TNT: Irritating Things

[Oldiesaholic]

I find myself watching the TV with the picture aspect in the "zoom" or "large" mode,
and tabbing it up and down to "remove" all the distracting pop-ups and annoying
messages that remind me I'm watching the show that I'm watching-as well as what
is coming up this time next month. I like hi-def OK, but I would rather watch a pasty
looking picture that I can at least stay focused on, then try to watch it through all
the clutter. I'm also being tired of constantly being warned by ratings bugs after every
10 minute commercial break. This "disease" has spread to all 597 channels.

 

[PirateJohnny]

Funny, I'm so used to them (the bugs) I don't even notice them anymore.

 

[sack]

As long as we are making complaints....

Movie directors don't seem to realize that their "masterpiece" will spend a few weeks in theaters and then spend years (if the director is lucky) being watched at home - on broadcast or cable TV, on DVDs, via streaming or using whatever technology comes along later. But much of the eventual audience for any film will see it in some sponsored form on an advertiser-supported medium. You'd think these directors would would allow for that - would plan for breaks and for the need to show a toned-down and cleaned up version of the film. But no!

I disagree. Why should any director, who is an artist in one way or another, change their vision and change their "masterpiece" so down the line some greedy broadcaster has it easier to stick in a bunch of commercials. Remember, you can always get a dvd or Netflix and see the movie the way it was intended. I dont like changing any art to accommodate commercials. Maybe these broadcasters could take a little more time and effort to find a proper place to break for spots, based on content and not a clock and show a little respect for what they are broadcasting (and making money from).

 

[FredLeonard]

As long as we are making complaints....

Movie directors don't seem to realize that their "masterpiece" will spend a few weeks in theaters and then spend years (if the director is lucky) being watched at home - on broadcast or cable TV, on DVDs, via streaming or using whatever technology comes along later. But much of the eventual audience for any film will see it in some sponsored form on an advertiser-supported medium. You'd think these directors would would allow for that - would plan for breaks and for the need to show a toned-down and cleaned up version of the film. But no!

I disagree. Why should any director, who is an artist in one way or another, change their vision and change their "masterpiece" so down the line some greedy broadcaster has it easier to stick in a bunch of commercials. Remember, you can always get a dvd or Netflix and see the movie the way it was intended. I dont like changing any art to accommodate commercials. Maybe these broadcasters could take a little more time and effort to find a proper place to break for spots, based on content and not a clock and show a little respect for what they are broadcasting (and making money from).

An artist? Please. It's a business. They don't make movies with their own money. But they are happy to take money from having their films shown later on TV. They are hos. I see no reason to pander to their pseudo-artistic arrogance.

Besides, their job is to please an audience. The least they can do is show some consideration for the audience which watches movies on TV.

The greatest films of all time were made under the studio system when directors knew or were kept in their place.

 

[LKellerIII]

As long as we are making complaints....

Movie directors don't seem to realize that their "masterpiece" will spend a few weeks in theaters and then spend years (if the director is lucky) being watched at home - on broadcast or cable TV, on DVDs, via streaming or using whatever technology comes along later. But much of the eventual audience for any film will see it in some sponsored form on an advertiser-supported medium. You'd think these directors would would allow for that - would plan for breaks and for the need to show a toned-down and cleaned up version of the film. But no!

I disagree. Why should any director, who is an artist in one way or another, change their vision and change their "masterpiece" so down the line some greedy broadcaster has it easier to stick in a bunch of commercials. Remember, you can always get a dvd or Netflix and see the movie the way it was intended. I dont like changing any art to accommodate commercials. Maybe these broadcasters could take a little more time and effort to find a proper place to break for spots, based on content and not a clock and show a little respect for what they are broadcasting (and making money from).

I also disagree. Sure, film-making is a business, but it's also an art. Feature length films are not TV shows - why should they be cut and diced into short segments to fit commercial breaks for their eventual run on commercial TV. That's pretty far down the distribution chain, considering that most films run as originally intended in the theatre, then on DVD, then on premium cable, and only thenon commercial TV.

I've noticed that action films (short scenes, a lot of cutting) work OK on commercial TV, even though commercials are certainly an interruption of the action. But slower paced dramas don't fare as well.

