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

2002-2006 films AREN'T classic movies!!!!!


Recommended Posts

> It sounds like fxreyman and jamesjazzguitar really enjoy watching these newer films and really take a stand against anyone that complains about Mark Cousin's jacked up movie picks.

 

I can't speak for James, but I for one do not subscribe to TCM anymore. I am aware of the Story of Film, and I have been keeping up with the various threads, but beyond that I am not too interested. As far as not getting TCM now?.. for me it is a matter of economics. My cable bill was getting too expensive especially for the amount of times I was actually watching the channel.

 

As far as my commenting to you in the first place on this thread, well that had more to do with the FACT that you created a very similar thread last week on the same day. Last Monday the film series was showing as well. I believe this evening was the last installment. I have a certain disdain when members of the boards create similar if not very similar threads about the same subject over and over again. In your case you have started two threads about the same subject one week apart. Why not just add to your other thread you started last week?

 

> I'm not sure why they are even on TCM's message board and not on one of the other movie channel's boards like IFC or Sundance talking about newer movies that they enjoy.

 

Well, for one thing I enjoy conversing with my fellow movie fans here. Of all of the message boards out there I think that even when few people are posting here there's many more people here than there are over on any of the other film message boards. Plus most of the conversations here are slightly more serious and more fun than the sniping that goes on especially on the IMDB message boards. And I am not aware of message boards over at Sundance or IFC, are you?

 

> I've been watching TCM since it was created back in 1994 because I love OLD movies. That's what they've always shown, so when they start showing movies that aren't OLD, I've gotta express my displeasure, whether it was just a week ago that I had something to say, or whether you agree with it or not.

 

Well, good for you. Maybe you should know this, since you have been watching the films being shown on TCM ever since the channel started?.. Newer, more recent films have always been shown on TCM. Even that first year the channel started. Several 1970's and 80's films were shown the first month. Now maybe there weren't as many new films shown back then as there are today, and that would make sense. Considering the fact that many of the older films being shown on the channel in 1994 either have been lost or they were never converted over to a digital format. Back then the technology had not yet changed, so many more pre 1970 films were able to be shown that is before the channel had to switch from analog video format to the newer digital format.

 

> If you're tired of watching OLD classic movies, then don't watch the channel anymore.

 

Well, as I wrote earlier, I don't have TCM anymore. It is a cost issue for me.

 

I love older films. My favorite film of all time is 1938's The Adventures of Robin Hood, so there! However, just because I do not have TCM does not mean I don't have a chance to watch older films. Of the over 1,000 films in my own library, well over 65% were produced from before 1960. So I can watch many older, pre-1960 films anytime I want. Maybe not the ones on TCM, but quite a few.

 

> I'd like to know what their ratings were during a 2002 subtitled French movie.

 

TCM does not subscribe to any ratings services.

 

At the annual TCM Classic Film Festival back in April, TCM Programming Guru Charlie Tabesh was asked at a panel discussion about cable ratings and how much pressure TCM was under to generate high ratings:

 

?Zero. We don?t get ratings. We?re not even allowed to get ratings,? he said. ?When AMC went commercial many years ago, the cable affiliates freaked out, because they were getting a lot of complaints from subscribers and they wanted to make sure that TCM never added commercials. And we?ve never have plans to add commercials. I think it?s actually written into some of our affiliate agreements.?

?It?s not only important from a business perspective that we remain commercial-free, but we know that is the core of the TCM brand,? festival managing director Genevieve MacGillicuddy added. ?That?s extremely important for fans, for the network, for the vision of what the network is. And we?re very proud of having stayed true to what that vision was for the network when we launched in 1994.?

 

Tabesh added: ?We?re not trying to reach a broad audience. We?re not trying to maximize the demo. We?re not trying to get the 18-34, whatever it is. There?s none of that that?s considered at all.?

Link to post
Share on other sites

>To me, turning on TCM and seeing a movie from the 2000's is like turning on the Horror Channel and seeing National Lampoon's Vacation showing. It's a great movie, just not for the Horror Channel.

 

ROFL After the 2008 collapse, all bets are off !

 

I tuned in to a history channel and saw pawn shops. I tuned into Headline News and found a cooking show. I tuned into a Rural tractor channel and found Remington Steele. I tuned into SyFy and found pro wrestling !

