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

How can TCM improve..?


Recommended Posts

 

fxreyman, on 25 Nov 2015 - 4:12 PM, said:

 

Welcome to the boards!

 

Thanks fxreyman !!  I'm happy to be here :)
 

You are new here so you may have not read many of the threads that have been written about this matter involving possibly changing the age of movies TCM programs. Earlier today I posted a reply to another new member on this very thread about the very useful information MovieCollectorOH gave us with the lists he has provided us with.

 

I've read this entire thread ... as clunky as the forum reading experience is mind you.

 

I took it one step further and did some figuring on my own and no where during the past 15 years has TCM gone over the 30% threshold of showing newer movies versus older movies per year. It is quite amazing that after 15 years, TCM has been able to hold the post 1960 films being shown at less than 30% each year. There have been several years where it has come very close to 30% but mostly the numbers fall in the 22% to 29+% range.

 

I read it and don't dispute it

 

So unless you are talking about your own experience and how based on your own viewing habits you see more and more post 1960 films on the schedule, the numbers do not lie. Less than 30% is a pretty good number to hope for. Some posters like JamesJazzGuitar would like to see more of a 80% / 20% split, but having numbers in the twenties is not bad considering all of the other channels out there that have come and gone with their token promises.

 

I wasn't talking about what I see on the horizon.  I just stated what I would prefer.

 

So I think all you need to do is focus on those films that appeal to you and forget about the newer films being shown.

 

I do .

 

That is what many people do around here, although I have to say that I enjoy seeing some of the newer releases.

 

I was just expressing an opinion or suspicion and that I dont' think they need to show any, much less 20-30% of the newer films.  There's no evidence that's gaining them anything.  Probably people, including the younger ones, are just accepting it but are here for the older films like I was when I was young.  

 

Having 20-30% of the newer films are not necessarily the reason they have more, the same, or less younger viewers.   The younger viewers may and probably are here for the same thing most of the rest of us are here for ... the older movies that we dont' get anywhere else ... but that's just an idea .. I have no facts or substantiating data ... just thinking out lound.

 

Again I really appreciate the welcome :)

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

fxreyman, on 25 Nov 2015 - 4:12 PM, said:

 

Welcome to the boards!

 

Thanks fxreyman !!  I'm happy to be here :)

 

You are new here so you may have not read many of the threads that have been written about this matter involving possibly changing the age of movies TCM programs. Earlier today I posted a reply to another new member on this very thread about the very useful information MovieCollectorOH gave us with the lists he has provided us with.

 

I've read this entire thread ... as clunky as the forum reading experience is mind you.

 

I took it one step further and did some figuring on my own and no where during the past 15 years has TCM gone over the 30% threshold of showing newer movies versus older movies per year. It is quite amazing that after 15 years, TCM has been able to hold the post 1960 films being shown at less than 30% each year. There have been several years where it has come very close to 30% but mostly the numbers fall in the 22% to 29+% range.

 

I read it and don't dispute it

 

So unless you are talking about your own experience and how based on your own viewing habits you see more and more post 1960 films on the schedule, the numbers do not lie. Less than 30% is a pretty good number to hope for. Some posters like JamesJazzGuitar would like to see more of a 80% / 20% split, but having numbers in the twenties is not bad considering all of the other channels out there that have come and gone with their token promises.

 

I wasn't talking about what I see on the horizon.  I just stated what I would prefer.

 

So I think all you need to do is focus on those films that appeal to you and forget about the newer films being shown.

 

I do .

 

That is what many people do around here, although I have to say that I enjoy seeing some of the newer releases.

 

I was just expressing an opinion or suspicion and that I dont' think they need to show any, much less 20-30% of the newer films.  There's no evidence that's gaining them anything.  Probably people, including the younger ones, are just accepting it but are here for the older films like I was when I was young.  

 

Having 20-30% of the newer films are not necessarily the reason they have more, the same, or less younger viewers.   The younger viewers may and probably are here for the same thing most of the rest of us are here for ... the older movies that we dont' get anywhere else ... but that's just an idea .. I have no facts or substantiating data ... just thinking out lound.