One of my favorite films from the 70s was Terrence Malick's Days of Heaven. I saw it first in the theatres in what was then high-tech 70 millimeter film. It's an incredibly beautiful film. I remember seeing it later in the 70s on Showtime cable - even though there were no commercials, my 23 " RCA analog TV did not do it justice, cinematically speaking. It would probably look great these days on a 1080p big screen LCD or plasma set. But would I watch it with commercials? Not a chance.

 

[FredLeonard]

Again: My point is these directors-auteurs-artists need to consider their audiences, all of them - immediate and future. Not just the immediate theater audience. If they have a "vision," they would be advised to protect it by shooting alternate takes and doing alternate cuts themselves. They already do "director's cuts" for DVD and on-demand, when theater owners have demanded a shorter film. They already do "unrated cuts" for DVD and on-demand when they trimmed the film to get an R rating in theaters. If they are so concerned about their "vision," they need to consider the entire distribution chain and make allowances to protect their vision and serve their audiences. Otherwise, they are just hacks - willing to pocket money for sponsored showings but not considering the vision or the audience.

 

[PirateJohnny]

So, should recording artists mix their songs so they sound good on $5 ear buds?

 

[FredLeonard]

So, should recording artists mix their songs so they sound good on $5 ear buds?

Yes, and sound good to people listening via low-bandwidth streaming to mobile devices.

 

[sack]

I still say if you are going to show a movie on TV, you should take the time to make your commercial breaks where it would fit into the film, not every 10 minutes and destroy the film. Just because its a business does not mean they can do whatever they want to a film for their convenience. Cutting away for spots does destroy the continuity of the film,,, but don't these "businesses" have any concern for their customers, yo know,, the people watching? Do you like watching an intense scene and have it abruptly stop for more commercials,,, that is not serving your customer. I will never accept the excuse "its a business" for bastardizing films and tv shows. A good business does it right,,, a rotten business considers themselves first over their customers,,, and tv has turned into a rotten business.

 

[vchimpanzee]

What tool there thinks it's OK to stretch all the SD 4:3 programs to 16:9.

To me, distorting the picture is the same thing as taking mono audio and distorting one channel to make it stereo.

I saw "Slumdog Millionaire" and the subtitles were often partly off the screen. I couldn't even see them. I have only old TVs because they were cheaper, but why couldn't the station have letterboxed them?...

Really? We get that complaint from viewers about FOX sports graphics. If the image were letterboxed for your out of date TV, it would be postage stamped (black bars on top, bottom, left and right) for viewers with up to date TVs, capable of seeing the entire 16x9 picture with no black bars anywhere. Your digital converter box should give you the option of display appearance on your TV. Your converter box should make it letterboxed for you.

It does, but that would require a much better antenna than I have now. Sorry, I didn't make this clear. The cable company is sending it out this way.

 

[ixnay]

They often offset program start and end times so recorded programs are clipped at the end.

TCM disappointed this railfan (who managed to vacation in Midtown Manhattan this past spring) by doing the same thing with the original Walter Matthau/Robert Shaw The Taking of Pelham One Two Three (about the hijacking of a NYC subway train) when it aired in the wee hours (Eastern time).

ixnay

 

[PirateJohnny]

What tool there thinks it's OK to stretch all the SD 4:3 programs to 16:9.

To me, distorting the picture is the same thing as taking mono audio and distorting one channel to make it stereo.

I saw "Slumdog Millionaire" and the subtitles were often partly off the screen. I couldn't even see them. I have only old TVs because they were cheaper, but why couldn't the station have letterboxed them?...

Really? We get that complaint from viewers about FOX sports graphics. If the image were letterboxed for your out of date TV, it would be postage stamped (black bars on top, bottom, left and right) for viewers with up to date TVs, capable of seeing the entire 16x9 picture with no black bars anywhere. Your digital converter box should give you the option of display appearance on your TV. Your converter box should make it letterboxed for you.

It does, but that would require a much better antenna than I have now. Sorry, I didn't make this clear. The cable company is sending it out this way.

I have a pair of rabbit ears in my attic. i can pull in the local stations about 30 miles away.

Doesn't your cable box have a menu for sending a letterbox picture to a 4:3 TV? If you only have access to the analog channels this wouldn't work. Some cable systems still send out analog signals (4:3) on the lower channels. Look up in the 900s and above for the digital channels (16:9).