 

The actual name of a channel means very little these days. And how did anyone survive before 1990 when you had to stay up to midnight just to catch ONE classic movie ?? Now people complain that they have to wake up in the morning to catch several good old films everyday. The way its going hopefully there will be more classic channels to complain about.

 

I think some on here need a vacation, a cruise even. Oops ! They left yesterday lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

>I turn on TCM to see movies from the 1920's to the 60's, not something that i can get from the video rental store or from the $5 bin

 

th?id=H.4542874038961055&pid=15.1

 

>There are way too many movie channels on the DIsh/Direct that could be showing these movies.

 

th?id=H.4711666250484071&pid=15.1

 

>In my opinion, the 10 hours of showing these newer films could have been better spent showing some obscure b/w films that even a die hard TCM watcher hasn't seen before.

 

th?id=H.4533218961458838&pid=15.1

 

Do you realize stations have to pay for broadcast rights? And not every obscure title is even available?

 

Amazing how we've become a culture of complainers rather than doers.

 

Rather than complaining about how some cable TV station has "gone wrong" why not go to your window, stick your head out and yell, "I'm mad as hell and I'm just not going to take it anymore!" it has about the same impact.

 

No wonder our society and government is dysfunctional. Not enough people get off their butts to change things, they just complain on an internet message board.

 

(the first thing you can _do_ is stop shopping at WalMart and other stores that undermine US made products)

Link to post
Share on other sites

*Rey and james have posted a total of 7491 comments on this Forum. So far you're up to 15. You love "old movies" so much, where have you been posting for the last 19 years? On the Mickey Rooney channel?*

 

AndyM, I like watching old movies. I don't have to post 7000 comments about them. Until recently, I didn't have anything to say on this forum.

 

So were you asleep in 2010 when TCM showed 25 films by that furriner Akira Kurosawa? Or were you in the shock and trauma ward of your local hospital without access to a computer?

 

So, go back to watching your subtitled French film and don't worry about how many posts I have, prick

 

Okay, now I get it. What you want is for TCM to contact you privately before deciding on their monthly schedule, and let you veto any movie you don't like. Sort of like a Senatorial courtesy veto for cabinet appointments from a Senator's home state. Sounds like a plan to me. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

> Lorry_Driver wrote:

> I'm sure that's not the only mock schedule they have consulted.

 

The TCM Programmers have posted in several TCM Programming Challenge threads of their admiration of entries and stated their intention to use themes and movies suggested.

 

Nearly a full day of one of my fiance's schedules was used with only one substitution and two movie times switched.

 

I believe that one of my schedules may have influenced programming as an entry of mine contained a premiere and related movies. That movie premiered soon after and several of the related movies followed it.

 

Many other entrants have had similar experiences.

 

It is obvious by these things that some at TCM do read these forums and that they take seriously the desires of posters. They have demonstrated that they are open to suggestions made by those who are enthusiastic about movies in positive ways. I believe it is reasonable by human nature that they have little regard for those who can only complain and whose suggestions are vapid.

 

> On a totally unrelated note, I'm dismayed this thread has turned so ugly. I was expecting better from a TCM message board.

 

It has been my experience that here as in life those who are able to contribute value to a forum are generally well-behaved. It is the mindless and feckless carpers who quickly show their ugliness by rude behaviour.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> I believe that it is unfortunate that you are unable to appreciate spectacular movies simply because they do not fit into your personal definition of the word "classic".

 

Let's not count our chickens, Sans. Not many, if any, here have SEEN these films before. As I'm posting this after their being shown, it could be the majority feel they're not all that "spectacular". I didn't watch any of them, so I can't critique either way.

 

roverrocks, a "gushing review" from a film critic is NO guarantee of how good a film really is. It's been stated in these forums by many members that they disdain ANY critics opinions for one reason or another. Some people might reject the movie out of hand BECAUSE Ebert liked it!

 

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ebert as a reviewer was right on target about "Russian Ark" as I heartily agree with his 4/4 stars review after watching this amazing and provocative historical costume film on TCM. One has to have a real semblance of Russian/European history in order to appreciate "Arks" historical nuances and I know with only one viewing under my belt that I will have missed many of these nuances and that I will have even greater appreciation of this instant "CLASSIC" after subsequent viewings. I filter as many movies as I can through "rottentomatoes" reviews be they old golden classics of sound and silence or newer more modern movies trying to discern thru the online reviews of many others just what I will want to watch or not watch. I don't reject or gush about any film based solely on one reviewer but rather thru a multitude of reviewers. I neither reject or admire any film simply because of it's ancient lineage or it's mere toddler age. Meritorious does not imply ancients only need apply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> Meritorious does not imply ancients only need apply.

