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

TCM in the Year 2032


Recommended Posts

TCM in the Year 2032

 

http://www.nypost.com/p/entertainment/tv/night_at_the_movies_TTej3cCe0I6t8lLj9fSZPI

 

That NYPost article posted over the weekend included a film critic picking five films from the past ten years that will likely be on TCM in 20 years. It's provoked some thoughts on my part - both general and in regard to what kind of films would be on TCM in 2032.

 

Now, whether TCM still exists in 20 years is a dubious proposition in itself. Just its uniqueness in the cable television universe should cause even the most optimistic viewers to place it on the "endangered species list" of cable channels. Television is not an industry inclined to support endeavors of an artistic or historical nature when success is measured by the standards of the business world. Even the honorable idealist Longfellow Deeds questioned the wisdom of using his money to support the opera.

 

Many other channels with ambitions equally lofty to those of TCM have succumbed to the pressures exerted by shareholders and their "bean-counter" enablers. "History" is missing for hours at a time on its namesake channel and a theatrical "Bravo!" is not the reaction elicited by the "performances" witnessed on the home of "Real Housewives..." Such are the changes wrought by "commercial interests" on cable programming over the past decade.

 

But let's assume that TCM continues to fend off the barbarians at the gate and remains true to its mission to present the greatest films of all-time. What will the line-up look like in 2032? There are a number of films released in the past 20 years that could fit nicely into a classic film schedule. But I don't think all the titles in the NYPost article are the most likely candidates to become fixtures on the TCM two decades hence.

 

Recent films will have to fit in with the Classic Canon of perennial favorites. If they are going to be seen alongside *Mrs. Miniver* or *The Maltese Falcon*, they will need to be equally timeless. Otherwise it might be better if they become part of the AMC line-up of the future.

 

Here are Post critic Kyle Smith's selections -

*A.I. Artificial Intelligence* (2001) - Stanley Kubrick?s take on ?Pinocchio? was decades in coming to the screen, and as finally realized by Steven Spielberg after Kubrick?s death it is an eerie fairy tale about a cyborg (Haley Joel Osment) determined to prove he is as capable of love as a real boy.

 

*Million Dollar Baby* (2004) - Clint Eastwood?s late-career Oscar winner about a crusty boxing trainer who has become estranged from his own daughter, yet finds a surrogate in a surprising young fighter is one of the screen?s most moving depictions of father-daughter bonding.

 

*The Royal Tenenbaums* (2001) - Pained, sweet, funny and tragic by turns, Wes Anderson?s impeccably realized family saga is so singular that it takes several viewings to take it in ? and so timeless that it?s bound to obsess the next generation.

 

*War Horse* (2011) - A simple fable about a boy who wants to be reunited with his horse unfolds into first a WW I epic and finally a reflection of the common humanity that binds us all, even during our darkest hours. Perhaps only Steven Spielberg could have made such a soulful and rousing throwback picture.

 

*Inglourious Basterds* (2009) - Putting World War II through the prism of pulp fiction, Quentin Tarantino?s masterpiece begins and climaxes with two of the most vivid scenes of the era ? the unbearably tense one in the French farmhouse and the supremely cathartic one in the Paris movie theater. In between, it?s sharp, irreverent fun. Starring Brad Pitt.

 

Of these, only *War Horse* strikes me as likely being a fixture on the TCM of the future. The film would not be out of place if shown alongside other World War I features like *Sergeant York* or *All Quiet On The Western Front*. Hopefully the programmers in 2032 aren't so lazy as to pair it with a "Francis" film.

 

I've not seen *Million Dollar Baby*. It could be a contender for the heavy rotation on TCM. Lord knows, there are many boxing films in the TCM "library". (And TCM does have a soft spot for Clint Eastwood.) Nor have I seen *The Royal Tenenbaums* but any film that, as the critic noted, "requires" multiple viewings is usually the sign of a flawed film. Or a film that you probably DON'T want to see a second time.

 

I think the language and violence of *Inglorious Basterds* will keep the film from sharing the line-up with *Kelly's Heroes* or *The Dirty Dozen* while *A.I. Artificial Intelligence* is too cold and uninvolving. I just didn't care what happened to to the cyborg-child.

