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

Recommended Posts

*They should have taken the money they spent on ?Lord of the Rings? and ?Gladiator? and paid it on the rental of ?The Story of Temple Drake?.*

 

Fred,

 

You are a smart man and I know you understand the concept behind rights issues. *Temple Drake* can't be rented for broadcasting on television. Why? Because there are issues with the rights that prohibit that.

 

TCM has been working for over a year to get those issues cleared up. Until they are successful, they can't legally show *Temple Drake*.

 

And you are kiddng yourself if you think the Time-Warner legal department is going to allow them to illegally broadcast a film they don't have the rental/lease rights to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

*Did you see "Temple Drake" at the TCM festival in Los Angeles last year?*

 

No, unfortunately, I was not able to.

 

And, I'm sure you know that there is a difference between between theatrical rights that allow it to be screened at film festivals, etc and broadcast rights which prohibit it from being broadcast on television.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=FredCDobbs wrote:}{quote}

> Sean Bean and Viggo Mortensen?? LOL.

 

No worse than Mickey Rooney or Rock Hudson (which has to be one of the worst screen names ever, except for possibly Englebert Humperdinck)

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote}

> tracey, I too love Peter Jackson's *Lord of the Rings* movies, all three of them. He captures the spirit of the books while keeping the films "cinematic". Everything you said in praise of these films, I agree with.

> And I don't usually like movies over two hours in lenght - but with the LOTR movies, I don't even notice how long they are.

>

> (ps - I like Sean Bean as Boromir better than Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn, even though he's only in the first of the three films. But that's a quibble...Mortensen is great, too.

 

Sean Bean was a great Boromir. He's probably the most tragic character in the book. He had such potential to be great, and blew it. Then, he's given an opportunity to redeem himself and gives it his all and they take the hobbits to Isengard anyway. Very sad.

 

I have to complain a little about the length of the movies though--Peter Jackson should have taken the words of Hitchcock to heart: "The length of a film should be directly related to the endurance of the human bladder." Especially if you have a large Diet Coke with your popcorn...

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=FredCDobbs wrote:}{quote}

> > {quote:title=stjohnrv wrote:}{quote}

> > My, we are on our tippy toes standing above and beyond the common herd today, aren't we?

>

>

> Well, I dont moo or baaa, if thats what you mean.

 

Seems to me that in this thread, mostly you have been saying "baa," or "bah," however you want to spell it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just checked the TCM lineup for the next couple nights. "Thelma and Louise". "Amadeus". "Silence of the Lambs."

 

People, if we don't start fighting this now, these new programing execs at TCM with their "fresh" ideas and their need to express themselves are going to keep slipping more and more of these "new classics" into the TCM schedule, until all we're left with is another Cinemax, or Hallmark channel or some such.

 

And it's not just TCM we've got to fight. TCM over the years has apparently enlisted a subsegment of their viewership which ostensibly watch the channel for "classic movies", not "old movies." Subtle difference, but one with disastrous consequences for the station. A "classic" movie can basically be anything, sky's the limit. Thelman and Louise. Shrek. Kumar and Schlepzoid at White Castle. Basically anything.

 

I'm going to fight this tooth and claw. These young punks at TCM just took a massive wrench to their precious career plans. Sorry, boys. No BusinessWeek or WSJ feature stories in your futures.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay BabyDiapers....this is 31 Days of Oscar and this is what TCM does every years in February. Besides, the last few months on TCM has been terrific, between Moguls and Movie Stars, Ava Gardner, Mickey Rooney, and Hal Roach. And during the day alot of good old time movies from MGM, WB, and RKO. And in March we have Jean Harlow. Thank the Lord for TCM!

Link to post
Share on other sites

*"People, if we don't start fighting this now, these new programing execs at TCM with their "fresh" ideas and their need to express themselves are going to keep slipping more and more of these "new classics" into the TCM schedule, until all we're left with is another Cinemax, or Hallmark channel or some such."*

 

Psst. Haven't you heard? Revolutions start on Facebook or Twitter nowadays and not on coporate Message Boards.

 

*"Sorry, boys. No BusinessWeek or WSJ feature stories in your futures."*

 

That's OK. The women in the department will be happy to sit in for them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

*these new programing execs at TCM with their "fresh" ideas and their need to express themselves are going to keep slipping more and more of these "new classics" into the TCM schedule, until all we're left with is another Cinemax, or Hallmark channel or some such.*

 

TCMProgrammr has been with the channel longer than these message boards have existed. There are no 'new programing execs at TCM with their "fresh" ideas and their need to express themselves'.

