Coming Up on TCM

[jdb1]

Even I was somewhat taken aback by ROPE as a "Kids" movie, so I checked out TCM's press release for Essentials, Jr.

Lo and behold, there appears to be a lack of clarity with the on-line schedule. When one looks at the Sunday night line-ups on the on-line schedule, there are two or three movies in orange that appear to be the Essentials, Jr; however, the press release, which includes the complete Essentials, Jr schedule, has only the first movie listed on the on-line schedule as part of the Essentials, Jr.

My conclusion: On July 26, all three movies are "In Real Time", but only HIGH NOON is Essentials, Jr.

Well, I hope that's the case, Chi-Chi. But I'm remember an instance a few years ago when I was home during the day and watching that morning "Sunny Side of Life" thing they used to do on TCM. I can't remember what film it was that was programmed into that slot, but sunny it wasn't. Totally inappropriate is what it was. I remember commenting about it here or at TCMLand. So I don't entirely trust TCM programmers. And I did send them an email about it. Someone should call it to their attention, no?

It's endemic to the online world: so many of the people doing the arranging and dissemination of information are very young people, and they don't necessarily know what it is they are feeding us. To them it's very much a case of the medium being the message. You should see the onair program descriptions that show up on Cablevision. The misidentified films, the misspelled cast names, the grammatical errors. It would be hilarious if it weren't so sad.

[ChiO]

From the CM press release, this is the complete list of Essential, Jr. movies:

June 7 Yankee Doodle Dandy (1942)
June 14 To Have and Have Not (1944)
June 21 Father of the Bride (1950)
June 28 The Philadelphia Story (1940)
July 5 Mr. Hulot’s Holiday (1953)
July 12 The African Queen (1951)
July 19 An American in Paris (1951)
July 26 High Noon (1952)
Aug. 2 Heaven Can Wait (1978)
Aug. 9 Notorious (1946)
Aug. 16 It Happened at the World’s Fair (1963)
Aug. 23 Gaslight (1944)
Aug. 30 You Can’t Take It With You (1938)

[jdb1]

Gaslight, maybe. I can't see Notorious at all for kids younger than 14 or so. There are more apt Hitchcock films than that. I didn't realize that To Have was presented as a Jr. Even I have trouble sitting through that one. Maybe kids would like Walter Brennan and Hoagie Charmichael, but is that enough for them to get anything from that film?

[klondike]

I didn't realize that To Have was presented as a Jr. Even I have trouble sitting through that one. Maybe kids would like Walter Brennan and Hoagie Charmichael, but is that enough for them to get anything from that film?

Well, you know, sometime before starting high school, Junior might need to know how to shoot a gun from inside a desk drawer, or nancy-slap a pushy tourist, or just whistle.
Seriously, I'd sooner have my grandkids emulating the social attitudes from TH&HN, than from Gaslight or The Philadelphia Story!

[mrsl]

Yankee Doodle Dandy, It Happened at the Worlds Fair, and Father of the Bride are the only films I see on the list as appropriate for young children. I doubt if they would sit through An American in Paris unless they show a talent, or great love for music.

Why can't they get movies like:

Cheaper by the Dozen
Belles on their Toes
Bachelor and the Bobby Soxer
All Mine to Give
State Fair ( Jeanne Crain/Dana Andrews version)
Them
Creature from the Black Lagoon
The Thing
War of the Worlds (original)

It seems to me that movies with, and about kids would be more likely to draw children to a TV movie than love stories and murder mysteries. At one time, my last four choices would have been considered far from children's fare, but as we all know, our childrens eyes and ears are mostly insensitive to what was considered frightening sights and sounds in those movies.

What other movies would be more appropriate that you can think of, that might overcome that desire to see people and cities blown up?

I am aware of the cost of renting from various outlets, but if they really want to draw kids into the family, show them something that is rarely seen on TV, and we all know that all of the movies I've listed have been shown on TCM at least once.

Anne

[knitwit45]

I'm really confused (no news there). When the "essentials" movie is shown, it's only ONE movie. So is Essentials Jr showing more than one movie an evening? or is it just the lineup AFTER the essentials jr. movie?

[klondike]

Yankee Doodle Dandy, It Happened at the Worlds Fair, and Father of the Bride are the only films I see on the list as appropriate for young children. I doubt if they would sit through An American in Paris unless they show a talent, or great love for music.

