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

It's already happening


Recommended Posts

the showing of the 2001 modern German film ,which is not a classic ,Mostly Martha,Invites in the future they may stop showing classic films of the 10s' 20's 30's ,there is so much to explore here ,But big corporate arts is greedy ans selfish,beside Comcast wanting to buy time Warner which could speed up this disaster.Beside continued exploration of the early weirmar talkies like the wrong husband 1931 with special guest star comedian harmonics,the 33 and 45 as well as after the war,right after 1 to 10 years,Foreign french stars like Luis Mariano, Tino Rosie and Henri garat then Alice Bab and others,the only one Ingrid Bergman film she did in Germany that they have not premiered as well as the one that were directed by Douglass sirk,First are American classic,the Janet Gaynor films tha have yet to be seen,John Gilbert's first talkie ,Norma shears first talkie.Warner brother second two color Technicolor feature that has survived.Many more Warner brother and MGM classics feature of the 30 and forties that have yet to be seen There is enough m.g.m and Warner classic ,plus the ones at universal and m,c,a to create 4 classic film channels on cable.How about t.c.m international,Never before seen foreign classic could be premiered of the 10 's 20's 30's 40's .as i said they need to cut back on the 80's 90' and 2000 and show more 20 30 and 40,the way archive theaters do!


Edited by: 28Silent on Mar 8, 2014 5:04 PM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, 28Silent, no offence, but if you want your comments here to be read and taken seriously, I recommend that you employ the usual rules of grammar and spelling.

Or failing that - I don't want to be accused of snooty-ism - at least break up your post into smaller readable segments. One big long block, especially without benefit of commas or other punctuation, and with no paragraphs, is hard on the eyes. And the brain. And my patience.


It's called "self-editing".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I'm getting that he wants to show more silents and more movies from the early 30's, and that he thinks that Mostly Martha is a prelude to TCM's selling the farm. But it's hard to wade through all that verbiage without getting bogged down.


And the reason for not enough silents (a point I agree with) isn't films like Mostly Martha, which generally are one and done. The much bigger reason for the relative lack of silents are those TCM contracts that oblige them to show movies like Splendor in the Grass and Rebel Without a Cause so often that they crowd out movies that lack equal capacity for attracting the "I just *LOVE* old movies but I don't want to watch anything I've never heard of" crowd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Miss Wonderly, thanks so much for your comments. As a teacher, I can't help but notice misspellings, poor grammar, and a general lack of knowledge of the English language. And when I see a long, cumbersome paragraph all run together, I tend to ignore the whole thing. Thanks for pointing out things that should have been noted long ago.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I mentioned in another thread, one of the big obstacles to more silents and films from the early 1930s that the OP wants to see is that they aren't available in a digital format for TCM to rent.


It's a problem that TCM has been dealing with for at least ten years ever since they, along with the rest of the industry, went to digital servers.


The studios are usually in no hurry to transfer their early film titles to digital unless they are well-known titles that will sell. Unlike the majority of the studios back in the mid-2000s, Warners was very interested in transferring more of their film library, including the lesser known titles, to digital as well as doing preservation and restoration on the titles.


As they own the largest studio film library, film fans welcomed that news. Unfortunately, that didn't last long because as the Great Recession became a problem and studios tightened their belts, Warners abandoned their big plans for their film library and began choosing titles to transfer that would sell. Warners Archive, the MOD discs, was a compromise that has made lesser known titles available but wiithout many of the bells and whistles of extra bonus features or restoration.


But Warners Archive has a moratorium on their films being available to TCM of at least a year or longer from their release.


Until the film studios see the value in their film libraries and provide the budgets to transfer the titles, this is going to continue to be a problem going forward for not only TCM but film fans who want access to those films as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clearly the OP is challenged by attempting clear communicative skills. Yes, his post was difficult to wade through. However, not knowing his background, education, or his actual command of English (it may or may not be his native tongue) I don't think it is necessary to trash a fellow film enthusiast ("...long cumbersome paragraph, I tend to ignore the whole thing.") where clearly he was writing, albeit awkwardly, with passion. Some things we can think, but don't need to say. Maybe OP was sloppy and careless, or maybe he was doing his best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vertigo2: First, it was I (or "it was me? " Now I'm being super-critical of my own writing, which of course I should always be. Still, I think it's "I")...

who initially commented to the OP about his writing style.

So if you're going to reprove (albeit gently) anyone about being unfair to that person, reprove me. Terence was just agreeing with me.


Second, I do think it's important to try and communicate clearly, whether it's in person or on the internet. There were parts to his post that indicated he was capable of writing more intelligibly had he chosen to take the time to do so.

And even if not (for sure, if English is not his first language, we should cut him some slack), one can still separate one's thoughts and sentences, rather than typing it all out in one big off-putting block.


It's in a poster's own interest to make his posts as readible as possible to others.