 

Again I really appreciate the welcome :)

 

 

First let me say welcome.   We need new blood at this forum as well as diehard studio-era movies fans.   

 

As it relates to if the showing of 'newer films' and if that will increase younger viewers (I prefer to say new viewers of the station):  yea,  none of us have any data to determine if showing newer films has an impact to attracting new viewers to TCM or NOT.   But I assume TCM runs focus groups or other type of marketing research.    

 

Sometimes the marketing angle is clear;  e.g.  TCM showed all the Plant of the Apes movie.  This was timed with a release of a new Apes movie.    While the first Apes film was released in 1968 (right at the cut off of the production code era),  it did star Charlton Heston therefore there was a link to the so called golden era of movies.     Did the TCM marketing department believe that by showing these Ape films it would get new viewers that saw the newest Ape movie to watch TCM?     That this type of marketing would help generate interest in films from the 30s - 50s (TCM's bread and butter)?     

 

I have no clue but clearly TCM is trying to maintain a market share and in order to do so they have to attract new viewers.   Could they do this by promoting 30s - 50s films?      Yea, that worked for us (e.g. I saw my first Bogie film when I was 20 on the big screen in a theater in Hollywood and I was hooked!),  but I assume folks who no nothing about films from the 30s - 50s need some type of link they can relate to, to get them interested. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

First let me say welcome.   We need new blood at this forum as well as diehard studio-era movies fans.   

 

As it relates to if the showing of 'newer films' and if that will increase younger viewers (I prefer to say new viewers of the station):  yea,  none of us have any data to determine if showing newer films has an impact to attracting new viewers to TCM or NOT.   But I assume TCM runs focus groups or other type of marketing research.    

 

Sometimes the marketing angle is clear;  e.g.  TCM showed all the Plant of the Apes movie.  This was timed with a release of a new Apes movie.    While the first Apes film was released in 1968 (right at the cut off of the production code era),  it did star Charlton Heston therefore there was a link to the so called golden era of movies.     Did the TCM marketing department believe that by showing these Ape films it would get new viewers that saw the newest Ape movie to watch TCM?     That this type of marketing would help generate interest in films from the 30s - 50s (TCM's bread and butter)?     

 

I have no clue but clearly TCM is trying to maintain a market share and in order to do so they have to attract new viewers.   Could they do this by promoting 30s - 50s films?      Yea, that worked for us (e.g. I saw my first Bogie film when I was 20 on the big screen in a theater in Hollywood and I was hooked!),  but I assume folks who no nothing about films from the 30s - 50s need some type of link they can relate to, to get them interested. 

 

Thanks for the welcome !!!

 

I never saw a pre-60's film on the big screen (except Gone With The Wind in the late 70's) and was still hooked.  I've been hooked since I was very young and watching KPLR channel 11 out of St Louis on the weekends and late at night on weekends.   Then later the dedicated "old" movie channels so I could get more.  What really hooked me was the Basil Rathbone Sherlock Holmes I happened to watch when I got home from work at about 16 ... after that I wanted to see every great movie ever made.  Mind you I'm not saying all the SH movies were great but after watching the series of movies there were playing at the time the channel started showing other really great old noirs and other classic movies.

 

And those SH movies were almost 40 years old at the time .. and don't get me wrong I love the good movies from the 60's and later.  It's just that the older movies are a very special and different thing.  It's an experience that's different than the later movies to me .. and I can and do get that elsewhere.

 

I think maybe with some advertising .. on other media to attract viewers and promote the experience that maybe the way to go ... not changing their "brand" or movie focus.  I think they do a great job with the websites and the pre-movie build up experience mind you so they've got some smart and capable graphic/video people .. it makes it look and feel exciting for instance when the movie is getting ready to come on ... like and event !

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

    That alterative is MOVIES-TV for 40s Fox Films or GET-TV for 30s and 40s Columbia firms  (but of course they have commercials).

