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

What is this baloney on TCM now?


Recommended Posts

I don't need to know how he acquired the knowledge to use certain backgrounds like Monument Valley. As long as I see his finished product and it is likable to my eye, that's all I need. Maybe some people need this knowledge, that is their right, but I don't like TCM infringing on my enjoyment in trying to teach me something I don't particularly care to learn.>>

 

Anne,

 

Look at it this way, there are times on TCM that I choose not to watch for whatever the reason. Those are likely many of the movies that you are watching and enjoying.

 

TCM is not infringing on my enjoyment of their channel when they run something that I choose not to watch. Other people are enjoying the movie and that is what is so great about TCM.

 

It cannot program individually for each of us but it can and does try very hard and very valiently to schedule for all of us.

 

And for the record, I am one of those folks who tunes into the documentaries on filmmakers. That's part of my enjoyment of TCM, learning more about the movies and how they were made.

 

So, we kind of cancel each other out (with our likes, dislikes and choices of what we chose to watch on TCM) and I'm betting we are not the only ones.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"a lot of the crabbier sorts who frequent the TCM message boards aren't gonna like this too much."

 

?That same bunch of Negative Nellies?

 

 

Hey, psst, Mr. Harron,

 

You need to learn how to post a film review without going out of your way to insult people who have opinions that are different from your own. Remember, film is art, and everyone is entitled to have their own personal opinions about various examples of this art.

 

Try to keep your mind on reviewing the film itself, and not on attacking people who disagree with you.

 

My opinion is that the Reese?s candy film was silly, boring, out of place, much too long, and low quality. There wasn?t a chuckle in the entire production. I?m not interested in paying to see these types of student films.

 

If you want to see a masterpiece of a brilliant short satire film, get yourself a copy of ?Forgotten Silver? from 1995, or ?The Swiss Spaghetti Harvest? from 1957.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I don't have a problem with TCM devoting one day to short films.

I knew it was coming and I expected that I wouldn't like most of them. I'm just not a fan of the avant-garde or more modern shorts.

 

I would have loved to see the earlier Keaton, Chaplin, Roach, Todd shorts, but unfortunately, I have to work for a living so I missed them. I tried to watch the evening programming but was bored by it.

 

To each their own. But an experiment worth trying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy Cow:

 

I leave for a while to watch for about the 125th time 'Casablanca' and come back to being insulted and being mis-quoted.

 

Karloffman:

 

"To my horror, mrsl confirmed my sarcatic assessment of her by repeating that foreign language films don't belong on TCM.

 

Get your quoter correct Karloffman, I NEVER SAID THAT!!! - I said "I know that I do not like foreign films so I just don't watch them. You, and everyone else is of course, welcome to watch. I just hate my evenings being stolen from me by things like this past week." It is my choice not to watch foreign films, I would never attempt to tell anyone what to like, but my opinion should be respected. I'm sorry I 'horrified' you, but it was someone else, not me, who horrified you. Check your reply to before you insult someone.

 

lzcutter:

 

You might not have seen my post earlier in this thread, I said, "They could have split it up through the month and spliced the shorts in between movies now and then. That's all I'm saying. Mix the medicine with sugar, don't force-feed it."

 

Right now it's on the second page of this thread. I would appreciate it if you read it. Also, I should not have included Keaton, I believe it''s him that the house front falls on, and he comes up thru the window opening, whoever it is, it's a gem. I don't care for the 'little tramp' character, to me he is a whiner, not sympathetic.

 

I apologize if someone felt they were reading a rocky road post higher up, but I resent being insulted and mis-quoted. Karloffman owes someone an apology, I can live without it, but even though we all have firm opinions, nobody else found it necessary to get abusive.

 

Anne

Link to post
Share on other sites

From your post at 3:13 pm today:

 

"As far as I'm concerned, foreign language films belong on IFC."

 

> Karloffman:

>

> "To my horror, mrsl confirmed my

> sarcatic assessment of her by

> repeating that foreign language films don't belong on

> TCM.

>

> Get your quoter correct Karloffman, I NEVER

> SAID THAT!!! - I said "I know that

> I do not like foreign films so I just don't watch

> them. You, and everyone else is of course,

> welcome to watch. I just hate my evenings being

> stolen from me by things like this past week."