 

They've been there for years and they have no 'new agenda' to replace all the classic films with modern films.

 

As over a dozen other posters have told you, it is the *31 Days of Oscar*, an annual event that has happened every year since 1995 and that every year includes recent modern films because TCM salutes the *ENTIRE* history of the Academy Awards.

 

You want to believe differently, that's your right.

 

In the meantime, I'll go try to find some strawberry ice cream for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Boy, every time I come back after a few hours this thread gets more and more interesting all of the time. No amount of explaining things to you logically seems to be working. Why don't you just climb back into your crib for the night and let the professionals take over.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=hamradio wrote:}{quote}

> There is a 1978 animated version of "The Lord of the Rings". Its not Oscar material but it did told the whole story in one movie.

 

and someone else said "(although the Ralph Bakshi LOTR is still my favorite even though Return of the King was not part of the LOTR films he made)"

 

You are both wrong...Bakshi made ONE LOTR movie....he did not make "LOTR films". The movie he made was the first book, as was the first of the Jackson films, based on "The Fellowship of The Ring". The Bakshi film bombed, which is why he never made another one. It didn't tell "the whole story in one movie", unless you mean the story of the FIRST book. Also, Return of The King was a tv movie...

 

....and Babydiapers is still a troll in this thread. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The animated Ralph Bakshi "Lord of the Rings" was the only movie I was referring to. At the time of that films release, I knew nothing at all about the *complete* story until the trilogy came out. The animated version told of the History of the Rings, the Mines of Moria, the Orcs, Helm's Deep, Theodens's victory and finally the Voyage to Mordor.

 

Didn't realize at the time a sequel was possible, this is why I thought it was the complete story. I thought (at the time) the *first* LOTR live action movie was simply the animated movie brought to life as funny as it sounds, like "The Flintstones".

 

The trilogy taught me the depth of the *whole* story. I think the animated flopped because at the time of release, it was said it was geared more toward young adults / adults, wasn't intended for small children.

 

Surprised that the adult themed "Heavy Metal" (1981) was a limited success and is a cult classic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just thinking I wonder if anyone actually did watch Return of the King for the first time on TCM last night and if so what they would think because the film is so dependent on the other two in the series. I understand why TCM only showed ROTK because it is the film in the trilogy that won Best Picture but if you never saw the other two it is somewhat hard to fully appreciate the 3rd I think.

 

Of course I don't want to think about the complaints if they ever did show all 3 on TCM. I am definitely not suggesting it. lol

 

Besides while I don't through a fit like some people when the occasional modern film comes on I am much happier with the older ones

 

Edited by: Kinokima on Feb 22, 2011 12:01 AM

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kinokima wrote:

<< Of course I don't want to think about the complaints if they ever did show all 3 on TCM. I am definitely not suggesting it. lol >>

 

The TCM programmer might see this post and do it for fun and just see what will happen. I've seen the trilogy on Starz. The walking, talking trees from "The Two Towers" were something right out of Harvey Casper comics, lol. Now that left me in awe.

 

Lord-of-The-Rings-Tree_l.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Babydiapers, I swear you get better at being funny with each post. "Young punks at TCM..." Gad, that made me laugh, and I am sure you handed them quite a jolly this morning.

 

"And it's not just TCM we've got to fight. TCM over the years has apparently enlisted a subsegment of their viewership which ostensibly watch the channel for 'classic movies', not 'old movies.'" LOL, you're saying the people who watched this station who like what TCM said it would do from its first broadcast (show movies old and recent) are to be listed your enemy list? You really are a hoot.

 

You only hit on one thing that some here dig their heels in or bury their heads in the sand about: "A classic movie can basically be anything, sky's the limit."

 

Oops, what's that sound. Oh oh, babydiapers, tha's the recess bell, you better head back in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

babydiapers wrote:

<< These young punks at TCM just took a massive wrench to their precious career plans. Sorry, boys. No BusinessWeek or WSJ feature stories in your futures. >>

 

Just curious, what gave you the assumption that *everyone* who works at the TCM studio is *young?* I've been here since 2007 and I don't even know the average age. I know some of the posters here are much older than you think.

 

By the way, what is the age of the programmers? If they are young, this shows the appreciation for the old silents that have been shown.

 

Wonder does the studio uses the TCM Vacuum tube studio microphone that is *modern?* Found this during a Google search, lol. Maybe this is why Robert Osborne's voice sounds so good. :)

 

NAD-TCM%201050-2T.jpg

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...