 

Off the top of my head, films of a "recent vintage" that I can see being successful additions to a mid-21st century TCM include the romantic comedy *Clueless*, *Topsy-Turvy*, *Seabiscuit*, *Wag The Dog*, *Good Night And Good Luck*, *The Legend Of 1900* and *October Sky*. I think each of these films hold up to multiple viewings and their narratives allow them to stand alongside the best stories of the studio era.

 

But TNT will still be the one network showing *The Shawshank Redemption*.

 

I understand. No one knows what the future will hold. Heck. By 2032, civilization may have ended all together. But if TCM is still around twenty years from now, that's one sign that civilization has endured.

 

What films do others think will be smoothly integrated into a 2032 TCM?

 

Kyle In Hollywood

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=hlywdkjk wrote:

> }{quote}Such are the changes wrought by "commercial interests" on cable programming over the past decade.

>

There's a difference between "commercial interests" & corporate rape, pillage, & murder. The latter is what the vast majority of media outlets (so far not TCM) have fallen prey to. The arts are capable of making money. But why make a tiny profit selling a steak when you can make a killing selling a shitburger?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kyle, I'm laughing about your comment concerning the true meaning of "need to see it several times to take it all in." You hit the nail on the head.

 

*The Ides of March* is a throwback to classic cinema, and would pair nicely with various films of Preminger, Huston, Wyler, or Zinnemann.

 

The garish colors in the last scene of *War Horse* definitely reminded me of *Duel in the Sun*. But the Spielberg film which fits best is *Catch Me If You Can*.

 

*The Artist* is a perfect fit for TCM. As for Wes Anderson, *The Darjeeling Limited* has a 60s/70s vibe and would go well with British films of that era.

 

The TCM of the future could discover the fine 80s comedy *Almost You*. For Scorsese, *The Age of Innocence* and *After Hours*.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The first basic question is if in 2032 TCM would show movies made in the 21st century. The concept of a movie network showing movies from 1920 - 2010 (or so), just doesn't work for me.

 

I would rather there be 2 or 3 'classic' movie networks that focus on specific time periods.

 

As you noted by 2032 I don't see the need for any networks that show fixed (pre-set) schedules. Instead one will just log on to websites that have specificc libraries and select from them what they wish to watch.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect everything will be in some, on demand form by then. Wow, i'll be 62. But I could see the following ten on TCM if the channel exists:

 

Moneyball

Pulp Fiction(Maybe the longest shot due to language)

Lars and the Real Girl

Juno

Match Point

Gran Torino

Million Dollar Baby

Garden State

Catch Me If You Can

Vanilla Sky

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can envision them chosing darker movies such as:

 

*Killing Zoe* (1993)

*From Dusk Till Dawn* (1996)

*La Femme Nikita* (1990)

*Breathless* (1960)

 

These are much older than the previous five years. I believe their subject matter and ratings will require twenty more years for them to be thought so mellow and old that they can be shown.

Link to post
Share on other sites

*Killing Zoe*

*Romeo is Bleeding*

*Gangster Number 1*

*Hugo*

*The Devil's Backbone*

*Pi*

*Down By Law*

*Careful*

*Saddest Music in the World*

*Mulholland Drive*

*Erendira*

*Man Facing Southeast*

*Pixote*

*Bye Bye Brazil*

*Brazil*

*Tideland*

*Jacob's Ladder*

*Donnie Darko*

 

Edited by: ValentineXavier on Jan 31, 2012 8:59 PM

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what I think they'll be showing? Movies from the Golden Age. They won't show movies from the 90s and 2000s just because times have changed. They haven't changed what movies they were showing since they started in the early 90s, so why would they change what movies they show in twenty years?

Link to post
Share on other sites

> while *A.I. Artificial Intelligence* is too cold and uninvolving. I just didn't care what happened to to the cyborg-child.

 

In that case, it would be paired well with *Member of the Wedding*. Then again, I did sort of care what happened to the Julie Harris character: I wanted Ethel Waters to smack her into the next state.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt I'll be around in 2032, nor will a huge chunk of TCM's current viewership. If you think TCM will hold true to their current direction, you made some good choices. I used to watch *Legend of 1900* every time IFC played it. I'm surprised that TCM hasn't shown it yet, fits in very well. Don't ask me why, but I did enjoy Burton's *Alice in Wonderland* , and could see TCM playing it in a few years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well this is an interesting thread. And the article from the New York Post was intriguing to say the least. I would think that based on everything that has been written so far on this thread, one sure thing can be said and that is that there is still a core of posters who believe that TCM should continue to show only classic films from the Golden Era or at least many of the same films from before 1970 as they have been showing. And there is nothing wrong with that.