> It is my choice not to watch foreign films, I would

> never attempt to tell anyone what to like, but my

> opinion should be respected. I'm sorry I

> 'horrified' you, but it was someone else, not me,

> who horrified you. Check your reply to

> before you insult someone.

>

> I apologize if someone felt they were reading a rocky

> road post higher up, but I resent being insulted and

> mis-quoted. Karloffman owes someone an apology, I

> can live without it, but even though we all have firm

> opinions, nobody else found it necessary to get

> abusive.

>

> Anne

Link to post
Share on other sites

RobertEmmettHarron, I don't consider myself to be one of the "Negative Nellies". In fact, normally I embrace the changes TCM has made in the past year or so. I enjoy the Dick Cavett shows, love the promos. If you go back and check the past threads, I think I've voiced my positive opinion on TCM programming choices. I enjoy how TCM shows a lot of the classic foreign movies that you can't see on any other networks. Hell, I've even come around to enjoying Ben on the weekends. All the way back in June or July when the September schedule was posted, I was very, very excited for Shorts day, particularly the primetime lineup of Hermes shorts, David Lynch shorts and Scorsese shorts. In the end, I was really disappointed by the majority of them and rarely am I disappointed by TCM.

 

Compared to the true classic shorts that were shown earlier in the day, the Hermes shorts left me feeling cold. I felt like 'Postmortem Bliss' wasn't so much a commentary on the "over-medicated, addicted, and misdiagnosed generation of today" (per the website), but rather, some teenager reading his myspace blog to the camera, doctored up by some fancy camerawork. I didn't enjoy them and I wouldn't rewatch them again. Does that make me less intelluctual, less willing to try watching new ideas? I don't think so. I'm young, 26 years old, probably a core target of their demographic and yet, I would have prefered to watch a classic movie instead of the primetime shorts.

 

So please don't lump all of us who didn't enjoy the Hermes shorts into one pile of "negative nellies." I have my own brain, I can think for myself and I know what I love and don't love (for instance, lots of people around these parts think that Citizen Kane is the biggest piece of overblown crap. Me? I love it. I'll watch it whenever it's on.) I loved lots of the shorts they showed towards the nighttime (I loved the Truffaut ones!), but everytime the Hermes shorts were reshown, I found myself diving for the remote.

 

In the end it's all about personal taste. My taste doesn't run towards the Hermes shorts. Maybe in a year or two (or even six months), I'll rewatch them and find something that clicks with me, but at the moment, they just left me feeling cold and uninterested. You found something to love while watching them. It's all subjective. But please don't judge those of us who gave them a chance and didn't like it.

 

However, I will say: The graphic intros shown before each new short were very aesthetically pleasing and modern. Clean and easy to read what was coming up next. Nice!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Talk about splitting hairs, Karloffman, where exactly are the words 'foreign films do not belong on TCM?' TCM has played foreign language films for years every now and then, I don't care to watch them.

 

From your post at 3:13 pm today:

 

"As far as I'm concerned, foreign language films belong on IFC."

 

> "To my horror, mrsl confirmed my

> sarcatic assessment of her by

> repeating that foreign language films don't belong on

> TCM.

>

Please tell me from where I repeated the phrase? Also, even if I did say that (which I heartily deny), where does that give you the right to 'sarcastically assess me' as if I were not entitled to post on these boards? How do you think I came to the conclusion that I do not like foreign language films? By seeing them in movie houses, STARZ, HBO, IFC and on TCM, that's how! I don't like Rap music, there's something else for you to sarcastically assess.

 

I apologized on another thread in case I hurt any feelings or abused anyones rights on these boards. I didn't feel I had, but just in case I wanted to make sure. When I am wrong or misunderstand, or disagree, I willingly apologize. Unfortunately some people don't read a complete post. They simply pick out one thing to complain about and continue to lambast with no thought to common sensibilities. Read the title of this thread, Karloffman, I'm not the only dissenter here.

 

Anne

Link to post
Share on other sites

>

>

> Hey, psst, Mr. Harron,

>

> You need to learn how to post a film review without

> going out of your way to insult people who have

> opinions that are different from your own. Remember,

> film is art, and everyone is entitled to have their

> own personal opinions about various examples of this

> art.

