AMC really missed the boat when they went "mainstream". The exorbitant amount of commercial breaks and the unmerciful butchering of some great movies pretty much took the channel off of my "favorites" list. And for you Stooge fans, AMC has butchered the shorts as well. Oh they were using some nice pristine prints, but the commercial stop breaks are over-whelming. I loved it when the Stooge shorts were played in their entirety from start to finish when AMC had "N.Y.U.K." (with the late Leslie Neilsen introducing the shorts) or "Stooges Playhouse". I don't watch AMC anymore.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
AMC butchering The Rifleman
- Thread starter therealjm12
- Start date
M
Mario500
Guest
landtuna said:
Many writers use the term "network" to describe a programming service on cable TV or satellite TV because its programming is supported by affiliates (cable TV and satellite TV companies). Many of these programming services provide local time for their affiliates like NBC, ABC, CBS, and FOX provide local time for their local stations.
Mario-500 said:
True - if you look online for references to these cable...uh...outlets, most are referred to as "networks" so consumers just repeat what they hear. Also, words like this become common usage. We no longer "dial" phone numbers, and it's been at least 60 years since people have put their land line phone back on the "hook" when they've ended the call. Similarly, unless you still you use a VHS VCR, you no longer "tape" programs off your TV, either. But we've used these words for decades, and they've stuck.
yes we need ad's to pay for the programming,but I have to agree on the sloppiness of how the ad's are running.This reminds me how SiriusXM hacked up the classic Casey Kasem's AT40's when sirius took over XM Radio. I dont bother taping old tv show from cable tv no more.I'm tired of the screen being littered with graphics flying around and again with the sloppy ad inserts.The networks are just getting worst.
Lkeller said:
In the case of a telephone, touch tone or old-fashioned round dial, both are known as "dials". You just punch one and rotate the other.
And, as I write this, I'm staring at my good old Western Electric model "500" desk phone. And yes, it does indeed have a hook.
But back to the core discussion.....AMC, allowing time between its shows for cable systems to show their local commercials isn't what I would call the same as network affiliates producing their own content. The only local content on cable systems I am aware of is the very occasional hot camera pointed at a city council meeting every so often but none of those are shown on any of the major cable services.
And as long as I appear to be slamming "writers" I'll add a blast at the term "reality". There are indeed several true reality services (Discovery, Animal Planet, Nat Geo, Military and some of History come readily to mind) but the term "reality" has been expanded, erroneously, to include game shows that are anything but real. Virtually all of these shows on network TV and most on cable do not fit the proper content test. So it appears we don't have real "journalists" either. At least those writing entertainment pieces.
landtuna said:
Most would call it a "keypad" these days, actually. I note that the (virtual) "button" (also inaccurate) that I push to activate a phone call on my smart phone after I've entered the number is labelled "dial." That would be "dial" as a verb. It occurs to me that these old-school words are more likely to stick around as usage if they are used as verbs.
Same with; "The cameraman is filming the story for the 11 O'Clock News" - mentioned by azumanga above.
landtuna said:
Personally, the term "reality TV" has been stretched to mean anything featuring real, ordinary people, period. Case in point is Nick's "Kids' Choice Awards". Here were the 2011 nominees for "Favorite Reality Show":
American Idol
America's Funniest Home Videos
America's Got Talent
Wipeout
Two of these are talent contests, one's a stunt game show, and another one's a home video anthology.
In the past, other so-called "reality shows" nommed for Kids' Choice included "Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?" (game show), "So You Think You Can Dance?" (talent contest), "America’s Next Top Model" (talent) and "Deal or No Deal" (game show).
By that same definition, shows such as "Ted Mack's Original Amateur Hour", "The Gong Show", "The Price is Right", the "GE College Bowl", "The Dating Game", "Jeopardy!" and lottery draws should also be classified as "reality TV".
In my opinion, real reality TV are nature, science and history shows (I would consider "Mythbusters" and "Pawn Stars" part of this group), as well as on-the-scene cop and crime shows such as "Cops", "America's Most Wanted", "Dog the Bounty Hunter" and "Police Women". Even semi-documentary shows such as "Cake Boss" and "Hardcore Pawn" are considered genuine reality TV.
These days, practically anything that is not a fictional work is "reality TV".
Wow, has this thread jumped off the subject. What the problem is, Obviously people programing these cable channels have no pride in what they are doing. I hope they'll eventually catch on but I doubt it. When they start losing money they'll blame it on everything except themselves and they way they do things.
therealjm12 said:
Well, maybe. I'll admit I got caught in the weeds with obsolete verbs, and all. But I think there's a basic disagreement about whether or not AMC "has no pride..."