 

But lets say that of the tens of thousands of films available, pre-1970, only a couple of thousand films are translated digitally for future use. Eventually we will still have repeated showings of North By Northwest, and all of the other films that are repeated and then thrashed by the writers here who can't believe that there aren't any more films that can be shown on TCM.

 

But 20 years from now almost every film released since the mid 1990's has been digitally produced and so therefore many of these newer films might be on the schedule along with all of the pre-1970 films that were switched over digitally. As far as which movies from this most recent era that might be shown, one would first have to look at films that were Oscar contenders.

 

For even though I am sure Mr. Osborne will not be around in 20 years, I am more than sure that one of his pet projects, the Oscars will still have films shown during 31 Days of Oscar that will feature nominated films from 2000 and on.

 

After Oscar qualification, the next most important reason to air a film might be which studio TCM is closest to at the time. Will TCM still be owned by Time Warner, or will Viacom own the channel then. Who knows, but whichever conglomerate owns TCM I can bet you that that company that owns the channel will try and continue to air high quality films on the channel for years to come. Just say one word: Peabody. TCM continues to win Peabody's I am sure whomever owns them will want to advertise that and try and keep the channel running as smoothly as it does now.

 

As far as the films that could be shown I would nominate any of the following from the year 2000 on:

 

Almost Famous, Erin Brockovich, Gladiator, Thirteen Days, Wonder Boys, A Beautiful Mind, Heist, Life as a House, Moulin Rouge!, The Shipping News, Shrek, About Schmidt, Antwone Fisher, The Hours, The Pianist, Signs, Spider-Man, The Sum of All Fears, Tadpole, American Splendor, Lost in Translation, Love Actually, Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World, Mystic River, Open Range, Seabiscuit, Secondhand Lions, Something's Gotta Give, The Station Agent, The Aviator, Hotel Rwanda, The Incredibles, In Good Company, Million Dollar Baby, Shrek 2, Sideways, Silver City, Batman Begins, Capote, Cinderella Man, The Constant Gardener, Good Night, and Good Luck, The Squid and the Whale, Syriana, The Thing About My Folks, Walk the Line, The World's Fastest Indian, Casino Royale, Children of Men, The Da Vinci Code, The Departed, The Good German, Infamous, Letters From Iwo Jima, Pan's Labyrinth, The Queen, We Are Marshall, The Bourne Ultimatum, Breach, In the Valley of Elah, Juno, Michael Clayton, No Country for Old Men, The Savages, The Visitor, You Kill Me, Appaloosa, Body of Lies, The Dark Knight, The Express, Ghost Town, Gran Torino, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Iron Man, Last Chance Harvey, The Reader, The Blind Side, Crazy Heart, The Hangover, The Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds, Julie & Julia, Me and Orson Welles, Sherlock Holmes, Star Trek, State of Play, 127 Hours, The Fighter, The Ghost Writer, Inception, The Kids Are All Right, The Kings Speech, and True Grit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've enjoyed reading the responses so far. (I'm glad readers have wanted to respond.)

 

I don't disagree that "watching movies" in 2032 will be a very different experience. Though I am at a loss to find the attraction in seeing a film on a "tablet" (or cellphone!) In the future, I wouldn't be surprised if the internet allowed film studios to circumvent cable operators or television channels and they would deliver their films themselves. "On Demand" delivery may put vast film libraries in every home and the idea of movie channels may be long dead regardless of their current success, reputation or viability. But hopefully the coming generation could still find a need for a TCM to be around.

 

And BetteDavis19 is probably right. TCM will still be showing more "studio era" films than anything from the past two decades. The question is what newer films can be included in the schedule too and not be necessarily be Oscar month "one-offs". (TCM did show *The Exorcist* once, ya know.) About ten years ago *As Good As It Gets* was given multiple showings. And it fit quite nicely.

 

I am surprised at some of the suggestions of films that will appear on the TCM of the future. I didn't know *Killing Zoe* had such a following in these Forums. Maybe my personal aversion to bleak subject matter is just that - personal. Some seem to have no issue with it.