Being a fan of Jacques Tati in all his films, I'd have to say that I believe M.Hulot's Holiday to be entirely suitable for kids & gr'ups of all ages (even big kids like me), but, same problem as, potentially, with An American in Paris; would most current young'uns have the patience to let a quiet, well-crafted film guide them in far enough to get with the proverbial program, and be truly entertained?
I am wanted to say: no, sadly, likely not . . but I remember back in '93, when my own kids were 10, 12 & 13, I strolled into our living room to investigate what had all 3 of my usually bored, squabbling brood laughing in simultaneous merriment . . and there they were, breathlessly entranced by the snappy patter in Son of Paleface.
"You like those jokes, do ya, Wes?", I asked my eldest.
"Naw, not really," he replied, not taking his eyes from the TV, "but that guy cracking 'em is hella funny!"
Over the next 6 years, Wes discovered classic sci-fi & chop-socky films, Morgan would become entranced by the wizardry of Ray Harryhausen, and my Cait fell forever 'neath the spell of that other Kate (railly she did!) . . . and we owed it all to Bob Hope!

[myrnaloyisdope]

Yeah that's a really weird list. Bringing Up Baby is much more kid-friendly than To Have and Have Not, if you want a Hawks film in there. Though I would love to see a generation of kids growing with a love for Walter Brennan and Hoagie Carmichael.

M. Hulot's Holiday could definitely have some appeal. There was a period here in Canada during the early-mid nineties where Mr. Bean was immensely popular, and even though I was just entering teenagehood, I was among the cult of Bean. Given that Bean liberally bowers from Hulot, it strikes me that young people could find Hulot funny too.

It strikes me that the best intro to classic film for young-folk would be Technicolor Musicals (ooh bright colors and catchy songs), Screwball Comedies, and probably some the silent comedies by Lloyd and Chaplin (maybe Keaton too, though he seems more esoteric).

[mrsl]

Klondike:

I never saw M. Hulot's Holiday so I couldnt say yay or nay on it. Your kids were a little older than I'm thinking (more 7,8,9), but I bet the 10 year old only stayed because the older ones did. I'm not giving you a hard time though, Mr. L had my four watching Bob Hope (his favorite) and Burns and Allen and rolling on the floor in laughter. They also snuck in the three stooges when I wasn't around, but they soon learned it was off limits in my house, especially when I caught my younger son about to hit his sister over the head with a table tennis paddle.

Anne

[Birdy]

A little late, but I just wanted to say how much I enjoyed Hitchcock day and Cukor day last weekend. They were my favorites of the directors month. Yes, I'd seen them all before and could look them up on my recordings at any time, but it's to just flip on the tv and have something on you can just jump into the middle of sometimes. We had crazy weather, so I ran indoors to TCM every time there was a cloudburst.
B

[jdb1]

Hey All,

Don't forget that tomorrow morning (Friday, July 10) TCM is running early 1930s films starring or featuring the excellent Mae Clarke. And on Saturday night (July 11), another of Hollywood's talented victims, Jean Seberg, is featured.

[jdb1]

Did anyone catch the Mae Clarke films on TCM last Friday? I saw only Three Wise Girls. I didn't think much of the film, but I thought Mae was very good, especially compared to Jean Harlowe, who was wooden, spoke her lines like she just learned English the day before, and looked pretty nervous throughout most of the thing.

It's interesting -- in general, Mae Clarke was a very natural actress, but in some of the earliest of her films I've seen, she has been quite different. In some she adopted that 1930s-fast- and loud-talking style, and in others she seemed to be imitating Joan Blondell. I think that was probably at the behest of the directors. When left to her own interpretations, as in Waterloo Bridge and Three Wise Girls, she seems startlingly modern compared to the others in the casts. And in these two movies, she was only 21, but seemed much more mature.

Another thing about TWG, I thought Harlowe looke ghastly in that horrible makeup. She must have been quite young as well; maybe they were trying to make her look older?

By the way, Marie Provost was pretty good in TWG, in a rather silly role as the "plain" one of the three girls. And so sad that the poor woman drank herself to death before she was 30.

[JackFavell]

Marie Prevost was a good light comedienne and pretty darn cute in her day. The studios told her that she had a weight problem and stopped casting her much after the advent of sound. Unfortunate for us, because she did a great job in everything I have ever seen her in. Though she did have a drinking problem, she actually starved herself to death.

[ChiO]

July 22 appears to be an All Saint's Morning. I have not seen any of The Saint movies, so are there any recommendations?

Early ones preferable to the latter ones? Hively ones more enjoyable? The Farrow one? Worth it only if one finds George Sanders to be scrumptious?

[Ollie]

I ended up not carrying for Louis Hayward's SAINT but enjoying the George Sanders' ones more. However, his PALM SPRINGS is Sanders' last and it's loaded with fakey indoor sets and Sanders acts like he wished he'd have left the series one movie earlier - not a good effort. The Hugh Sinclair TIGER is an interesting one, and I tend to compare it with Louis Hayward's as if I am too biased toward Sanders. Sinclair proved to me that I could enjoy more of these without Sanders, necessarily.