We don't have Movies-TV or Get-TV here in Central Virginia. I wish we did. They sound like really good channels. To me they sound like what TNT was like in the 1990's when I'd stay up late to watch a great epic.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the welcome.  Yes I'm 50 but was in the 18-49 demographic for 31 years before this year + the years before I was 18 LOL.

 

I can see the > 60's films readily so I look forward to the earlier films when I turn to TCM the most, even though I like and appreciate films from > 60's ... I come to TCM to view the movies I don't see elsewhere and always hope to find something new or that I haven't seen for a long time.

Oh yea, > 60s to say 75, tell me commercial free and where?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure what is happening in the board room or the program office, but TCM has changed so much in the last year. What is with the reruns, sometimes shown less than 60 days apart? Also, I have trouble finding the value in running a one star movie from the 70's or 80's. If TCM has a need to show the post 70's movies, then there are plenty of great films to run. TCM has grown to be a real puzzle.

 

I am not sure what is happening in the board room or the program office, but TCM has changed so much in the last year. What is with the reruns, sometimes shown less than 60 days apart? Also, I have trouble finding the value in running a one star movie from the 70's or 80's. If TCM has a need to show the post 70's movies, then there are plenty of great films to run. TCM has grown to be a real puzzle.

 

What's happened at TCM has become a reall puzzle and a very BIG disappointment, after the October outrageous movie selection and some recent host that were clueless and why these all day "theme movies" (BORING) and now the "TCM Wine Club" INFORMERCIAL that they show every second they can.  Makes one wonder?

 Please bring back the 'CLASSICS" and stop showing these "TRASH MOVIES". Why ruin a good thing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rey,

 

The problem is that, as I responded to James, you and others appear to be reporting about a period of time, 15 years, you can't, with clarity or surety claim that on any given day that 30% number has held fast. Because I know there were some days when there were blocks of post 1960 films shown that would have tipped the scales for that particular day.     

 

You know what? You are correct.

 

There is really no way for me to go back and look at previous daily schedules to see if a preponderous of post 1960 films were scheduled and how they were scheduled how they would have skewed the 30% or less numbers.

 

Someone here on the boards has access to the daily schedules and could if they wanted to spend hours and days trying to figure that out would then probably be able to see just what it is you are asking.

 

All I can do is go back and look at MovieCollectorOH's yearly schedules and figure out just how many post 1960 films appeared in a given year and tabulate according to those figures. I don't see how I can do any better than that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What's happened at TCM has become a reall puzzle and a very BIG disappointment, after the October outrageous movie selection and some recent host that were clueless and why these all day "theme movies" (BORING) and now the "TCM Wine Club" INFORMERCIAL that they show every second they can.  Makes one wonder?

 Please bring back the 'CLASSICS" and stop showing these "TRASH MOVIES". Why ruin a good thing?

I'd like seriously like to hear your definition of TRASH MOVIES and your definition of CLASSICS..

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

 


 

Mot925:

What's happened at TCM has become a reall puzzle and a very BIG disappointment, after the October outrageous movie selection and some recent host that were clueless and why these all day "theme movies" (BORING) and now the "TCM Wine Club" INFORMERCIAL that they show every second they can.  Makes one wonder?

Please bring back the 'CLASSICS" and stop showing these "TRASH MOVIES". Why ruin a good thing?

 

Wow. What can one say in reply to this post?

 

First of all let me just say "welcome to the message boards!"

 

We always like to see new members coming here to post their comments, opinions and generally get into the back and forth between the many other message board members here.

 

As far as your post is concerned and I really like CigarJoe's response to you, there really has not been many changes to the programming on TCM through the years. The sky is NOT falling and TCM still shows on average anywhere between 70 and 75% pre-1960 films on their schedule.

 

This is not meant to say that there are not repeats of the same films from month to month, there are. But the tabulations prepared by MovieCollectorOH earlier in this thread bears out the fact that clearly more pre-1960 films ARE shown on TCM. This does not mean that there are times in the schedule that newer films are being shown. With all of the special programming going on, one could see many different films from all time periods.