 

All in all, there have been some very thoughtful suggestions. All those that have played along included some titles that could find a home on TCM. The list from 'fxreyman' is the most of exhaustive. Nice job. I don't think I would quibble with any of his choices either. I may have to give *Catch Me If You Can* another look too since it was recommended by two of our posters. For some reason, it didn't catch my interest. Strangely, I did find Speilberg's *The Terminal* (Stanley Tucci aside) utterly charming. Go figure.

 

In a more general view, I think the films Of Barry Levinson, Cameron Crowe, Gary Ross, Garry Marshall and Penny Marshall will be recurring favorites. Perhaps TCM may find a place on the schedule to showcase many of the documentary films that have proliferated in the past twenty years.

 

And I predict Tom Hanks will be a "Star Of The Month" by the time TCM reaches its 40th Birthday. Hopefully Joel McCrea got there first.

 

Kyle In Hollywood

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the nice compliment.

 

Before additional posters write down their thoughts I would like to add the following.

 

The films I listed are *some* films from the year 2000 up until 2010. The films released during each one of these years are just a smattering of titles that are available. Some folks will see that some of the films I have selected include the following that many here say does not belong on TCM:

 

Nudity, foul language, CGI effects.

 

But mostly the films I selected are from a broad range of types of films, including sci-fi, adventures, dramas, westerns, a few foreign titles, animated, pure escapism, comedies, crime dramas, and the like.

 

If one is to compare what films are shown on today's TCM, you would find similar themes to the ones I just mentioned. And to all of you who lament the changes that have come to TCM in the past few years, well all I have to say is that I am sure TCM will continue to push the so-called "classic" envelope a little further each year.

 

Some of the films I mentioned may never be shown on TCM. But I for one look forward to the time when TCM could show a day's worth of sea faring films. Amongst those that could be shown on a day like that could include:

 

Old Ironsides, The Yankee Clipper, Mutiny on the Bounty, Captain Blood, The Sea Hawk, The Crimson Pirate, Captain Horatio Hornblower, John Paul Jones, Billy Budd, Damn the Defiant!, Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not much of a fan of post 1968 movies (I to see a new release about once every other year and only catch them when I'm traveling for business and watching HBO in a hotel).

 

This is how I say *Catch Me If You Can.* I liked it because it does have a 'throwback' type of feel to it and of course the time setting (I'm a Mad Man fan also for the same reason).

 

Of course I'm sure there any many other 'modern' movies I would enjoy but typically they reflect time periods associated with studio era movie.

Link to post
Share on other sites

>But the Spielberg film which fits best is Catch Me If You Can.

 

I saw part of this film last week on some channel, but it just didn't seem realistic to me. They tried to make him seem like a teenager, but I don't know of any teenage doctors or airline pilots.

 

The Tony Curtis version of 1961 was much better and was believable.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RIfTLzJNtg

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0053879/plotsummary

 

The real guy this story was based on was NOT a "teenager" when he did his most outlandish impersonations:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_Waldo_Demara#Early_life_and_adulthood

Link to post
Share on other sites

> People are speculating about what movies will be shown on TCM in 2032 that were made up to 2012. What about all the movies made between 2012 and 2031?

 

Well, of course. I and a few others are just stating on what is available now or in my case from up to ten years ago. To speculate on which movies will be released in the coming years, in many cases would involve a crystal ball.

 

> Anyway, I'm sure I'll still be wanting to see nothing from after 1959!

 

As I have written many times before on many other threads, there is a core group of folks here who have nothing but disdain for any film made after 1959. Some folks the cut off is 1949.

 

But this is missing the bigger point that I was trying to make. And that is even if all of the films made before 1960 were available, just how many of those films do you think that the studios who own their rights will make available for digital transfer. Especially in this economy?

 

That is the bottom line. If only a handful of pre-1960 films are available for digital transfer, then channels like TCM will have to start showing newer films. Or the channel will just fade away.

 

The following is just an example and not meant to be an industry standard......

 

You look at organizations like the American Film Institute (AFI). Do you have any idea just how many films were nominated from each decade for their 1998 top 100 movie list?

 

The following is their breakdown:

 

1910's: 5 were nominated and 1 was chosen for inclusion on the top 100 list.

 

1920's: 17 were nominated and 2 were chosen for the top 100 list.

 

1930's: 56 were nominated and 15 were chosen.

 

1940's: 61 were nominated and 12 were chosen.

