has made TCM (or “Tom” as we call it since the new logo) so unique is being able to see films that weren’t readily available anywhere else. It would be a shame to lose that. 

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

As long as the comments remain polite and constructive. No need to stink up the joint. 
 

For me the main rub is that beautiful logo that just was cast aside for something relatively meaningless. Entities spend millions every year developing recognizable identities; maybe a brand new logo works, but most of the time it doesn’t.  And, the content has seemed to shift ever so slightly since the roll out of the “changes”. I hope the wonderful films of the 20s, 30s, 40s, and 50s aren’t sacrificed for the sake of 70s and 80s films that are shown everywhere else. What has made TCM (or “Tom” as we call it since the new logo) so unique is being able to see films that weren’t readily available anywhere else. It would be a shame to lose that. 

As you well know TCM has shown post studio-era films (> 1969 IMO),  since the start;  Osborne even mentions this in his opening statements about the brand back in 1994.

As long as 80 plus percent of the films TCM shows are American studio-era talking films,    I'm fine with the brand.     TCM programmers can show whatever they want during that remaining 19 or so percent.     That includes silent films,  foreign films,   post American studio era films,  etc...

Based on actual data from a guy with a database of every film TCM has shown,  TCM remains in that plus 80% range. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not so frustrated at TCM in isolation as I am disappointed that it feels it has to go the way of the crowd - to apologize for movies made before 1960 for simply demonstrating the values of their times. Nobody ever apologizes to ME for the graphic sex and violence on other channels. There is a warning - S,V,L - and that is it. Nobody ever apologizes for having every family comedy that involves a white family for portraying the man of the house as fat, stupid, and lazy and the  woman of the house as smart, together, and beautiful, and either somehow putting up with the man or going out with her other smart, together, and pretty friends to cheat on said stupid husbands. 

I watched a movie on youtube a few months back that was made for TV in 1975 -  "Murder on Flight 502". I remembered watching it on TV years ago when it first came out, but other than the basic plot I had forgotten the details.  Some things shocked me watching it in present day. For example, Sonny Bono is  walking to his plane with his agent, still deluding himself that he is "on top". His agent stops him and says loudly  "If you are on top you can rXpX Whistler's Mother at high noon in Macy's window..." THAT got my attention. But everybody else walking  through the airport within earshot kept walking. And I apparently thought nothing of this either 46 years ago because I had forgotten it. Because in 1975 this was acceptable dialogue. Things change, but films shouldn't be buried like a dirty secret for being of their time. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, LsDoorMat said:

- to apologize for movies made before 1960 for simply demonstrating the values of their times.

Yeah, that's downright ridiculous. Virtue signaling for all the lemmings. Say, here's an idea- if TCM management and hosts are so offended by content in films such as Gone With the Wind or The Searchers, then why don't they simply stop airing such films? In this way, perhaps we can avoid seeing BM faint dead away on screen. I don't want to hear people apologizing for the work of others.  Just stop showing these films. There.  All better now.  Banky/bottle/bedtime.  Sweet dreams, delicate creature.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, scsu1975 said:

I think the median would be the best statistic to use to demonstrate your case, but I suspect you used the mean. Did you add up all the years, then divide by the number of values (like you were computing an "average" of your test scores)? If so, you used the mean. If you arranged all the years in order from smallest to largest (or largest to smallest, makes no difference) and then found the value in the middle, you found the median. If you used the year that occurred most frequently, then you found the mode.

And what is this "old math teacher" stuff?  I am in the prime of life - well, my age is a prime number anyway.

LOL

Btw here Rich, yes, I performed the first function you mentioned up there.

(...reminded me of how I used to get my "average" in those bowling leagues years ago)

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

Being frustrated doesn't get anyone the right to misbehave. It's just bad manners, bad form.

Can you imagine if a guest came into your house, was frustrated with you, and proceeded to tell you that you are dying a slow death. You wouldn't tolerate it. You'd kick them right out the door!

Nope TB, that wouldn't be what I'd do at all.

Nope, now what I'D do is, first, tell them to give me MORE than just their "feelings" about "my slow, dying death" and by use of FACTS instead of "feelings about "my slow, dying death". YOU know, like what I did earlier in this damn thread and when I found the "mean year" (btw, THANKS Rich) that the movies shown on TCM were released. (remember, I said "1953" here, dude)

Uh-huh, and THEN in my case, I'd invite them to accompany me to the nearest tennis court..and where I'd run their sorry (and most likely fat American) butt around that court for a few sets.

(...and THEN ask 'em WHO between the two of us is in better shape and who might be "dying a slow death"!)

LOL

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

Yeah, that's downright ridiculous. Virtue signaling for all the lemmings. Say, here's an idea- if TCM management and hosts are so offended by content in films such as Gone With the Wind or The Searchers, then why don't they simply stop airing such films? In this way, perhaps we can avoid seeing BM faint dead away on screen. I don't want to hear people apologizing for the work of others.  Just stop showing these films. There.  All better now.  Banky/bottle/bedtime.  Sweet dreams, delicate creature.