>

> Try to keep your mind on reviewing the film itself,

> and not on attacking people who disagree with you.

>

>

 

Thank you Fred

Link to post
Share on other sites

> Talk about splitting hairs, Karloffman, where

> exactly are the words 'foreign films do not belong on

> TCM?' TCM has played foreign language films for

> years every now and then, I don't care to watch

> them.

>

> From your post at 3:13 pm today:

>

> "As far as I'm concerned, foreign language films

> belong on IFC."

 

I think it's not a leap of logic to say that this implies that you think foreign films therefore don't belong on TCM.

 

>

> > "To my horror, mrsl confirmed my

> > sarcatic assessment of her by

> > repeating that foreign language films don't belong

> on

> > TCM.

> >

> Please tell me from where I repeated the

> phrase?

 

I just posted your repetition of your view of foreign films. You originally stated your view in your first post of this thread on the night of the 15th:

 

"Earlier this week we had a whole evening of foreign films with sub-titles, yippee. I've said before, if I want to read during prime time I'll pick up a book, thank you."

 

Also, even if I did say that (which I

> heartily deny), where does that give you the right to

> 'sarcastically assess me' as if I were not

> entitled to post on these boards?

 

You are allowed to post on these boards. You are allowed to criticize posts on these boards too.

So am I.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Karloffman:

 

Your assumptions are wrong. I prefer reading a book to reading sub-titles, that has nothing to do with whether I think foreign language films should be shown on TCM.

 

You have the right to criticize the posts, not the poster, you do not have the right to launch a personal attack by being rude, snide and sarcastic.

 

I'm done with you, say what you will from now on.

 

Anne

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good afternoon, sugarpuss--

 

Thanks for the comment, and I'm sorry to have tarred you with a broad brush if you are not actually a Negative Nellie.

 

Perhaps my initial speechifying was a trifle vehement -- I knew that as I was writing it, but a person has to 'blow' every so often and I guess it was my time. It is just that I do get exceedingly frustrated with the sheer volume of negativity on these message boards, and felt it was necessary to try to mount some fairly cogent defense of what TCM was opting to do with The Shorts Circuit.

 

To be frank, I didn't actually care all that much for the contemporary shorts, although I didn't think it was necessary to get into that when posting earlier. The idea for the festival was worthwhile, I thought, even if the products were often less-than-riveting. For the record, I thought "There Is No Place Like Home" and "Post-Mortem Bliss" were excellent short films, although I was left scratching my head trying to figure out what "Post Mortem Bliss" actually had to do with classic movies. (Slapping a James Dean quote on the first frames of a movie is not really all that is required of a homage, in my opnion.) The other four films I found variable; I liked "In the Eye Resides the Heart" (or whatever it was called) the least -- I found it trite and empty, despite the gorgeous photography and soundtrack, which I thought effective.

 

My impression is simply that a lot of people seem to want to use the boards to beef about the showing of everything and anything that isn't within their own personal comfort zone -- a trend which I think shows small-mindedness and an unwillingness to experience 'other' types of movies. I ask your pardon if you felt I expressed this in a way that insulted you personally.

 

But, as for Mr. Dobbs. Really. I find it just beyond comprehension that you have the sheer gall to take me to task for posting my opinon in a way that insulted others. This, I have observed for long enough now, is something you can't help but do every time you post on these boards. Indeed, the very label you affixed to this post contains a personal insult to anyone who actually enjoyed the Hermes shorts, or felt that they were worth showing on TCM in the first place. It was your high-handed, blanket assertion that all the films were "baloney" that fired me up in the first place. You have made it abundantly clear that your take on each and every film that airs on TCM that doesn't rate your personal approval is "baloney" and that those who disagree obviously has no idea what they are talking about. To paraphrase somebody famous, those who go about hurling written grenades shoudn't get their dander up if a little shrapnel falls back their own way. Talk about childish.

 

However, I will say this, Dobbsie: You have chosen your board moniker with great discernment. If ever their was a character type that fitted the user's personality to a T, you've found it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[nobr]The thoughts you indicated that flashed in your mind whilst enjoying TheShortsCircuit, crossed my mind too, Robert. But fortunately, only fleetingly, for I attribute very little credence to naysayers.[/nobr]

 

Keep in mind one pertinent fact - they are but a vocal minority.