 

And I agree with that. As I said, I haven't seen the movies in question, so I'll have to take you on your word. There are several people I know personally whose critique of a movie I can trust, and many others whose critique of a movie is questionable, and I'm able to discern which movies, based on either's opinions, I'd like to see. But I hesitate to go by "professional" critics alone. Like you, I wait for an assesment from many people before I decide to see any movie that doesn't pique my interest off the bat.

 

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites

Boy, you stay off this forum for one night and look what you miss!

 

We all had this knock-down, drag-out in another thread just a couple of weeks ago. I don't see much point in continuing to ram my head into a brick wall. I made my feelings pretty well known on that thread. I personally always have viewed TCM as an incredible showcase for "classic" movies in the broadest sense of the word and believe it to be unique among TV networks for doing so. We could all go to dictionary.com for verification, but "classic" and "old" to my mind aren't perfect synonyms. The name of the network is not Turner Old Movies.

 

In fact, I would be so bold as to suggest that the older films shown on TCM are less likely on average to be worthy of classic status. I would wear on us all quickly if TCM was nothing but endless rotations of FROM HERE TO ETERNITY, GONE WITH THE WIND, LAWRENCE OF ARABIA, ON THE WATERFRONT, A FACE IN THE CROWD and CASABLANCA. Some people on this forum complain these movies get shown too much as is. So, there's a healthy mix of B-pics, less-remembered works of major stars and directors and efforts from tiny little studios in addition to those generally deemed to have attained classic status.

 

On the other hand, when something recent is shown, it is usually a picture that has achieved considerable acclaim. I feel like nobody on this board remembers that Hayao Miazaki was Director of the Month a few years ago. I never see it referenced on this board.I can't remember, but people on this board were probably proclaiming the end of the world that month. Seeing anime on TCM was a bit jarring, but I applaud TCM for highlighting the body of work of a near universally acclaimed master. I cant imagine any other US television network doing it, frankly.

 

Otherwise, the newer films are almost always tied to a specific event or purpose: 31 Days of Oscar, The Story of Film, etc. They showed a Robert Zemeckis film from 2000, WHAT LIES BENEATH, the same night he appeared on their filmmaker conversation series, and people around here whined that night, too. But I thought that film had merit in a classic context because it was so obviously a Hitchcock tribute.

 

The people who complain about these things are without fail melodramatic in their presentation, which is probably what irks me the most about them. They make ridiculous, overwrought claims like "The death of TCM as we know it", or they write their subject heading in all or partial caps, or the put five exclamation points after the subject heading in what feels to me like a desperate ploy for attention.

 

Personally, I hope the whiners don't hold too much sway over TCM programming decisions. I personally prefer a more diverse, less predictable approach to scheduling. I think the programmers are also aware of the kinds of films that are expected from them, and they have hardly abandoned those kinds of films. I don't think we have to worry about a wholesale transition to something completely unrecognizable, like MTV changing from music videos to the 24-hour-a-day "Teen Mom" network. I find that highly unlikely. It was pointed out on another thread that TCM is showing 77 musicals this month. Well, that doesn't sound like a network that's decided to start showing nothing but Marvel super-hero movies from the last five years. sounds pretty much like a month on TCM in 2003 or 1994.

 

To refuse to even watch a new movie is to be pretty closed-minded and unwilling to live in the present, in my opinion. If you generally love and respect TCM, why not trust them when they offer up something a little different once or twice a month, sometimes not even that often? Or, if you're too ossified in your tastes to be capable of doing that, watch something else and come back the next night. TCM doesn't exist to satisfy only your narrow tastes (or mine) every hour of every day of ever year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

>I feel like nobody on this board remembers that Hayao Miazaki was Director of the Month a few years ago. I never see it referenced on this board.I can't remember, but people on this board were probably proclaiming the end of the world that month.

 

sewhite,

 

It gets referenced every now and then. And yes, there was a thread, I think it might have been called *The Death of TCM* or something similar, that railed and railed about Miazaki films being shown throughout the month.

