Jump to content

 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
TerryEllsworth

Give it a rest, Professor!

Recommended Posts

Okay, so I watched the intro to ROAD TO MORROCO tonight and all I can say is that Professor Shaheen needs to give it a rest already. It's a comedy, for heaven's sake! This guy sees racism and boogey men behind every curtain. Sadly, that kind of thinking diminishes real racism.

 

ROAD TO MOROCCO is a comedy, one of the finest ever made. It's funny. It's light. You don't have to close your eyes for the final 15 minutes. I'm not sure that Professor Shaheen really understands what filmmaking is all about. He's always looking for "balance" -- but does "balance" have any business being a standard one should aspire to in fictional filmmaking? It seems to me the prime duty of the filmmaker(s) is to make the film they wish to make, not seek after some mythical "balance" approved of by a committee of grievance counselors.

 

His comments tonight reached a new low. I just love the look on Robert Osborne's face who tried, valiantly, to basically say it's just an entertainment that we all enjoy .... but he couldn't poor, sad Shaheen to admit it.

 

Regards,

Terry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree completely.

 

Could you imagine if the canine population of the free world sat around and watched old Lassie movies and debated the species-ism of what kind of dogs were cast and if they best represented a more balanced breed?

 

Taking absurdity to new heights with this series.

 

And for those who say we need to sit through crackpot academicians in order to see these movies...if this is the price or pound of flesh that must be paid to see Eddie Cantor in ALI BABA, I will gladly watch THE COURAGE OF LASSIE instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Could you imagine if the canine population of the free world sat around and watched old Lassie movies and debated the species-ism of what kind of dogs were cast and if they best represented a more balanced breed?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speciesism

"Speciesism is the assigning of different values or rights to beings on the basis of their species membership. The term was created by British psychologist Richard D. Ryder in 1973 to denote a prejudice against non-humans based on physical differences that are given moral value."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Fred,

 

I was trying to apply racism to animals to make a point.

 

This series is teaching me the error of what happens when folks start taking political correctness too far. I don't think that was the programmers' intent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No matter what the professor says about harmless 70 year old movies, there is nothing he can do about covering up the real truth and facts that we see every day on the news programs.

 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/us-puts-a-price-on-lockerbie-bomber/story-e6frg6so-1226086710772

 

http://www.newstimeafrica.com/archives/20709

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/bahrain/8638396/Bahraini-woman-poet-tells-of-torture-while-in-custody.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know you're in trouble when TCM is infected by PC. Prof. Shaheen is "shocked, shocked"--a la Capt. Reynaud--that negative images of Arab culture are depicted in a 70-year-old Road picture? Is he willing to discuss the beheadings, stonings, dismemberments, and **** mutilations of little girls that STILL goes on in the same culture? He frets over the "impact" of such images? What about the "impact" of commercial jet planes into American buildings ten years ago?

The arrogance and selective blindness of the Multi-culti crowd is beyond belief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another problem with a series of this kind is that it drags on too long, especially painful when there is a guest who is not convincing, or whose statements are easily picked apart and refuted. Thank goodness the films can stand on their own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And now we have an Abbot and Costello film as part of that theme. Geez, is there anything that doesn't offend his delicate sensibilities? I can't help but think that Mr. Osborne must see how ridiculous this whole thing is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TCM, please stop running this series, not because it's not worth discussing mind you...I can't stand all of this ludicrous bitching it stirs up in the fickle viewer base.

 

Seriously, this neither affects your ability to see these films, it doesn't affect your "freedom" in any way whatsoever, it doesn't do anything to you personally. If you want to watch Road to Morocco without prof. Shaheen's comments, you can watch it any of the twenty or so times TCM shows it every year...free from any of this stuff that frankly doesn't have an effect on your life at all.

 

Give me a break...what a bunch of babies we've got here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to be honest with you, I was a little puzzled as to why TCM chose to highlight Arabs in American films, this entire month.

 

It seemed as though, that this was yet another politically-correct attempt, to somehow, "soften" the image of Arabs (muslims) in the minds of most Americans, since 911.

 

I was not particularly fond of many of the film selections as well. I could fully understand the difficulty, that many individuals, from various ethnic groups feel, when watching their race, preferably, in a classic films, being grossly stereotyped.

 

However, the entire Arab culture is primarily centered on the religion of Islam, and I'm not to going to elaborate on this subject too much, other than to wonder what exactly was Dr Shaheen balancing these so-called "exotic" Hollywood stereotypes of Arabs against?

 

I would have prefered a look at the images of Italian-Americans or even polynesians. There is a whole body of entertaining films in which to document on.

 

TCM should not engage in any more of this kind of "propoganda." Inform your fans with accurate subject matter and the identifiable characters, many of have come to respect!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point Professor Shaheen was was trying to make was that the prejudicial stereotypes of Arabs are so ingrained in mainstream culture that we don't even realize their existence, or that they give offense and insult to the object groups' members. Of course, there is a reluctance to change one's way of thinking, it takes a lot of trouble and is inconvenient, especially if there is no perceived need. It is natural to expect impatience, anger and offense quickly growing out of what is thought of as an unjust and unmerited criticism, and it's seen in the posts complaining about this series. Precisely what Arabs are likely to feel when they see stereotypical depictions of their culture in movies.