 

Don't permit the vocality of the minority opinion to succeed in giving you the illusion that such negativity is the sentiment of the majority. It is not. And TCM is quite aware of this hence its consistent, brilliant programming.

 

So when you 'hear' petulant voices whine out:

I hated ShortsCircuit

I hate international cinema

I hate Miyazaki films

I hate Ben Mankiewicz

I hate cult films

I hate Molly Haskell

I hate Seventies cinema

I hate experimental cinema

I hate Rob Zombie

I hate the ThisMonthOnTcm promo this month

I hate the new logo

I hate the website design

I hate TCM Underground

I hate cartoons

I hate Peter Bogdanovich

I hate the younger generation

I hate this

I hate that

 

Just take heart in the fact that the population of NegativLand is but a tiny and provincial one.

 

[nobr]I'm of the opinion, of late, that the best thing to do with ultra-negative posters is to just ignore them and let them 'do the vomit' in their own little mutual-depreciation club. eck06.gif[/nobr]

 

 

 

S A M

[nobr]527.gif[/nobr]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, Mr. RobertEmmettHar...

 

I thank you for your review and comments.

 

My impression is simply that a lot of people seem to want to use the boards to beef about the showing of everything and anything that isn't within their own personal comfort zone

 

As you know, I got into a posting war with another poster but it was not regarding your impression, it was about rudeness, and insults, and misunderstand ing of my comments. Once again I will try to make myself more clear.

 

Regarding the above quote, my comments may have seemed to warrant your impression, but like the other poster, that was not my intent. If I switch onto HBO e.g., I may see a Western, then a mystery, then a children's program, then a "Making of Hollywoodland", short/promo. Just as TCM does with their programming. My point was three nights in a row of off the normal route programs.

 

My regret was that the programs were not interspliced with usual programming which is the way TCM normally (or used to) do it. The shorts, the foreign language films were not to my taste so I looked elsewhere for enjoyment, however not being a big fan of today's moviemaking, it was hard to find such enjoyment. I rely on TCM for a 'snuggle up on the couch' movie in the evening. I realized the Dick Cavett shows were going to lead the way to the visitors' movies all night, so I expected that with Woody Allen, I'm very much looking forward to this week with Robert Mitchum. If TCM wants to play beginners luck (with early directors works), that's their priviledge, it's their channel, I simply prefer not having 24 hours of it. I've investigated Rob Zombie, and when his show starts, I will look up each movie, if I find it too bloodthirsty for my taste, I will not watch it. However if someone sees that I did not watch and says I am unwilling to accept 'new' forms of movies, then they are wrong in saying I am ignorant, or stuck in a wasteland of fluff. My choice is my choice, and unless I call someone ignorant for liking blood and guts, nobody has the right to chastise me. I can say anything I want about a movie, or an actor, or programming; I can say it was dumb, or he/it was lousy, as long as I don't say you (general, you) are a fool for liking, or not liking, the movie or the actor, or the programming. My complaint (not rejection) is the radical changes TCM has undergone in the past 6 months or so. Their programming used to be movie to movie, their fill-in times were pleasant travelogues, quick bio bits, trailers of upcoming movies or nostalgic street scenes with a background of On the Sunny Side of the Street. The first time I saw the promo with the girl in her underwear taking curlers out of her hair, quite a while ago, I was surprised although it was exceedingly tame compared to the new tattooed lady, and the music was jazz rather than heavy rock. I see nothing wrong with nostalgia on a Classic (old) movie channel. Unfortunately they have switched geers too quickly for me, it takes me longer to aclimate than some other folks.

 

Anne

 

Message was edited by:

mrsl

Link to post
Share on other sites

mrsl, you acclimate just fine and TCM does seem to be moving away from their niche programming. They have to, as we've been told, so we'd do best to get used to it. I just happened to love the promo and its music and what I've seen so far of the shorts, but as you've no doubt read, I dislike just a wee few things on the station of late.

