It is currently Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:23 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 390 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 16  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Aug 11, 2007 9:33 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 12:20 pm
Quote:
I watched the old TCM VHS copy of Ambersons last night and it has an intro with Robert Osbourne at the beginning where he claims something to the effect of "who knows maybe the cuts were a blessing because the film could scarcely be better than it already is". Perhaps he's changed his intro when it airs on TCM now but that's ridiculous. I mean of course none of us have seen Welles' cut and will never know if it's actually a better film (but I'd wager a good deal of money that it probably was). But to say that the cuts made by RKO "might have been blessing" is pretty damn insane.

I think that might be the case of him not wanting to alienate the person who's presumably purchased the VHS by saying it's an inferior, truncated version. Sure that may be true, but there's no need to rub it in the face of everyone unable to watch Welles' original cut.


Top
 Profile  
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 11:52 am 

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 3:49 pm
Location: Round Lake, Illinois USA
Robert de la Cheyniest wrote:
I watched the old TCM VHS copy of Ambersons last night and it has an intro with Robert Osbourne at the beginning where he claims something to the effect of "who knows maybe the cuts were a blessing because the film could scarcely be better than it already is". Perhaps he's changed his intro when it airs on TCM now but that's ridiculous. I mean of course none of us have seen Welles' cut and will never know if it's actually a better film (but I'd wager a good deal of money that it probably was). But to say that the cuts made by RKO "might have been blessing" is pretty damn insane.

I agree....Orson Welles said that the best scenes of the movie were cut out, and to him, a painful experience for him to watch the movie years latter. If Robert knew the full story behind the cut of the film maybe he would have not said that. I noticed the release date on the VHS copy is 1996 so i hope he knows better!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 4:41 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:40 pm
Yes, Robert Osbourne's intros are suspect at worst and awkward at best. TCM could certainly stand for a makeover with a new host and a new team of writers.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 4:46 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
That begs the question; who should be the new face of TCM?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 4:50 pm 

Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:03 am
Rob Zombie


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 5:07 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 12:58 pm
Robert Osborne used to be a lot better (or maybe he just had better writers back then). As a Hollywood insider, he used to provide anecdotes that were interesting and informative, but now he mostly seems to be reading inane patter off a teleprompter. I still prefer him to Ben Mankiewicz, though. Pedigree or no, he's insufferable. The tragic thing is that he was surely hired to bring viewers my age (gen-x) to the channel, but I can't stand watching him.

What's George Clooney's dad up to these days? I liked him on AMC back in the day.

I don't know who would be a good host now. Surely there must be a youngish person with a wry sense of humor and encyclopedic knowledge of classical Hollywood cinema somewhere. Ahem.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:17 pm 
No. 33 Killer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 4:22 am
Location: Ogden, UT
Matt wrote:
Surely there must be a youngish person with a wry sense of humor and encyclopedic knowledge of classical Hollywood cinema somewhere. Ahem.

Sorry, I'm pretty happy with the job I have now.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:23 am 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 11:02 am
Location: Over & Out
Is Joe Bob Briggs still alive? Or did he die in that tire fire I threw him into back in 1987?

Matt, you'd have my vote, but then again, I would hope that you look like either Joyce or Tootsie or the both of them wrestling each other at once. If not, I'm sure Jerry Haynes has a few years left in him to get the job done, with respect to all fellow members of this board.

Anything would be better than Little Ben Mankiewicz. Rex Reed would be better. Sifl & Olly would be better. So would the Unknown Comic, Alexei Sayle, Taylor Negron, the giant dinosaur in pee-wee's big adventure, a discarded mop, or a bag full of radishes. But my vote would go to the kid at the NuArt who yelled "I don't even know what the movies is" during a showing of outrageous fortune. Maybe that kid was Ben Mankiewicz?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:43 am 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:57 pm
Location: Rollin' down Highway 41
I would do cartwheels if Alexi Sayle was turned loose in the TCM studios for a single day.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 2:49 am 
Dot Com Dom
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
and suddenly Taylor Negron's years of lurking on this board finally produce a successful vanity search.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 10:42 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:38 pm
Location: Back in Milan (Ind.)
pianocrash wrote:
Anything would be better than Little Ben Mankiewicz. Rex Reed would be better.

Wow! That was harsh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 10:52 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 1:39 pm
Location: Uffa!
We need someone who is intelligent & savvy like Steven Soderbergh. A sense of humor is a plus.

Send resume to jobs@TCM.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:30 am 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Scorsese would be interesting, but obviously not a choice since he's obviously busy.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 12:05 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 6:02 am
Location: London
Not that I even watch TCM (I hate Sky) but the idea of a guest host sounds good. Perhaps a film director one week and an academic another, surely this would make viewing even more desirable. I don't know how long it could go on for, but it's obviously less demanding for having some great people host, Martin Scorsese would therefore not be a too far flung dream. I might even subscribe to a Sky package if that were to happen.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 12:13 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
It would be interesting if they got more than just directors or actors to guest host, but possibly well-known composers and editors as well. Hell, maybe even famous people not in the movie business too.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 12:34 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 4:38 pm
Location: North Carolina
I think they should bring back Jay Sherman to host TCM:

Image

I actually know somebody who used to work at TCM, and she says that most of Osborne's intros/outros have always been written by TCM staffers. So a decline in quality/adventurousness may be due partly to the changing staff in Atlanta. (I mean, if you stop to think about it, TCM shows at least three Osborne intros/outros per day, which means Osborne has to film around 100 per month. I can't imagine that he writes them, too.)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 1:21 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
tryavna wrote:
I think they should bring back Jay Sherman to host TCM

Hell, it's the only network he hasn't been on so why not?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 2:08 pm 

Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Chicago
TCM will be presenting Michael Powell's ultra-rare "Age of Consent" late evening/overnight on November 25th/26th at 2:30 Eastern Standard Time.