TCM was stuck between the activist that wished for them to no longer show films these activist deemed "unsavory" and the view of movie lovers and fans of  the network that these movies need to be shown.   That "canceling" them was not the solution to anything.         This was explained  by Jacqueline Stewart,   director at the new Academy of Motion Picture here in So Cal and also a TCM host.      

No way was TCM going to give-in to these silly,  at best,  misguided,  cancel  culture activist.      But to reduce negative endless BS from the activist especially here in LA LA Land,   TCM felt it had to add some commentary.      I believe TCM made the right choice given the circumstances.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, JamesJazGuitar said:

That "canceling" them was no the solution to anything.  

I beg to differ.  Refraining from airing these horribly offensive films would have lessened the risk of apoplexy in the fragile flowers out there in movieland. What they want, though, is to have a straw man to batter around. How can one put their virtue on display if there are no longer any films to  declare racist, misogynistic, etc.? That is the real problem for those who are pure of soul and bereft of sin. Unless they have some "injustice" or "outdated yada yada"  over which they can clutch their pearls and shed crocodile tears, they are incomplete.

 

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

I beg to differ.  Refraining from airing these horribly offensive films would have lessened the risk of apoplexy in the fragile flowers out there in movieland. What they want, though, is to have a straw man to batter around. How can one put their virtue on display if there are no longer any films to  declare racist, misogynistic, etc.? That is the real problem for those who are pure of soul and bereft of sin. Unless they have some "injustice" or "outdated yada yada"  over which they can clutch their pearls and shed crocodile tears, they are incomplete.

 

Not sure where you big to differ;    if  your  point is that nothing short of a full banning of  these films will satisfy the cancel-activist,     I agree with that 100%.    

But it appears when you say "What they want" that "they"  is TCM's management and that TCM desired to have their cake and eat it too.       I just don't see it that way based on the comments made by Ms.  Stewart with regards to the new museum and TCM's programming;   Note that the Academy Museum will feature films like GWTW,  Birth of a  Nation,  etc...  just like TCM does;  because they are part of film history and history shouldn't be erased. 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, JamesJazGuitar said:

I just don't see it that way based on the comments made by Ms.  Stewart...

Assume for just a moment I am correct.  It would be foolhardy to expect people behaving so disingenuously to suddenly at some moment become honest about their motives. Therefore, I assign no weight to her remarks on this subject.

And that is as politely as I am able to express it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/20/2021 at 3:50 PM, ootsy said:

You won't recognize TCM three months from now.

10? Rage? The Hot Rock? Super Cops?

These "classics" never would have been shown on the old TCM, but on the new TCCM, HEY! Anything goes! Just call it "Classic". 

It's only going to get worse.

TCM is dead. Long live TCM!

Definitely. "Classic", Is Subjective and Interpretative. I'll Give You That. But it Would Be a (VERY) Dark, Sucky, Terrible, Awful,  Lonely, Miserable NoGoode Very Bad Day Indeed Were the Music to Stop.

 

   Feel Free to Laugh (or Throw Up) At This but its the Hugs. The Kisses. The "Hello ..!, - ...Im Robert Osborne,! .." That Makes Life THAT Much More Sweeter and Lovely.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Late to this discussion, but the problem is the conflict between "classic" and old movies.  TCM shows old movies, but not all are classic.  However, I have been exposed to and entertained by many "old" movies and have purchased the DVD's because of that exposure.  Lot of them were B movies, at best.  Some SciFi movies shown on TCM are C's, but very entertaining.

As for old or "classic," it is a moving target. The same argument occurs in the old car hobby.  God Forbid, they are now including cars from the 70's and 80's as "classics" and soon cars from the 90's.  Roughly 25 years ago.

 

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

Late to this discussion, but the problem is the conflict between "classic" and old movies.  TCM shows old movies, but not all are classic.  However, I have been exposed to and entertained by many "old" movies and have purchased the DVD's because of that exposure.  Lot of them were B movies, at best.  Some SciFi movies shown on TCM are C's, but very entertaining.

As for old or "classic," it is a moving target. The same argument occurs in the old car hobby.  God Forbid, they are now including cars from the 70's and 80's as "classics" and soon cars from the 90's.  Roughly 25 years ago.

 

I assume you're joking with the "god forbid";   to someone 25,  a car from the 70s is something their grandparents owned  and in their mind a "classic".

The moving-target is why I don't use "classic";   instead I try to use  something that is actually meaningful;  E.g.  car from the 70s or studio-era movie.

 

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

I assume you're joking with the "god forbid";   to someone 25,  a car from the 70s is something their grandparents owned  and in their mind a "classic".

The moving-target is why I don't use "classic";   instead I try to use  something that is actually meaningful;  E.g.  car from the 70s or studio-era movie.

 

Not sure, but I think most states that license cars as "antique" use 25 years as the cut off date.  Classic and antique are often interchanged.  

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...