As I stated earlier, AMC has produced and/or aired a number of very fine contemporary original cable drama series, including most notably Breaking Bad, and Mad Men, which are critically acclaimed and have won dozens of Emmys for writing, directing, and Best Actor (Brian Cranston, and Jon Hamm respectively). These are what they used to call "water cooler" shows, in that they were so exciting that viewers would talk about them at work the next day.
Lesser, but still great AMC series are Rubicon, Walking Dead, and recently, The Killing.
Yes - AMC is not the cable outlet it used to be. But in the last few years, AMC has produced or aired more great original dramas than any cable network, including HBO, Showtime, or FX. So to make the charge that AMC is unworthy because it butchers a corny old piece of sh*t like The Rifleman is laughable and ridiculous.
Lkeller said:
But still there's this double standard -- why do they treat their original programming very well, while any movies and TV shows that they buy from syndication firms (including "The Rifleman") are treated badly? If AMC treated "Mad Men" the same way they treat "The Rifleman", no doubt we would be hearing about it here.
azumanga said:
I do agree. I was just reacting to the posters who were saying AMC was basically worthless because of this.
Don't get me wrong - AMC should not be butchering the show. Commercial TV shows are paced and edited with commercial breaks in mind - so AMC should be adhering to the original breaks - not putting them in odd places. I understand that cable networks and local stations add another minute or so of commercials, but it seems like that could be done without ruining the show. It may be a little toughter for The Rifleman (say, compared to a sit com) because it was a 30 minute action show, and was tightly plotted. If I remember correctly, even the opening theme and credits are really short - maybe 15 or 20 seconds - more like a modern network show than a show from the 60s.
I never watch continuing shows like the ones mentioned above on AMC. My TV watching is strictly turning the TV on and seeing whats on right now. I don't like reality shows and I don't like tuning in next week to see what happens next. I rarely record anything. I don't get Netflix because I just don't plan ahead. So if I am up early on Saturday & Sunday mornings (& I try not to be) The Rifleman seems to be the only thing on my 600+ channels that fits my criteria. So in my own selfish way, I guess what I am saying is that I don't care anything about Mad Men etc. on AMC. I just care about The Rifleman and the few movies I watch on AMC or other channels and the way they are presented. Such channels would go out of business is if they depended on my viewership.
Lkeller said:
Just to clarify, I dumped AMC years ago - long before they produced their own content - so my comments need to be put in perspective. I never liked The Rifleman either but the fact remains they should not butcher any of their offerings. It would have never become an issue had they not gotten greedy and become commercial-oriented. To me, that was their greatest mistake and is why they lost me as a viewer long ago.
Lkeller said:
For a half hour show of that vintage, the amount of editing done to add commercials today would be more on the order of 3 to 4 minutes, much more than "another minute or so". By carefully snipping out bits and pieces here and there, those extra commercials could probably be added without totally wrecking the show -- but, as a practical matter, that's not the way it necessarily happens.
I'll also note that there's nothing new about seeing shows butchered in reruns. Watching "Star Trek" reruns back in the mid-seventies, the local station I watched it on (KSTW, channel 11 in Tacoma, WA, then owned by Gaylord Broadcasting) would add an extra commercial break and would chop out a six minute chunk of the show -- usually all in one place -- to make room for a commercial load that ran around 15 to 16 minutes in the hour. Needless to say, you had to be loyal "Star Trek" fan to watch those reruns, because if you didn't already know the gneeral plot line of every episode, figuring it out when the story lept ahead by six minutes wasn't going to be easy...
And, yes, a national cable network today should have the resources to do a better job of editing syndicated shows than did a local independent station 35 years ago. So I'm certainly not defending AMC.
Oh c'mon Texas Tom. You could take any six-minute chunk out of any Star Trek program and it wouldn't change a thing. Examples:
"He's dead Jim!"
<run six minute commercial block here>
"He's still dead Jim!"
.....and
<Big green hand showing on the high-def control room>
"What is that Spock?"
<run six minute commercial block here>
"I don't know, Jim!"
;D ;D ;D
"He's dead Jim!"
<run six minute commercial block here>
"He's still dead Jim!"
.....and
<Big green hand showing on the high-def control room>
"What is that Spock?"
<run six minute commercial block here>
"I don't know, Jim!"
;D ;D ;D
Episode butchering has been a familiar practice long before AMC. As long as there's been reruns, someone has been snipping away to squeeze in one more ad. It really became apparent when ABC, CBS, and NBC discovered the money they could make re-running their shows during the daytime hours. ABC butchered The Donna Reed Show. CBS did the same for The Andy Griffith Show. All about money. Thats the bottom line.
Videovet said:
Though I would think the networks would have more decorum and make edits properly, unlike AMC's treatment of "The Rifleman".
Of course, on a slightly different tangent, ABC ran the color episodes of "Bewitched" in black and white when it first started appearing in daytime reruns, even though the network was already broadcasting most of its daytime shows in color at the time.
- Status