NitrateVille.com

Aren't we the lucky ones???!!!


http://www.tcmuk.tv/data/UK.pdf

Michael O'Regan wrote:Aren't we the lucky ones???!!!


http://www.tcmuk.tv/data/UK.pdf

Wow. Stop my feet from dancing.

I stopped reading at The Boyfriend School with Steve Guttenberg.

Wow! I'd have a hard time not staying away from that lineup.

Jim Reid wrote:Wow! I'd have a hard time not staying away from that lineup.

It's a line-up all right, but they're the executioners...

Ewww. (Well, there is Lillian Gish...)

R Michael Pyle wrote:

Jim Reid wrote:Wow! I'd have a hard time not staying away from that lineup.

It's a line-up all right, but they're the executioners...

Ouch. The earliest film is from 1944 - and only two 40s films for the whole month.

Hopefully you have more of an opportunity to see vintage films screened in your area than I.

TELESHOPPING?? Like there aren't enough classic films to fill these slots???

Well, maybe they need help in paying the bills. But why?

Isn't it just lovely??
They obviously got hold of a bunch of Woody Allen films cheap.
Can anybody in the UK suggest why we don't similar programming to the US TCM programme - I could suggest some reasons, but I'm Irish and therefore I don't feel qualified to be rude about my present country of residence.

Michael O'Regan wrote:I'm Irish

I'd never have guessed!


(Yes, I'm Irish too)

Harlett O'Dowd wrote:

R Michael Pyle wrote:

Jim Reid wrote:Wow! I'd have a hard time not staying away from that lineup.

It's a line-up all right, but they're the executioners...

Ouch. The earliest film is from 1944 - and only two 40s films for the whole month.

Yeah, this is more like a current AMC schedule here in the USA.

The only thing I can think is that maybe another company in the UK has some sort of legal claim to the Warner, RKO & MGM libraries. Did these have another distributor when they did show up on tv in the UK?

Jim Reid wrote:The only thing I can think is that maybe another company in the UK has some sort of legal claim to the Warner, RKO & MGM libraries. Did these have another distributor when they did show up on tv in the UK?

Hate to respond to a question with a question, but this is the case with the RKOs, no? The Astaire-Rogers films were released on DVD in R2 by Universal, so evidently Warners doesn't have worldwide distribution of them. Which still wouldn't explain why other studios' films are absent from this absolutely putrid schedule, but it's a start.

Does Warners actually *own* the RKO library or does it just control domestic distribution rights? Different sources are rather foggy about this issue.

-Harold

Here in the US, WB have repeatedly said that the "censored 11" will never be released on home video or shown on TV.

Imagine my surprise when, searching around YouTube a while back, I found Tex Avery's UNCLE TOM'S BUNGALOW, in color, with French subtitles and one of those identifying cable-TV "bugs" on it. I guess it was a French channel, though I forgot to note what it was.

So I guess the local divisions of the movie companies and cable networks have a lot of programming latitude.

UNCLE TOM'S BUNGALOW is public domain. Of course, if the French-language channel leased the package from Warners, then, during the program, they would not have the right to broadcast a title that had, deliberately, been left out of that package.

MGH wrote:UNCLE TOM'S BUNGALOW is public domain.

Yes, but the version I saw was looked like it was mastered from an archival/studio source, not a 16mm print made for TV decades ago. It's akin to the difference between a copy of A CORNY CONCERTO (also PD) on a $1 DVD and the version on the Looney Tunes Golden Collection, Vol. 2.

I think it's more to do with the fact that the UK general public has little if any appreciation of or understanding of film history and culture.

If it's B&W they're not interested. If it's silent as well....oh, dear God!!!!

RKO titles do, indeed, come out on DVD thru Universal in UK and thus when King Kong came out in USA, Universal did it in UK but in a box set with other Kong type items and the colorized version of Kong not done by WB in USA being the current Turner policy after originating the idea years back for TV.

In Australia there have been a few pirate RKO issues on DVD and a lot of RKO VHS were issued, firstly, at $30 then later on throw-out $5 tables anywhere they could find space. Quality varied greatly. They do get on TV though, mostly on our BBCTV equivalent in the wee hours and run over and over and over. Like the Falcon series, Mexican Spitfire.

That TCM channel a bit better than the lousy pan regional Latin American version of the same channel.