 

Take October, the month you mentioned. That month had the first of what will be a three year special Women's Director Series highlighting films produced and or director by women. And since there weren't many woman directors pre-1970, many of the films being shown are of more recent times.

 

As far as the commercial about the TCM Wine Club, this is an internal promotion created by TCM to run on TCM between films. It is a new venture created with the guidance of new general manager Jennifer Dorian that will bring wines to TCM members and connect them with movies that are tied to a specific wine. It's not a bad idea. They are trying different ways to connect with fans of films in a way that I do not believe has ever been done before.

 

One last thing... In another thread titled "Every time I tune in TCM lately, it's a 70s, 80s, 90s, 0r 2000s movie", one of our more interesting and funny members Dargo posted the following in regards to new members asking the type of questions you have asked:

 

Posted 30 October 2015 - 01:09 AM
Ya know folks, I'm REALLY startin' to wonder if these people who come on here and apparently are either not cognizant of TCM's original mission statement OR aren't familiar with this special Women Directors series that's been running ALL this month because they seldom actually tune in to TCM, and THEN come on here like they're both "shocked" and "scared" about seeing a few fairly recently made movies on this channel...well, I'm REALLY startin' to wonder here IF these folks might be direct decedents of OR at least somehow related by blood TO the very SAME people who turned on their radios to the CBS Network the night of October 30th 1938 and freaked out thinking the Martians HAD actually landed in Grover's Mill New Jersey AND that the world they knew was about to END?!!!
LOL
(...c'mon, admit it...wouldn't that be interesting to know for sure?!)

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yea, > 60s to say 75, tell me commercial free and where?

 

Who said anything about commerical free?  

 

There's TNT and lots of movies channels playing movies on cable and dish etc and there are plenty of ways to watch movies online and if you have a google chromecast you can watch whatever you can find on the internet on your TV... I do it all the time and LOVE it btw.  

 

Netfilx has Chinatown and The Conversation on right now.  

 

Then there's Amazon movies etc ... tons of places to find movies.

 

Off topic but other than classic movies we aslo watch Cardinals baseball and a LOT of British TV programming via the web although mostly not movies.  

 

There's lot's of options to get what you want ... but really nothing else like TCM.  I just hope TCM continues to be like TCM and frankly I think it will or be close enough to still be enjoyable.  ;)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Off topic but other than classic movies we also watch Cardinals baseball and a LOT of British TV programming via the web although mostly not movies.  

 

I have to get my daily fix of Coronation Street. It's on Hulu. Episodes here are about nine days behind the Brits, but that's not bad. When I lived in Asia, most English shows were three months behind.

 

I also like Father Brown, the detective series about a priest who solves murders (much better than Father Dowling).  It turns up sometimes on PBS. These are probably the only two regular television series I watch, because most of my time is devoted to classic film.

 

It would be an improvement as far as I'm concerned if TCM aired a few more British films in primetime. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Who said anything about commerical free?  

 

I did, that's why I watch TCM, I'd like to see 60s -70s films for FREE and UN-CUT And UN-CENSORED on TCM with informative intros like we are accustomed to getting

 

There's TNT and lots of movies channels playing movies on cable and dish etc and there are plenty of ways to watch movies online and if you have a google chromecast you can watch whatever you can find on the internet on your TV... I do it all the time and LOVE it btw.

 

If its so great why don't you do just that, and quit belly aching about small even miniscule changes if any, here on TCM as born out by MovieCollectors stats, 

 

Netfilx has Chinatown and The Conversation on right now.

 

And so should TCM they ARE classics. 

 

Then there's Amazon movies etc ... tons of places to find movies.

 

Not For Free

 

Off topic but other than classic movies we aslo watch Cardinals baseball and a LOT of British TV programming via the web although mostly not movies.  

 

There's lot's of options to get what you want ... but really nothing else like TCM.  I just hope TCM continues to be like TCM and frankly I think it will or be close enough to still be enjoyable.   ;)

 

I hope they do exactly what they are doing slowly evolving including newer classics and other worthy films of note, live with it. :rolleyes:   

its all above  in red  :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I'll just move on .. you seem to be taking this a little personal.