 

Then again, I've decided to run for Mayor of NegativeLand, so you know how us politicians are. My platform against the candidate from PompousVille will be:

 

A personally pleasing TCM in every pot.

 

Care to vote for me? :)

 

dolores

Link to post
Share on other sites

Top o'the day Anne--

 

I was most pleased to read your post, and sorry to read about the 'posting war' that you seem to have run into. Let's try not to get into one ourselves, OK?

 

With respect, I'm a bit perplexed as to how you manage to come up with 'three nights' of off-the-route programming in a row.

 

I can only think that you are finding the Janus Films retrospective "off the normal TCM route," but in all cordiality, and to quote Cornelius Hackl in "Hello Dolly," "It's just not so."

 

Foreign films from all areas have long been a part of the TCM legacy, There was the festival of Italian films some two or three years back, a salute to Truffaut, Godard and the French New Wave before that, and last year's salute to the Golden Age of Mexico, which I adored.

 

Again, with respect, what I find dismaying is that you can state so flatly and so matter-of-factly that foreign films "aren't your cup of tea." The notion that all foreign films are somehow 'alike' is about the same as saying all 'silent' films aren't one's cup of tea. There's quite a range among the silents from Griffith's "The Sealed Room" of 1909, to Weine's "Cabinet of Dr. Caligari" of 1919, to Von Stroheim's "The Merry-Go-Round" of 1925 to Seastrom's "The Wind" of 1928.

 

Likewise, the content and style (to say nothing of spoken tongue) of films like "The Seventh Seal, " "Mon Oncle" and "Der Blaue Engel" are poles apart. I urge you, really, give some of these flims a try. You may find none of them to your liking, but then again...You may discover you have a taste for the films of France, or Italy, or Russia, and to my mind, the voyage of discovery is always worth taking.

 

Personally, I got through about 18 minutes of the first Bollywood film that TCM showed for its Indian festival two years ago, and I couldn't bear it. I bailed for the rest of the festival. But if someone else discovered a new love in Bollywood, I think that's fine. I hope they'll likewise be driven to try the films of moviemakers like Bunuel, Lang, and Antonioni.

 

I see that next week TCM is showing "Rashomon" a great Japanese classic from 1950. It's short (88 minutes), leanly acted and directed with great care and economy from the legendary Akira Kurosawa. If you haven't seen it, please PLEASE, PLEASE give it a chance. It is a remarkable film which is -- among other things -- about the way different people have different opinions and 'takes' on what is the truth. (Get it?)

 

Seriously, though. A wonderful film. Tune in and see if you don't find it worth your time. You don't even have to get a tattoo to attend.

 

Cordially,

Robert.

 

Message was edited by:

RobertEmmettHarron

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, Robert, lzcutter, Jack, Larry, and everybody else who has advised me:

 

I promise I will check them out, although I have seen Kurosawa, and was not bored, just uninterested. I agree with your estimation of Bollywood, maybe its the times. One thing remains though, it's not always easy to read sub-titles, sometimes they're too long or if you look away, you may miss something, so you are forced to keep your eyes glued to the screen. Also, often the sub-titles are in white letters on a white or grey background, again making them hard to read. Often I am doing my nails, crocheting, or sewing while watching a movie and sub-titles do not work with that. I hate to just sit, and stare at the screen. Maybe most people do, but I never have. I guess I'm a multi-tasker.

 

One last thing: I find most foreign films to be dis-jointed and difficult to follow the story plot, I feel that foreign directors tend to get too subtle, or too (all I can think of is descriptive), ie. they talk too much, or use the camera too much during a discussion, with the camera on the surrounding scenery or room decor'. And Robert E, those foreign film festivals is where I realized I'm not fond of foreign films, in addition to my 'brainier than thou' days when I went to independent/foreign films movie houses, in my younger days with the jerk I married.

 

Anne

Link to post
Share on other sites

"The thoughts you indicated that flashed in your mind whilst enjoying TheShortsCircuit, crossed my mind too, Robert. But fortunately, only fleetingly, for I attribute very little credence to naysayers."