 

 

Hey, what happened to the Bugs Bunny cartoon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just viewed Road to Morraco and listened to the comments prior to the movie. Where does that jetk get his history from. Road #3 was filmed in 1942 and released in 1943. I quote the professor, at the time this film was made Morraco was our ally. It seems to me Morraco was splite between two protectorates, one being Spain and the other France. French Morraco was under Vichy French rule and allied to the Axis. As far as I'm conserned the the last 15 minutes of the movie was apt for the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's clear that he's just telling history the way he wants it to have been to suit his point of view.

 

I

R

R

E

S

P

O

N

S

I

B

L

E

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Golly, that's never been done before. Tell me, do you have an interpretation of history that is uncomfortable or inconvenient for you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some levity:

 

The only history I am interested in is TCM's broadcast history. Everything else is an attempt at revisionism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a miserable excuse for a guest. TCM and Robert Osborne should be embarrassed. Why would they invite this person who is clearly lost touch with what the Arab world has evolved into. He brags about forcing Disney to change words to a song in Aladdin...what right does he have to be so arrogant as to ignore what everyone knows to be true...that Arabs lose their hands, their sight, and can be stoned to death for transgressions against the laws of the Koran. He assumes no one has heard about Shiria law..what a fool and what a lousy and meaningless guest. TCM you scraped the bottom of the barrel with this Shaheen.

 

Edited by: pst50 on Jul 15, 2011 12:52 AM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*"I can't stand all of this ludicrous bitching it stirs up in the fickle viewer base."* - JonasEB

 

I feel for ya.

I knew this month's "Race In Hollywood" was going to rival "Screened Out" for "outrage" among the closed-minded set and their inability to accept that "the others" see many things differently in Classic Films.

 

I can't help but think these folks would vilify Donald Bogle for pointing out that, no matter how "humorous" people found him, Stepin Fetchit was a prejudicial and stereotypical image in film history.

 

Kyle In Hollywood

 

Edited by: hlywdkjk on Jul 14, 2011 9:52 PM

to add an article

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But you didn't answer the question. You criticized Professor Shaheen for tailoring his interpretation of history to suit his ends. What I would like to know is if you have an interpretation tailored for your convenience, or wether you have one that at least in part is uncomfortable for you to consider? I would just like to make certain you are not criticizing the Professor for something you do yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I understood what you were asking. I didn't answer you because the original poster is not questioning my view of history or your view of history, but is instead questioning the view that is being advocated by TCM's month-long guest.

 

None of us has that kind of television pulpit eight evenings for four or five hours each night to spew our theories. R.O. may react occasionally or ask him to clarify something, but who is really challenging what he is saying? At least there is this message board with intelligent people weighing in on his claims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have my own very effective and fuss-free way of giving this subject a rest. It matters not to me what the Good Doctor thinks, or that TCM has chosen to place him on exhibit for others to argue about, fret about, worry about, etc., ad infinitum.

 

I plan my recording schedule in advance from the TCM monthly schedule which I have printed out, and use two DVD recorders to record a lot of the movies directly to rerecordable DVDs. The reason for using this type of DVD for recording is that, if one wishes to edit the disc after recording, this can only be done using a rerecordable disc. After recording, without watching what I am recording but with a general allowance for recording time (including some small extra time allowed for the Good Doctor to rant and rave, propagandize, etc.), I use the excellent editing software supplied with my two recorders (of different makes), finalize the recordings after editing, and then copy them to non-rewriteable DVDs on my computer. These hard copies then go into my own personal archive for future study, analysis, review, but not for redistribution. The original rerecordable disc is then reformatted for another use.

 

As for me, the Good Doctor is scrubbed out during the editing procedure. As he happens to pop up in any future role, such as a guest commentator or whatever, I just de-pop him once again in the editor. This is all that there is to it. So why make all this fuss about a non-entity? What I am concerned about are the movies themselves, which (hopefully but not always) meet the schedule commitments.

 

This procedure, for all movies, not just those on themes such as Arabian whatever, serves me very well. Those who like to argue in these forums for the sake of argument are certainly welcome to do so. I am not one of them.

 

Gerald

 

Edited by: geraldrobertson on Jul 15, 2011 1:28 AM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he's been very fair about these movies. He's not saying they're bad films or that we should hate ourselves for still enjoying them.

 

he's exploring the way a race was portrayed in hollywood, and he's not wrong about the way Arabs were villified. does he over analyze sometimes? Sure, but that's kind of the point of this series.

 

if you don't like what he's saying, you could just push mute until the movie starts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you are saying that they are wasting time and money on him that could be devoted to movies. I would hate to think what he is getting paid to appear on TCM eight evenings. He is not doing it for free or merely to hawk a book. There is some fee he earns for sitting there and pontificating.

Share this post


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
Sign in to follow this  

© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
×
×
  • Create New...