 

I didn't come here to respond to attacks and insults.  Carry on

 

Black and white

It's called a discussion, and where did I insult anyone, unless you consider the verb bellyaching an insult?

Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't have Movies-TV or Get-TV here in Central Virginia. I wish we did. They sound like really good channels. To me they sound like what TNT was like in the 1990's when I'd stay up late to watch a great epic.

 

Hopefully soon you will have access to Movies-TV and Get-TV;  Both channels feature 30s - 50s films that TCM doesn't show.   Movies-TV shows many Fox 40s and 50s noir films.    In the last few years TCM has started to show some of these (e.g. Laura).   But I have seen at least 20 Fox noirs that TCM has never shown. 

 

Get-TV is mostly Columbia films and they focus a lot on the 30s and 40s.   e.g.  many Jean Arthur early 30s films.   TCM tends to only shows her 'hits';  the Capra films,  More the Merrier.     I can never get enough of Jean.     Anytime I see that early cheap looking Columbia logo at the start of the film,  I know it highly likely I'm going to get something that TCM doesn't offer.   (Columbia being the new kid on the block in the 30s offered something different than the majors).      Melvin Douglas comedies with Joan Blondell,  Claudette Colbert, etc...   

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Anytime I see that early cheap looking Columbia logo at the start of the film,  I know it highly likely I'm going to get something that TCM doesn't offer.  

Interesting comment, James. I think TCM still shows some early Columbia films, but not as many as before. And yes, the ones they select are going to be the hits by established (Oscar winning) directors, featuring household names.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I noticed this morning, and there's no real excuse for it (except that it shows bias)...is when they list the films that are coming up, now without the voice over, they mix up the billing. All three of these were billed wrong today on screen by TCM--

 

They said TOPPER -- Cary Grant & Constance Bennett (when actually Bennett is top billed).

 

They said BRINGING UP BABY -- Katharine Hepburn & Cary Grant (when Grant is top billed).

 

And they said MY FAVORITE WIFE -- Cary Grant & Irene Dunne (when Dunne is top billed).

 

I can see why they might want to change the billing if they have a series of films featuring a certain artist who might not be top billed (the other day for RIGHT CROSS, they said -- Ricardo Montalban & Marilyn Monroe, when the two leads were actually June Allyson & Dick Powell, and Monroe only has a tiny scene). Since Montalban's films were being spotlighted, I can see why they mentioned him, but someone who had never seen RIGHT CROSS before would have assumed Marilyn had a significant role in the film, but she definitely does not. Because TCM is so star-driven, they have to mention her name, because they are basically saying she's more of a star than Dick Powell (I disagree with that bias). 

 

But getting back to today's billing. They are airing a morning of Cary Grant films, so I guess I can see why they put his name ahead of Bennett and ahead of Dunne, but why ahead of Hepburn? Especially when Grant is the top billed star of BRINGING UP BABY and they are showing his films today, not Hepburn's films. So this tells me whoever writes the text for those 'coming up' pieces is showing their bias and probably TCM's bias too, that BRINGING UP BABY is really (in their minds) a Katharine Hepburn movie.

 

I feel the billing should be listed correctly, because it gives us a more historical sense of who had greater box office clout at the time the movie was made.

 

If the morning tribute is spotlighting a performer who is not top billed or even second billed in the movie being shown, like Montalban in RIGHT CROSS, then just add a bit more text-- like this: RIGHT CROSS -- June Allyson & Dick Powell, with Ricardo Montalban. And if they still want to highlight Monroe, then like this: RIGHT CROSS -- June Allyson & Dick Powell, with Ricardo Montalban & Marilyn Monroe. That way the viewer knows that while Montalban is being spotlighted, it's really an Allyson & Powell film where they will have the most screen time, and Marilyn is included somehow. It should not be falsely advertised as a Marilyn Monroe film where Ricardo Montalban seems like her leading man (they do not even share scenes in RIGHT CROSS).