As a sample, check its "multimedia" content: http://www.tcmla.com/ar/multimedia/

That is one of the many reasons why the American version is so pirated all over. Warner bought an excellent group of channels that included RETRO that originally played TV series, although later expanded to include serials, classics, silents and Argentine films... just to pull it off the air to put this repugnant insult to quality television.

In Brasil, they used to broadcast old films with Os Três Patetas, Pica-Pau, and Gordo e Magro on the channel 'Rede Brasil' but now they just show music and talk shows.

CoffeeDan wrote:

Harlett O'Dowd wrote:
Ouch. The earliest film is from 1944 - and only two 40s films for the whole month.

Yeah, this is more like a current AMC schedule here in the USA.

Living in the UK, I occasionally watch TCM UK for oddities such as the 1966 Italian version of The Man Who Laughs.

The reason behind the difference in programming of the UK and US TCM channels is that the economic models of the two channels are completely different. The British TCM is advertiser supported. They have to run recent films to get their ratings sufficiently high to be be able to sell ads. The cable channels pay for the right to be carried on Freeview digital terrestrial and Freesat (and presumably Sky), with carriage costing as much as £5 million per year.

Several years back Variety ran an article on the transition of AMC from old movies/no ads to recent movies/ads. They said that AMC's ratings increased significantly with the change - because the films were much more commercial.

David Pierce

CoffeeDan wrote:

Harlett O'Dowd wrote:

R Michael Pyle wrote: It's a line-up all right, but they're the executioners...

Ouch. The earliest film is from 1944 - and only two 40s films for the whole month.

Yeah, this is more like a current AMC schedule here in the USA.

AMC now has Mad Men. As far as I'm concerned, all is forgiven.

Michael O'Regan wrote:I think it's more to do with the fact that the UK general public has little if any appreciation of or understanding of film history and culture.

If it's B&W they're not interested. If it's silent as well....oh, dear God!!!!

Not true. The TV audience is rarely given the choice.....meanwhile, our Silent Comedy Gala in January sells out its 1700 seats every year....the interest from the younger generation seems, if anything, to be growing.

1700 seats is not the UK General Public.

Perhaps I'm blinkered because I unfortunately live in the cultural desert which is Essex.

David Pierce wrote:
The reason behind the difference in programming of the UK and US TCM channels is that the economic models of the two channels are completely different. The British TCM is advertiser supported. They have to run recent films to get their ratings sufficiently high to be be able to sell ads.

David Pierce

You're probably right.
Shame!

In Australia, apparently TCM classic movies is very good although not quite that of the US model. It is thru Foxtel & others and was via Hong Kong. Murdoch is the Fox part, of course, and Tel is the former government telephone company. Ads are not cut in the films but they do screen the promos, shorts & facts of the day etc. I have little need for the service because I have little time and plenty of discs of all kinds when I get the chance to sit down and relax.

I must add that I get a lot of pre-1950 material from Amazon UK & others, silents among them. I also get a lot of old TV shows that have not all been shown in Australia or slipped thru the net in odd spots not noticed. With things being as they are there must be people to buy and it is better for me now with a better dollar against the pound & euro and delivery can be quicker than America. The prices, in the main for a lot of stuff is much greater than standard price in USA or Australia but continual promotions help a lot or good pre-order prices.

So the question is: Are British citizens culturally inferior and the goods are actually all shipped out of UK or what?? In Australia I get friends telling me that today's Australians are culturally moronic. I must admit I have trouble getting sales for films I have doubles from overseas and not otherwise available here. I table these at a country market that is in a place where there is a cross section of locals(growing by the week), holidaymakers & daytrippers to see the penguins come in at might and I see little interest. I don't sell just discs & it is not my stall but I help my mother who has run it for 30 years. We sell old books by top authors quite well, though. One would never get rich these days from the current public. The good old days when everything sold & at good prices are long gone.

Perhaps, other than we citizens of Nitrateville, everybody these days is pretty much culturally moronic...

It'd be interesting to get a nice big list of the copyright statuses in other countries. I know that all of the pre-48 Warner cartoons are in the public domain in the UK and Australia, for example, which is certainly not the case in North America.

And yeah, the second I see John Candy's name on a TCM schedule is when I leave. (And I like John Candy, but I have principles.)

Especially his sophisticated comedies like WAGONS EAST

Bob