Forget about grammar and punctuation, if you want (as I said, I don't want to be accused of being snooty, and in any case, my own writing is far from "proper" much of the time).

But anyone can break their post into smaller and therefore more readable segments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sorry to say that I had great difficulty parsing that message and I am unsure if I understand certain sections as the poster means them.


It is to me more a reason for sorrow that a person with such clarity as to the type of movies which they wish TCM to air does not find a positive and perhaps effective way in which to present their views.


The form and structure of the post presents to me as a mindless rant which is surely not what the poster intended.


Perhaps the poster could create threads to show support for the various genres and dates of movies which they want aired? I believe that leaving out accusations and recriminations would be a significant first step.


I believe it should be pointed out also that Comcast is not proposing to buy Time Warner. Their proposal concerns Time Warner Cable which is a separate and distinct entity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your post seemed gently critical, but also helpful with a couple of basic suggestions. The one in agreement to yours from the English teacher did seem unduly snooty and dismissive and frankly, an experienced English teacher should be more sympathetic with someone trying ( but maybe failing) to communicate and not less so.


("It was I" is correct. I is the complement following the linking verb is.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> misswonderly wrote:

> (for sure, if English is not his first language, we should cut him some slack)


I am very happy to say that most here have been very tolerant of my limited ability to write in English. I know there have been many times when my meaning was not clear or my word choices were not of the best.


I am grateful that so many have cut me slack. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SansFin, I do wonder if you are expressing more modesty than is necessary here.

Anyone who's been reading these boards for a while - and therefore your posts - knows very well that you are an exceptionally good writer, not only clear and grammatically correct, but also knowledgeable and witty.


Sad fact is, your writing is a lot better than many whose first language is English. ( and I suspect that on some level you know this, umnyy chelovek...is that right?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ability to write well is an accomplishment difficult to achieve. It takes years of cultivation and constant practice. Like learning to play the violin or piano well, it's not a skill that can be learned within a short amount of time.


Certain societal trends, such as the increasing reliance on video and digital means of communication and information consumption, work against developing old fashioned literacy and writing skills. Modern media caters to a short attention span, and discourages people from developing the writing skills that are better cultivated at a deliberative pace.


I get the writer's concern, although I too wished it would have been better put. People have always feared that TCM may change; such concerns are frequently and repeatedly expressed on these boards. I feel one should appreciate the channel for what it is and can offer. If you want more classic content than what TCM is able to provide, internet sources like youtube should be looked at. There are a lot of old films available for viewing from that source. Fred Dobbs has done a remarkable job with his "Old Movies On Youtube" thread. It's a treasure trove of classic film links!


I admit that my own inaugural post on these boards years ago was a thread I launched expressing alarm and concern about where TCM might be going. Yes, I was "one of those people"! It was my dubious debut as an alarmist and malcontent! I got over it quickly and have since made other contributions to this community.


Now several years later (it feels like decades!), I wonder not that TCM is abandoning classic film, but that it continues to show them at all! I'm grateful for every old film they do show. Had my worst of my original fears come true, today they wouldn't be showing any old flicks.




Link to comment
Share on other sites

> I am very happy to say that most here have been very tolerant of my limited ability to write in English


Your English is much better than my Russian.


I generally try to write in proper English mostly because I post on some other boards where there are a lot of non-native speakers, and using the language properly should make it easier for them to understand.


If one thing drives me up a wall, it's when people abuse the apostrophe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> Fedya wrote:

> Your English is much better than my Russian.


> I generally try to write in proper English mostly because I post on some other boards where there are a lot of non-native speakers, and using the language properly should make it easier for them to understand.


> If one thing drives me up a wall, it's when people abuse the apostrophe.


I thank you for your kind words.


I applaud your efforts when writing in those forums. I can attest how very much easier it is to read when the forms and structures are correct. It becomes often the difference between the writing making a person think about what is written and the writing making the person wonder what is written.


I learned to read English for work. It was technical reports. They were read in a different office first to determined priority. I could tell when one particular person had read them because the mistakes of: its, it's and there, their, they're, and your, you're and many other common errors were marked with a blue pencil. I do not know if they did that to make the reports easier for others to read or if it was because such errors grated on them and that was their method of expressing their frustration. It is by this experience that it is rare that I make such errors. I hope. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't the same TCM from 10 years ago. Last night, I came across a March 2005 issue of now playing in my garage. It had Jean Arthur on the cover. I noticed they had a day of John Garfield's movies on his birthday. The same ones they showed last week.


In the magazine , I only found 2 80s movies shown that month and 2 or 3 70s movies. This is 2005.


Now it's 2014 , 9 years later. They've been showing more and later films as years go on. But the majority are still 30s - 50s. But most are re-runs of films shown every three months for the last decade. I agree with some of you who say more early films need to shown.


I suggest TCM make more old movie channels. A second TCM should do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The schedule varies considerably from month to month.


