Jump to content

 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
VP19

'31 Days Of Oscar': A necessary evil?

Recommended Posts

It's not so much that I mind "31 Days of Oscar", heck, I even like most of the films that are being shown during the 31 days. My big gripe is that the blockbuster OSCAR WINNERS, and you know which ones they are, that invariably will always rate a slot in FEBRUARY, are always repeated during the course of the year as ESSENTIALS, SUTS, or as is the case with FROM HERE TO ETERNITY which may get extra innings on MEMORIAL DAY, VETERANS DAY, DECEMBER 7th, anniversaries of some star's birthday, a guest programmer's choice (ha ha), and/or whatever other day can be dreamt up by the programmer(s) as an excuse to take a holiday from more creative programming decisions. If these films are so special as OSCAR WINNERS, then keep them for this month and this month only, and fill the slots that they might occupy during the rest of the year with different films. Is that too much to ask?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=finance wrote:}{quote}FHTE was heavy on Oscar noms. But some of the other suspects for deing aired too frequently, e.g. SLIH and NBNW, were not.

 

 

So, your point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=dpompper wrote:}{quote}Sinatra's last film was his best film.

Wasn't *Cannonball Run II* his last film?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is that YOUR point may apply to FROM HERE TO ETERNITY, but not necassarily to other films which people say are too frequently shown on TCM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=finance wrote:}{quote}FHTE was heavy on Oscar noms. But some of the other suspects for deing aired too frequently, e.g. SLIH and NBNW, were not.

FHTE was also heavy on the Snooze factor. Time to put the darn thing in mothballs. Maggio, Schmaggio let it go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember when John Landis was the guest programmer. When RO asked him why he picked, I think, A NIGHT AT THE OPERA, he replied it was the only Marx Brothers movie TCM had the rights to show at that particular time. Or it may have been a Buster Keaton movie. I've forgotten. But whatever the movie was, it was an interesting pull-back-the-curtain moment we rarely see on-air at TCM. It was cool of the network not to edit out that moment.

 

So, I know guest programmers are constrained by what's available to show. Ron Perlman had picked SULLIVAN'S TRAVELS, but TCM had to insert a Ben Mankiewicz explanation that the rights to that movie weren't available, and Perlman had actually e-mailed a suggestion for an alternate pick to go in that slot (happily, TCM did eventually get around to showing TRAVELS not too long ago as one of The Essentials).

 

But the idea that guest programmers might have their choices forced upon them never occurred to me. I would doubt a lot of people would even participate if that was the case. What would be the point? Much of the time, it seems the films chosen for guest programmer nights aren't ones that are in heavy rotation on TCM, although occasionally they are. Bill Paxton's recent picks were pretty far off the beaten path.

 

Lotta cynicism on this board! I'm going to continue pretending guest programmers can pick whatever the heck they want, their only limitation being it's something TCM has the rights to air, until I have some concrete evidence to the contrary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If that WERE the case, TCM should get some clever elecronics geek to make them a "juke box" type of device that plays DVDs instead of CDs, put it on that set that Osborne uses, fill it with DVDs of everything they have to show, give their "guest programmers" a roll of quarters and let them make the choices THAT way.

 

 

Sorry, but I just don't understand all this crap about "rights" to show certain movies. If TCM offers a flat fee to obtain the rights to show a movie, then isn't it in the best interest of the "rights" holder to just go ahead and do it? All TCM needs to agree to is state, after the movie is shown, that it's available on DVD(if it is). Thereby, the "rights" holder is actually getting PAID to advertise, and is helping to generate sales. If sales of the movie is the name of the game.

 

 

I just don't GET it.

 

 

Sepiatone

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*"Lotta cynicism on this board! I'm going to continue pretending guest programmers can pick whatever the heck they want, their only limitation being it's something TCM has the rights to air, until I have some concrete evidence to the contrary."* - sewhite2000

 

You're spot on. That is exactly how it works for Guest Programmers.

 

Robert Osborne's "picks" each month may be less about his personal choice than TCM using the opportunity to highlight films premiering on the chanel that month. (Robert, we've got *My Gal Sal* for the first time this month. Do you want to intro it as a "Bob's Pick"?, etc.) But even in that case, I am sure he would be able to agree or veto the selection for his evening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*"I just don't GET it."* - Sepiatone

 

Do you also expect to order Moo Goo Gai Pan at the Italian restaurant or prime rib at the Curry House?

 

As to your "juke box" analogy, that sort of describes NetFlix streaming service - and even that doesn't offer every title available on DVD, does it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

No, it doesn't. But it DOES describe, in a sense, the way the guest programmers "pick" the movies they do. At least according to previous posts.

 

 

I also "don't get" what prime rib in a curry house has to do with those who hold the "rights" to certain movies have against allowing some movie channel to SHOW the damned movie.

 

 

Sepiatone

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, whoever picks the Bob's Picks does a damn fine job. That's pretty much almost always a really good (or at least inn-teresting) line-up and some of *my favorite viewing experiences* have been via B'sP's.

 

ps- they really need to start letting Youknowwho do the same.

 

Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Feb 13, 2013 11:20 AM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I'd be curious as to what Ben's picks turned out to be......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=Hibi wrote:}{quote}LOL. Hardly an earth shattering pick..........

Yeah. Kind of a snoozer (the pick, not the pic.)

 

Edited by: AddisonDeWitless on Feb 13, 2013 1:15 PM

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 | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...