 

That's funny SamTherapy, because I attribute very little credence to those of you that applaud every single change that TCM makes to their regular programming. I'm sure they could start showing porn and you guys would still be cheering them on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"One thing remains though, it's not always easy to read sub-titles, sometimes they're too long or if you look away, you may miss something, so you are forced to keep your eyes glued to the screen. Also, often the sub-titles are in white letters on a white or grey background, again making them hard to read. Often I am doing my nails, crocheting, or sewing while watching a movie and sub-titles do not work with that. I hate to just sit, and stare at the screen. Maybe most people do, but I never have. I guess I'm a multi-tasker."

 

This is a response I'm used to and understand to a certain extent. Both subtitles and intertitles (for silent films) require a much fuller commitment of attention than talkies. However, believe me when I say that after a little time and practice, you stop being aware that you're "reading" the film in addition to merely "watching" it. I avoided Italian films at first because Italian is (generally) a rapidly spoken and profuse language -- hence the subtitles were more difficult to follow than, say, a Kurosawa film. But after seven years (and hundreds of foreign-langauge and silent movies later), being able to follow the subtitles and action onscreen simultaneously comes naturally. As a self-described multi-tasker, that challenge shouldn't put you off. The only thing is, as I said, you have to pay closer attention than usual.

 

Anyway, if you're going to give the Janus films another try, I applaud your effort and willingness to do so. May I recommend that, in addition to Rashomon (which is a genuine masterpiece), give these a try, too: Yojimbo (an action-packed samurai movie with no talky or slow-moving bits at all); Ashes and Diamonds (a fine war film); and Beauty and the Beast (a magical fantasy film).

 

A final thought: I wonder if the head-butting going on in these forums is due to a contrasting set of opinions on what TCM is all about.... It seems that for Anne and a lot of other folks who seem to regret the channel's more recent programming changes, TCM serves as a sort of refuge or familiar and welcoming retreat -- almost like a hoby. While for myself and Robert and others who have been more keen on the Shorts Circuit, etc., we seem to think of TCM as serving an almost educational purpose -- just as universities and archives serve a dual purpose of preserving knowledge/art and creating new (and sometimes unpopular) ideas and ways of looking at things.

 

So which audience should TCM ultimately serve? Both are very much niche markets (because I frankly don't know many "kids" who are keen on being introduced to John Cassavetes or educated about Woody Allen).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Greetings, all:

 

Quiller--Good to hear from you. Sometimes I wonder if we don't give kids a bit less credit than they are entitled to. Last year, I did a group of silent films for a church group just for the educational experience -- and although the 'regular' audience was largely senior types, there were the occasional young people, and the stray teen-ager and they returned for subsequent pictures. Among the films I showed, the most popular with my 'teen' (hardly an "A' student was -- of all things -- Eistenstein's "Ocktybr" (1927). I thought there was a 50-50 chance he'd walk out, but he was engrossed. Younger folks also enjoyed a program of film titles as diverse as "Wings" "Sparrows" "Seven Chances" "City Lights" and the first films of Louis and Auguste Lumiere. So I think there is a chance to educate new generations on these types of films, and I also think we'd darn well better be doing it now before our generations pass and there is no one who knows how to use a Vitaphone disc or appreciate a part-talking picture. Any good picture can sell itself to a willing audience, so long as the audience takes the time to assemble.

 

Sweetbabykmd--Not to keep getting into this, but your comment to Samtherapy was below-the-belt and unnecessary. Frankly, it's that sort of thing which has generally compelled me to stay off message boards in the first place. The gentleman was kind enough to respond to my post and, lo and behold, hard on his heels comes your post, which was nothing, mind you, other than a snide and frankly borderline libelous statement which you surely must know was a grotesque distortion of Sam's position. (Of course, he is able to defend himself I am sure, but speaking for myself I find it most improbable that any fellow with a cute little barking dog mascot like his can be much of a porno field. Sam please correct me if I am wrong about this.)

 

But I sense the sarcasm is part of the fun for you. (Gee, folks, Samtherapy is so dense or smutty-minded or both that he would probably be cheering TCM on if they ran porno films.)

 

I'm also sorry to still be harping on this incivillity. Really, I'd much rather talk about movies -- and yes, that still means ALL kinds of movies. Sorry to have such wide-ranging taste. Didn't know that was a fault in the old US of A.

 

Message was edited by:

RobertEmmettHarron

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...