I have just now looked at the: September, 2005 schedule and found seven movies from the 1970s, three from the 1980s and three from the 1990s.


The: February, 2003 schedule is the earliest which I have. It shows movies from the 1980s and 1990s.


I believe that it stands to reason that if they were airing movies from the 1990s ten years ago then it is consistent that they now show movies from the 2000s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem isn't that TCM is showing newer more recent films more often, the problem is according to what Lynn ( lzcutter ) wrote earlier in the thread. And that is the fact that the studios do not have the time nor the financial resources to convert many of their older films into a digital format. TCM could do that as well if they had unlimited amount of resources which they do not, nor is it their business to do this in the first place.


I agree, that today's TCM is not the same TCM that was showing films almost twenty years ago. And there is a reason for that. As we the films get older, the more recent films will continue to grow and expand on this channel. There will still be a vast majority of 1930's to 1960's films being played for the most part.


In 1994, TCM showed films up to and including the 1980's. Then at the tenth anniversary they included films from the 1990's. And now we are at the twentieth anniversary and I am sure the mission statement will be revised once again to include films from the 2000's.


As far as the Now Playing magazine is concerned, there have been many fluctuations in there as well. Not every film that is listed in that guide makes it onto the small screen. Many reasons for that as well. Mostly the reasons are due to rights issues, and that TCM is sent the incorrect version of the film. Those two reasons are the most likely that certain films disappear from the channel that were originally shown in Now Playing.


Now as far as a new TCM channel is concerned, you can pretty much forget about that. That will never happen. For one thing TCM being a part of the larger Time Warner group of cable channels, is the only cable channel that is commercial free. For TCM to continue that practice there won't be another commercial free channel developed by the corporate parent. Just not economically feasible or warranted at this or any future time.


It would be great to have several different TCM channels. But then which one would you watch then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>I agree, that today's TCM is not the same TCM that was showing films almost twenty years ago. And there is a reason for that. As we the films get older, the more recent films will continue to grow and expand on this channel


Another factor in that is that when TCM debuted in 1994, we were still living in an analog world. Thanks to the home video revolution of the late 1970s-early 1980s, film studios had discovered there was money to be made from their film libraries. The home video market created demand for content that people hadn't been over exposed to.


Studios threw open the vaults and began transferring not only well-known classic titles but as demand continued, obscure and lesser known titles.


Laser discs, which catered to film fans, kept that demand going. Before that era ended, a great number of films had been transferred to analog masters and making a broadcast quality copy was easier because broadcast quality video been the industry standard since the 1960s.


That all ended with the digital revolution and the decree by Congress that networks move to digital.


Many of those wonderful obscure silents and 1930s films that were on TCM in the 1990s aren't available in a digital format for TCM to rent and broadcast since going digital.


Consumer demand peaked in the VHS days and while DVD had some very real salad days that came close to that demand, quickly changing digital formats make it next to impossible for any one standard to have a long shelf life.


Studios aren't willing to commit $$$$ to converting their film libraries when the format wars keep declaring a new winner every couple of years. Studios prefer longevity- a format that lasts at least a generation (20 years).


In these rapidly changing digital times, they are lucky if they get two years before what they did has to be redone to be compatible with the next big shiny HD object to catch consumers interest.


So, for the studios, they would rather play it safe and take it slow when it comes to converting the films in their libraries.


Twenty years ago, when TCM debuted, most of us hadn't seen the majority of films that TCM offered since the days of the Million Dollar Movie and now we had a channel that offered classic films 24/7.


We reveled in the feast thinking it would be never-ending.


We awoke from our reverie to discover that there are a finite number of films available to TCM and we feel that we have seen the majority of them. So, we want to TCM to get more titles, to keep dazzling us with classic films we want to see.


And TCM tries. Each month they bring us a number of premieres that seem to make many of us happy but there are limitations to what they can rent, both from what is available and what they can afford budget wise.


But for now, the ball is mainly in the studios' court to make more available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's possible the OP is severely handicapped or sight impaired, so let's give the poster a break, however this issue is accurate as written. TCM only has 24 hours a day to program, excluding daylight savings days, so if they show a more recent movie it means they are not showing what the OP wants. The same could be said for the Carson shows.


I would recommend anyone who is worried over this issue to build their own movie collection just in case TCM goes the way of the Dodo bird. FMC changed their format and TCM may someday too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has been the biggest non-issue posters have complained about. Ever since TCM began, it has shown older and relatively recent movies. I suspect the second day TCM was in existence, viewers began mentally wringing their hands over wether TCM would abandon its paradigm. Well, it's twenty years later, and TCM is doing exactly the same as it did the first day. And it shows the same mix of studio-era movies and post-studio era movies. The only thing different is that it now shows movies made in the 2000s, which, of course, didn't exist when it began. Sometimes I think some posters actually want TCM to go the route of AMC, just so they could have the satisfaction of saying, "See? There, I told ya'."

Link to comment
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. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
  • Create New...