I'm definitely burning this to DVD! Not sure about the aspect ratio for the presentation, though.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2007 9:19 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 12:58 pm
Poking around the TCM website, I found this in their FAQ:

Quote:
What happened to Cartoon Alley?

Unfortunately, TCM's Cartoon Alley has been removed from the schedule. We no longer hold the broadcast rights to WB's Merrie Melodies and Looney Tunes cartoons.

The hell? How is that even possible?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 07, 2007 9:41 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 3:25 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Th-th-th-th-th-that's bullshit!

Cartoon Alley was one of the greatest programs. i honestly looked forward to it each Saturday morning, even if the didn't play Looney Tunes or Merrie Melodies.

This can't be true, how can they loose the rights? Turner OWNS them!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 4:50 pm 

Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Chicago
Set my DVR to record the entire presentation of Powell's neglected rarity, only to find that the final 4 minutes were lopped off at the end because the film, along with the Robert Osborne introduction, ran 4 minutes over the time allotted by the cable providers for that program.

Those fucksticks at that place just can't get it right. This is the 3rd time in less than 6 months that TCM has mispublished the "actual" running time of the presentation on its own website. It also happened with Losey's "These are the Damned" and Welles' "Immortal Story."

Interestingly enough, not one of the films are available on Region 1 DVD. What a bunch of savages!

The film, by the way, looked fantastic (great colors, letterboxed, uncut). In fact, the presentation last night offered no less than a 107 minute cut of the film. Unfortunately, the block of time devoted to the program was just 105 minutes.

So unless you were up at around 4:15 in the morning watching, you are royally screwed!

I guess it's all about forcing you to buy the eventual dvd because you missed the critical final moments of these films. A$$holes!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 5:04 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 9:45 pm
Location: Portland, OR
Wittsdream wrote:
Set my DVR to record the entire presentation of Powell's neglected rarity, only to find that the final 4 minutes were lopped off at the end because the film, along with the Robert Osborne introduction, ran 4 minutes over the time allotted by the cable providers for that program.

Those fucksticks at that place just can't get it right. This is the 3rd time in less than 6 months that TCM has mispublished the "actual" running time of the presentation on its own website. It also happened with Losey's "These are the Damned" and Welles' "Immortal Story."

Interestingly enough, not one of the films are available on Region 1 DVD. What a bunch of savages!

The film, by the way, looked fantastic (great colors, letterboxed, uncut). In fact, the presentation last night offered no less than a 107 minute cut of the film. Unfortunately, the block of time devoted to the program was just 105 minutes.

So unless you were up at around 4:15 in the morning watching, you are royally screwed!

I guess it's all about forcing you to buy the eventual dvd because you missed the critical final moments of these films. A$$holes!!

People should have wised up by now and be prepared to record the film and the movie folowing. Hell, if you did the math (film starts at 11:30, next film is at 1:15, the movies is suppose to be 107 min) even without the intro you should have planned ahead. It has nothing to do with DVD, and everything to do with the (rather foolish) fact that all schedules are created to end at :00, :30, :15:, or :45 even if the film goes a little over. TCM should do something about it, and make sure that DVRs somehow now to record the whole thing, but it's not like it couldn't have been caught.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:41 pm 

Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: Chicago
CB, the only running times listed on ANY site (TCM, IMDB, Senses of Cinema) were either 98 minutes or 103 minutes. The cut presented last night was the longest cut I have ever seen for Powell's film: 107 minutes. When coupled with the opening intro with Osborne and Schoonmaker, the total program running time approached 112 minutes, not the 105 minutes that the cable provider carved out. That's a 7 minute discrepancy (not a fraction by any means).

Someone keeps dropping the ball on these "rare" presentations, and I am more than a little convinced that it is motivated by commerce, and nothing else.

Preminger's "Skidoo," Fuller's "Park Row" and Tourneur's "Nightfall" are slated for the January TCM schedule. None of them is available on DVD anywhere in the world. I'll heed your advice this time around and record 6 films just to get the 3 that I really want, then find a way to patch the overlaps together with Final Cut Pro. Is this 2007?

These are the hoops that TCM is asking us to go through if we want to retain a personal copy of their presentation. I thought the entire point of placing their logo on the lower right third of the screen at half hour intervals was to prevent illegal copying?

I spend $100 a month on cable bill so that I have the RIGHT to watch and RECORD anything I want for my own personal enjoyment. Has something changed since 1978?

Very despondent that I do not have a copy of this rare Powell film to show to my friends over the holidays.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:57 pm 

Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 11:44 pm
Location: NY, USA
Wittsdream wrote:
CB, the only running times listed on ANY site (TCM, IMDB, Senses of Cinema) were either 98 minutes or 103 minutes. The cut presented last night was the longest cut I have ever seen for Powell's film: 107 minutes. When coupled with the opening intro with Osborne and Schoonmaker, the total program running time approached 112 minutes, not the 105 minutes that the cable provider carved out. That's a 7 minute discrepancy (not a fraction by any means).

That's 1/15 of the alloted time, actually.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:58 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 12:20 pm
To add more confusion to the advertised running time of Age of Consent, TCM's own program guide Now Playing listed it as 91 minutes. I assume the extra time was due to TCM showing a restored cut. Thelma Schoonmaker, introducing the film, said that Michael Powell had been upset with Columbia's cuts at the film's release. Schoonmaker recently asked Sony's Grover Crisp to restore the film and he did and that was what TCM aired.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 390 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 16  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group




This site is not affiliated with The Criterion Collection