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It would be an improvement as far as I'm concerned if TCM aired a few more British films in primetime. 

I agree TB...more English films would be a great plus.  I just finished a book on the special relationship between the British and American film industry, its directors, actors and other technical aspects from the late 1900's to the time when the book was completed and it is amazing that there are so many films we never see...especially from Alexander Korda.  As I said earlier somewhere this is the 70th anniversary of BRIEF ENCOUNTERS and an excellent time to feature British films and stars other than David Niven and Cary Grant. 

 

I believe TCMs programming is getting less inclusive and more geared to the "usual suspects" when really the more valuable viewers want to see a broad expanse of films.   Somewhere else here, as well, someone listed all the films from London stuidos which would be a great addition to TCM's list of films.  I can't believe that access to these films would be too expensive. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe TCMs programming is getting less inclusive and more geared to the "usual suspects" when really the more valuable viewers want to see a broad expanse of films.   Somewhere else here, as well, someone listed all the films from London stuidos which would be a great addition to TCM's list of films.  I can't believe that access to these films would be too expensive. 

The irony is that when they program things like the Projected Image series featuring Jewish stories or the recent spotlight on women trailblazers, they think they are being more inclusive. But that form of inclusivity comes by excluding golden age classics. Classics that reflect the times in which they were made and how historically, a perfect society never existed. They need to find the right balance. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree TB...more English films would be a great plus.  I just finished a book on the special relationship between the British and American film industry, its directors, actors and other technical aspects from the late 1900's to the time when the book was completed and it is amazing that there are so many films we never see...especially from Alexander Korda.  As I said earlier somewhere this is the 70th anniversary of BRIEF ENCOUNTERS and an excellent time to feature British films and stars other than David Niven and Cary Grant. 

 

I believe TCMs programming is getting less inclusive and more geared to the "usual suspects" when really the more valuable viewers want to see a broad expanse of films.   Somewhere else here, as well, someone listed all the films from London stuidos which would be a great addition to TCM's list of films.  I can't believe that access to these films would be too expensive. 

The problem may be, as it is with me, that the dialogue is often difficult to understand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem may be, as it is with me, that the dialogue is often difficult to understand.

Film is a visually driven medium. Unless it is an adaptation of Shakespeare, I don't see how someone could have a lot of trouble with British dialogue. There's always the internet to look up certain phrases if they are using slang on screen. But often you can figure out the meaning with context clues. That's what I do when I watch episodes of Coronation Street on Hulu. Like they are talking about going to a hen party, and I figure since a character is about to get married, it means bridal shower. 

 

But I agree with Emily's comment that there is more to British acting in golden age films than Cary Grant and David Niven. This is another example of TCM's programming bias, preferring to air movies with household names, because the channel is star-driven, at the expense of all this other great rich filmmaking.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Film is a visually driven medium. Unless it is an adaptation of Shakespeare, I don't see how someone could have a lot of trouble with British dialogue. There's always the internet to look up certain phrases if they are using slang on screen. But often you can figure out the meaning with context clues. That's what I do when I watch episodes of Coronation Street on Hulu. Like they are talking about going to a hen party, and I figure since a character is about to get married, it means bridal shower. 

 

But I agree with Emily's comment that there is more to British acting in golden age films than Cary Grant and David Niven. This is another example of TCM's programming bias, preferring to air movies with household names, because the channel is star-driven, at the expense of all this other great rich filmmaking.

Slang is not the problem. I often have difficulty picking up what is being said if everyone in the film has a heavy British accent.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Film is a visually driven medium. Unless it is an adaptation of Shakespeare, I don't see how someone could have a lot of trouble with British dialogue. There's always the internet to look up certain phrases if they are using slang on screen. But often you can figure out the meaning with context clues. That's what I do when I watch episodes of Coronation Street on Hulu. Like they are talking about going to a hen party, and I figure since a character is about to get married, it means bridal shower. 

 

But I agree with Emily's comment that there is more to British acting in golden age films than Cary Grant and David Niven. This is another example of TCM's programming bias, preferring to air movies with household names, because the channel is star-driven, at the expense of all this other great rich filmmaking.