 

[vchimpanzee]

What tool there thinks it's OK to stretch all the SD 4:3 programs to 16:9.

To me, distorting the picture is the same thing as taking mono audio and distorting one channel to make it stereo.

I saw "Slumdog Millionaire" and the subtitles were often partly off the screen. I couldn't even see them. I have only old TVs because they were cheaper, but why couldn't the station have letterboxed them?...

Really? We get that complaint from viewers about FOX sports graphics. If the image were letterboxed for your out of date TV, it would be postage stamped (black bars on top, bottom, left and right) for viewers with up to date TVs, capable of seeing the entire 16x9 picture with no black bars anywhere. Your digital converter box should give you the option of display appearance on your TV. Your converter box should make it letterboxed for you.

It does, but that would require a much better antenna than I have now. Sorry, I didn't make this clear. The cable company is sending it out this way.

I have a pair of rabbit ears in my attic. i can pull in the local stations about 30 miles away.

Doesn't your cable box have a menu for sending a letterbox picture to a 4:3 TV? If you only have access to the analog channels this wouldn't work. Some cable systems still send out analog signals (4:3) on the lower channels. Look up in the 900s and above for the digital channels (16:9).

I have the very basic cable service and everything is analog. There is no box. The wire plugs into the back of the TV just like the one that used to come from the antenna.

 

[PirateJohnny]

What tool there thinks it's OK to stretch all the SD 4:3 programs to 16:9.

To me, distorting the picture is the same thing as taking mono audio and distorting one channel to make it stereo.

I saw "Slumdog Millionaire" and the subtitles were often partly off the screen. I couldn't even see them. I have only old TVs because they were cheaper, but why couldn't the station have letterboxed them?...

Really? We get that complaint from viewers about FOX sports graphics. If the image were letterboxed for your out of date TV, it would be postage stamped (black bars on top, bottom, left and right) for viewers with up to date TVs, capable of seeing the entire 16x9 picture with no black bars anywhere. Your digital converter box should give you the option of display appearance on your TV. Your converter box should make it letterboxed for you.

It does, but that would require a much better antenna than I have now. Sorry, I didn't make this clear. The cable company is sending it out this way.

I have a pair of rabbit ears in my attic. i can pull in the local stations about 30 miles away.

Doesn't your cable box have a menu for sending a letterbox picture to a 4:3 TV? If you only have access to the analog channels this wouldn't work. Some cable systems still send out analog signals (4:3) on the lower channels. Look up in the 900s and above for the digital channels (16:9).

I have the very basic cable service and everything is analog. There is no box. The wire plugs into the back of the TV just like the one that used to come from the antenna.

You're living in a digital world. TV broadcasts a 16:9 picture now. And it's in color, too.

 

[vchimpanzee]

What tool there thinks it's OK to stretch all the SD 4:3 programs to 16:9.

To me, distorting the picture is the same thing as taking mono audio and distorting one channel to make it stereo.

I saw "Slumdog Millionaire" and the subtitles were often partly off the screen. I couldn't even see them. I have only old TVs because they were cheaper, but why couldn't the station have letterboxed them?...

Really? We get that complaint from viewers about FOX sports graphics. If the image were letterboxed for your out of date TV, it would be postage stamped (black bars on top, bottom, left and right) for viewers with up to date TVs, capable of seeing the entire 16x9 picture with no black bars anywhere. Your digital converter box should give you the option of display appearance on your TV. Your converter box should make it letterboxed for you.

It does, but that would require a much better antenna than I have now. Sorry, I didn't make this clear. The cable company is sending it out this way.

I have a pair of rabbit ears in my attic. i can pull in the local stations about 30 miles away.

Doesn't your cable box have a menu for sending a letterbox picture to a 4:3 TV? If you only have access to the analog channels this wouldn't work. Some cable systems still send out analog signals (4:3) on the lower channels. Look up in the 900s and above for the digital channels (16:9).

I have the very basic cable service and everything is analog. There is no box. The wire plugs into the back of the TV just like the one that used to come from the antenna.

You're living in a digital world. TV broadcasts a 16:9 picture now. And it's in color, too.

I live in the world I want to live in.

If you have the money, I suppose you can live in that world too. I do not, and I live in the world where TV looks like it always did.