|
|
Post by christine on Jun 23, 2023 5:05:44 GMT
All these changes make me nervous. TCM has changed since I began watching in 2001. Those were the days of Robert Osborne and they showed films like Alfred Hitchcock's Rebecca and Samson and Delilah with Hedy Lamar, Victor Mature and Angela Lansbury. They showed many films that they don't show anymore. They seem to be in the same cycle of films the past couple of years. I'm sure there is a lot I don't understand about the politics of it but I miss the old TCM already.
|
|
|
|
Post by dianedebuda on Jun 23, 2023 13:57:02 GMT
Welcome Christine!
|
|
|
|
Post by lydecker on Jun 23, 2023 16:07:30 GMT
Getting rid of senior management when a new company takes over is typical because: A) The senior people who have been there the longest make the most money and, of course, experience counts for nothing if you can lop off an expensive salary AND B) New management doesn't want anyone to "argue" with them as they start screwing up the network. Still, I don't see TCM going away any time soon but I'm positive at least one host will be cut (please let it be Karger) and everyone left at the network will now find themselves doing 4 jobs instead of 1.
I see TCM being spun off as a streaming service in the not too distant future . . .
|
|
|
|
Post by cineclassics on Jun 23, 2023 18:11:46 GMT
Getting rid of senior management when a new company takes over is typical because: A) The senior people who have been there the longest make the most money and, of course, experience counts for nothing if you can lop off an expensive salary AND B) New management doesn't want anyone to "argue" with them as they start screwing up the network. Still, I don't see TCM going away any time soon but I'm positive at least one host will be cut (please let it be Karger) and everyone left at the network will now find themselves doing 4 jobs instead of 1. I see TCM being spun off as a streaming service in the not too distant future . . . I agree that TCM isn't likely to be shuddered and a streaming option should be considered, so long as it feeds into the linear TCM channel and folks can experience the live cable feed. And the fact that they have 5 hosts is excessive. The channel started out with Robert O. handling the duties that currently are managed by 5 hosts. Something has to give. Mank is safe as the most senior host, and I would think Eddie is also safe, as he's probably the most popular. |
|
|
|
Post by gerald424 on Jun 23, 2023 19:56:58 GMT
I see TCM being spun off as a streaming service in the not too distant future . . . They've tried versions of that before and it didn't work out. Too many streaming options already out there, many are already merging or shutting down (Like Discovery+ which is the reason for all this). I think TCM will become an off shoot of Max, where you get Max and for $5 more you get TCM.
Now, you need a service to get TCM which can start anywhere from $55 to $155 a month. That's just too much. That business model is obsolete.
|
|
|
|
Post by lydecker on Jun 23, 2023 20:05:43 GMT
I agree that they don't need 5 hosts. And, as I said in another thread, the reason the hosts aren't gone yet is because they all have contracts with the network which may run another year or so. Buying them out of their contracts ahead of schedule could be very, very expensive plus retaining them (for the moment) gives the appearance that they aren't gutting the network. (Which they are.) I could see them losing all of the hosts eventually and what made TCM special (those insightful hosted intros) will be gone. I thank God I have taped a zillion TCM films and intros and will have them for posterity. (As long as my VCR holds out!)
As I said to a friend many years ago: "Mergers and acquisitions are the root of all evil." It always goes the same way. First, the statement by the "take over" corporation that they love everything about the company they just took over and the PR statement that "there will be no significant changes." Then, wait just a few months and start slashing staff and screwing up everything.
|
|
|
|
Post by gerald424 on Jun 23, 2023 20:17:49 GMT
I don't think money is an issue. TCM is profitable. I think with the merger, there's a lot of redundancy in management. And they would rather one person manage several properties like an umbrella.
What is a problem is how to present TCM going forward. That's what we should be looking out for, I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by BingFan on Jun 23, 2023 21:17:38 GMT
There are at least three things that make TCM as valuable as it is:
1) the programming of films that are mostly from the Golden Age of Hollywood or are otherwise “classic,” and fit defined themes;
2) uncut and commercial-free programming; and
3) hosts that provide context for the films.
Changes to any of these three would diminish TCM noticeably. Elimination of just the hosts would turn TCM into a version of the Fox Movie Channel. (How many avid viewers does FMC really have?) Elimination of all three would turn TCM into AMC. (Does the world really need another version of AMC?)
Another point: turning TCM into a streaming-only service would be nothing short of killing the channel.
For one thing, it would probably remove the curated aspect of the channel. TCM would become just a bunch of movies on a menu.
Further, millions of people (including me) don’t have adequate internet service to effectively access streaming services.
Changing TCM in any of these ways would be akin to tearing down NYC’s old Penn Station, an architectural masterpiece. “You don’t know what you’ve got ‘til it’s gone.”
|
|
|
|
Post by lydecker on Jun 23, 2023 21:29:31 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by BingFan on Jun 23, 2023 22:17:04 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by lydecker on Jun 23, 2023 23:56:54 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by sewhite2000 on Jun 24, 2023 1:54:24 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by cmovieviewer on Jun 24, 2023 7:03:59 GMT
The article mentions the disappearance of the TCM hub in the Max streaming service. I was wondering about this as well - all of the hubs went away when the service was changed from ‘HBO Max’ to Max. Later I discovered that if you scroll down in the service there is a new row of icons called ‘Brand Spotlight’. Among these are icons for TLC, HGTV, etc. If you then scroll to the right on this row there is an icon for TCM that takes you to the TCM page, which shows all of the titles for the TCM collection and matches up with what was there before. |
|
|
|
Post by BingFan on Jun 28, 2023 1:07:52 GMT
A very well thought-out article by one of The New Yorker’s film critics, Richard Brody (who’s a Godard biographer). I only disagree with his idea that TCM should be preserved as a streaming service. He’s got the right basic idea but is too limited. TCM needs to also be preserved as the channel it is now. Otherwise, millions of people who don’t have good Internet service and can’t access streaming services will be left behind.
www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/turner-classic-movies-is-a-national-treasure
|
|
|
|
Post by mr6667 on Jun 28, 2023 1:35:30 GMT
"....That’s why TCM should become a not-for-profit streaming service—call it Turner Cinema Museum or Turner CinéMathèque. This is what the Academy Museum of Motion Pictures should have been: not a physical space for the display of artifacts but a permanent free or low-cost TCM-like Web site, programmed with the discerning enthusiasm that has been the channel’s glory until now. Just as an art museum shows art, the Academy museum should show movies—not with the local reach of a movie theatre but as a nationwide or global platform for viewing curated classics, a permanent public treasure...."  |
|