 

Well if one can't understand the dialog,  especially in a dialog driven film,  it can make it difficult to follow what is going on.    My wife is fluent in 4 languages (English being one of course),  but she has difficulty with British films,  especially those with 'strong' accents (Welsh,  Irish,  Scottish).      She wished some of these films had subtitles in Italian!    (her native language).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Slang is not the problem. I often have difficulty picking up what is being said if everyone in the film has a heavy British accent.

I think it's a matter of getting your ear to tune into it. If you haven't seen a British film in awhile and you've been hanging out in the ghetto that Elvis Presley sang about, then yes-- it's going to be a bit of an adjustment for you.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I noticed this morning, and there's no real excuse for it (except that it shows bias)...is when they list the films that are coming up, now without the voice over, they mix up the billing. All three of these were billed wrong today on screen by TCM--

 

They said TOPPER -- Cary Grant & Constance Bennett (when actually Bennett is top billed).

 

They said BRINGING UP BABY -- Katharine Hepburn & Cary Grant (when Grant is top billed).

 

And they said MY FAVORITE WIFE -- Cary Grant & Irene Dunne (when Dunne is top billed).

 

I can see why they might want to change the billing if they have a series of films featuring a certain artist who might not be top billed (the other day for RIGHT CROSS, they said -- Ricardo Montalban & Marilyn Monroe, when the two leads were actually June Allyson & Dick Powell, and Monroe only has a tiny scene). Since Montalban's films were being spotlighted, I can see why they mentioned him, but someone who had never seen RIGHT CROSS before would have assumed Marilyn had a significant role in the film, but she definitely does not. Because TCM is so star-driven, they have to mention her name, because they are basically saying she's more of a star than Dick Powell (I disagree with that bias). 

 

But getting back to today's billing. They are airing a morning of Cary Grant films, so I guess I can see why they put his name ahead of Bennett and ahead of Dunne, but why ahead of Hepburn? Especially when Grant is the top billed star of BRINGING UP BABY and they are showing his films today, not Hepburn's films. So this tells me whoever writes the text for those 'coming up' pieces is showing their bias and probably TCM's bias too, that BRINGING UP BABY is really (in their minds) a Katharine Hepburn movie.

 

I feel the billing should be listed correctly, because it gives us a more historical sense of who had greater box office clout at the time the movie was made.

 

If the morning tribute is spotlighting a performer who is not top billed or even second billed in the movie being shown, like Montalban in RIGHT CROSS, then just add a bit more text-- like this: RIGHT CROSS -- June Allyson & Dick Powell, with Ricardo Montalban. And if they still want to highlight Monroe, then like this: RIGHT CROSS -- June Allyson & Dick Powell, with Ricardo Montalban & Marilyn Monroe. That way the viewer knows that while Montalban is being spotlighted, it's really an Allyson & Powell film where they will have the most screen time, and Marilyn is included somehow. It should not be falsely advertised as a Marilyn Monroe film where Ricardo Montalban seems like her leading man (they do not even share scenes in RIGHT CROSS).

 

Explain to me...

 

Why is this such a big deal to you? Do you honestly believe that this is that important to you and possibly others that it is something that TCM needs to improve upon? What would happen do you suppose if they just showed the title of the movie, the year it was released and the name of the director? Do you think others would be upset?

 

It is my opinion that some around here just love to nitpick every little thing they think or perceive that TCM might be doing that could garner improvement. And this is a perfect example of something that is so small (again, my opinion) that it really does not seem to make any sense at all.

 

If you are a movie buff and you happened to see this just before watching the film do you really think that knowing which actor was billed higher than the actor really means that much to you as a viewer or a fan/buff?

 

I could see it if we were talking about when the film may have initially been released or as the case with plays where in many cases the writer and or actors really meant if something was going to be worth attending.

 

But these are films and because TCM wanted to showcase a few films from Grant today, his name appears at the top of the list. Just not that important.

Edited by fxreyman
  • Like 3
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
© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...