 

1950's: 61 were nominated and 20 were chosen.

 

1960's 58 were nominated and 18 were chosen.

 

1970's 54 were nominated and 18 were chosen.

 

1980's: 58 were nominated and 6 were chosen.

 

1990's: 30 were nominated and 8 were chosen.

 

The numbers for the 2007 AFI list was a little different:

 

1910's 5 were nominated and 1 was chosen to be listed on the top 100 list.

 

1920's: 17 were nominated and 3 were chosen for the top 100 list.

 

1930's: 48 were nominated and 12 were chosen.

 

1940's: 57 were nominated and 11 were chosen.

 

1950's: 50 were nominated and 16 were chosen.

 

1960's 41 were nominated and 17 were chosen.

 

1970's 56 were nominated and 20 were chosen.

 

1980's: 55 were nominated and 8 were chosen.

 

1990's: 43 were nominated and 11 were chosen.

 

2000's: 28 were nominated and 1 was chosen.

 

As you can see, the further we get up in years, the fewer films from before 1960 are nominated. Now, this is of course the AFI and I have always felt that their nominating process was skewed more toward more recent films and less to do with older films. Plus, I would assume that a great many of their members who are allowed to nominate films were all born after 1945 or so. These are the so-called baby boomers. They may have careers in Hollywood, but many may have no clue about what constitutes really well made films from before 1950 or 1960.

 

Also, if you look at popular websites like IMDB, their lists are skewered closer to more recent films. The population is getting older and channels like TCM, in order to survive will more than likely have to fill their schedules with more recent film fare.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=hlywdkjk wrote:}{quote}I

> I am surprised at some of the suggestions of films that will appear on the TCM of the future. I didn't know *Killing Zoe* had such a following in these Forums. Maybe my personal aversion to bleak subject matter is just that - personal. Some seem to have no issue with it.

 

I feel it is very similar to film noir. It is a look at a part of society few ever see. It does not prettify its denizens and it does not give them unrealistically noble traits. I am very against violence and gore simply for the sake of violence and gore. I found the amounts and types in this movie were appropriate to the characterizations and plot.

 

It is also an updating of old conventions. At one time it was always boy saves girl and boy gets girl. In this movie it is girl saves boy from police and then boy gets hooker.

 

I first saw it at a time in my life when it was less bleak than my real life and it was an appropriate escape. It has since stayed with me as a movie with many touching moments.

 

I do not think it would be appropriate for TCM now or in the near future. I can see it as viable for the channel in twenty years' time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on the stats you provided the AFI is NOT "skewed more toward more recent films".

 

Compare the aggregate of the 2007 nominations from 30s - 50s with the 70s - 90;

 

The totals are 155 verses 154. For chosen it is a tie at 39.

 

The data shows that the AFI is very balanced as far as what they pick per decade.

 

I'm no fan of the AFI (Olivia Dehavilland NOT being one of the top 25 actresses is a crime), but the data speaks for itself.

 

Also simple logic dictates that as more decades are added, LESS movies will be picked from any and all decades (unless one has the POV that there was only 1 or 2 high quality movies released in say the decade 1990, 2000 or 2010 or 2020 etc...).

 

Now if your point is that the AFI results should be skewed more towards 'older' (pre 1968), movies because the decades of the 30s - 60s had more higher quality films, I would agree with you.

 

Your slam of baby boomers is also misguided in my view. They may know "what constitutes really well made films from before 1950 or 1960" but given 100 choices just decide to pick movies from multiple decades instead of mainly just the 30s - 50s, because they believe well made films were ALSO made after 1968.

 

I admit my bias; My top 100 would have 90% of the firms from the 30s - 50s, but then some young pup could say I don't know what constitutes well made films from 1980 to today.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope we would also be seeing more movies from the 1930s and 1940s. It should happen that the owners realize there is a time limit on transferring their material to digital before it disintegrates beyond economic restoration. Advances in automated conversion within the next ten years should also spur this operation as it will become faster and cheaper.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How does AFI make up their top 100 list?

 

-----------------------------

 

I see their website says: Honoring the 10th anniversary of this award-winning series, a jury of 1,500 film artists, critics and historians determined that CITIZEN KANE remains the greatest movie of all time.

 

Who are these people? Do we know if they have all see I Am A Fugitive from a Chain Gang and The Bitter Tea of General Yen?

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...