 

A few fans of Miazaki, who were new to the boards, posted how thankful they were that the films were being shown but they got shouted down by those railing against the films. Most of those railing had never seen any of the films but it was the fact that they were "new" that caused them to fear that TCM was turning into AMC.

 

The next month many of those same posters were singing TCM's praises for the programming they were doing during *31 Days of Oscar*.

 

And so it goes, even seven years later.

Link to post
Share on other sites

*The Story of Film* was perfect programming for TCM.

 

The timely showing of movies not normally seen on the channel in and around the relevant episodes of the documentary was logical and much appreciated by many of us. I'm just sorry there were too many movies mentioned in the series to program examples of each -- a nearly-forgotten British filmmaker referenced in one of the earlier episodes springs to mind.

 

*Russian Ark* was, and is, brilliant -- and I was very happy to see it again last night after having seen it just once before when it arrived in theaters a decade ago.

 

So, here's one viewer who loved the whole experience these last several months, including the films from the last dozen or so years. Everyone else can go suck an egg. :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank heavens the people who run TCM actually like the art of cinema and aren't merely past fetishists.

 

I had to give up on The Story of Film halfway through but it was great to see TCM pull another great piece of year-end programming (all of the films associated with the series) out of its hat.

 

Along with the Rossellini and Truffaut months, it's simply been another year of increasingly canny programming choices. No one else puts this much effort into their programming in an increasingly sparse climate, no one else does so much to offer the widest array of unique films to the public.

 

Keep it up in year 20, TCM!

Link to post
Share on other sites

What happened to all the smart people on these message boards?

 

There are a few intelligent comments on this thread (including the one preceding this post), so I don't want people to think I'm throwing out all those smart babies with the dumb bathwater, but in general, these "Alack, TCM is going to the dogs" threads are on the increase.

 

Which suggests, to me, that those interested in engaging in genuine, intelligent conversations about movies, those who know that good movies exist in all eras, those who don't make cliched and ill-conceived remarks about how terrible it is when TCM doesn't show what they feel like seeing, are on the decrease on this website, and that slower-witted individuals are on the increase.

This is largely why I rarely come to this site anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really appreciated The Story of Film and all the wonderful movies that TCM scheduled with it. Though I wasn't able to see everything because of my work schedule, I especially appreciated I Am Cuba, a brilliant film that passed three late night hours perfectly. Thanks again, TCM. Now onto 31 Days of Oscar (grrrrr).

Link to post
Share on other sites

>By the way, you didn't kill twinkeee and hide her body somewhere, did you?

 

Twinkee's posts may have been quietly deleted.

I responded to this thread with my usual "crybaby" pictures and there's not a trace of it anywhere. I suspect the moderators decided it might incite a riot.

 

So I'll just simply state it without (I thought) humor- people who simply complain on an internet message board are just as effective as a crying baby.

Realize there are millions of other viewers of the station, not everyone likes the same thing.

If you don't like something, be proactive and DO something about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that's it, TikiSoo. There were probably a few people who felt all those crying babies were a little too insulting - three of them (or was it four?) might have been viewed as opinion overkill by our moderator.

 

But twinkeee would never have posted something that provocative, so I'm sure her posts would not be being removed for the same reason that your pictures were.

 

I think she's just stopped posting for some reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know we- or at least, I - might "get into trouble" with the moderator here for discussing Miss Twinkee so openly.

"That said", I want to say that while she was far from being my favourite poster here, I do not like the idea that I single -handedly hounded her off the site.

In fact, she kind of kept things going here - believe it or not, I honestly think she contributed a certain flavour to the boards. And I do not mean that in a sarcastic way.

I know I won't win with this one. Those who were not Twinkee fans will say I'm backing down, that I "insulted" her on numerous occasions, so why am I saying I'm sorry she's gone now?

Come to think of it, those who are Twinkee fans will say the same.

 

So be it. But I really do not believe I was half as mean or critical of her posts as she came to believe. Half the time I was just teasing her, because she was pretty thin-skinned, and it was so easy to do. Mean, I know.

Also: However I feel about any given poster who comes to this site, I do not like the idea that they chose to stop posting here due to anything I might have done or said to them.

Anyway, shirley I don't have that much power.

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