1)CHEYENNE- The Argonauts (TV Episode- 1955).
-
pt100 — 11 years ago(January 15, 2015 11:04 PM)
Wow, what a gratuitous poke. What's wrong with mentioning that one is a baby boomer? After all, Taylor's first screen credit was in the early 1950s when we baby boomers were starting out. So we sort of grew up on him and saw his career from at or near its beginning.
It is better to be kind than to be clever or good looking. Derek -
pt100 — 11 years ago(January 16, 2015 01:46 AM)
You still haven't explained why someone shouldn't identify oneself as a baby boomer. There's nothing wrong with doing so. It doesn't have to have anything to do with recalling one's earliest memories of Taylor. Someone else could just as well have said, "I'm a gen Xer, and I my earliest memories of Taylor were in the '70s." It gives us some idea of the poster's age, which some may find to be a helpful or interesting context.
It is better to be kind than to be clever or good looking. Derek -
hobnob53 — 11 years ago(January 21, 2015 09:34 PM)
Oh, wow, MEQ!
First, I really don't see anything wrong with the OP identifying himself as a boomer. As pt100 said, it gives him some context, that's all. It's not a judgment that boomers are somehow better, or the only ones who can appreciate Rod Taylor. But we were the ones who grew up with him, and I find that is rather a bit different than liking someone you know largely from the past, since I have experienced both. Ease up a bit, my friend. You're seeing offense where none was given or, I'm sure, intended.
I'm glad to be of Generation X. At least my generation isn't impossible to please.
I trust that
was intended to indicate that that statement was a joke, because Xers are notoriously hard to please and think the world owes them something even more than us boomers did! (The generation after them is even worse.)
As to
I also have the advantage of enjoying all those older films while enjoying the freedoms which women didn't have before about 1980 or so.
Really, I'd like to know what freedoms women lacked before the magical year of 1980 (or so). I'm not talking about certain forms of discrimination that existed and still exist, which is a different thing. But I can assure you that while there were many issues about how women were often treated in olden (pre-1980) times, women had pretty much all the freedoms then they have today. And the sexist mindset that has always been a part of the human condition had already changed considerably from what it had been years before. But even the 40s, 50s and 60s weren't exactly the dark ages.
I really think you're the only one with a generational problem here! (And you know how I mean that.) -
hobnob53 — 11 years ago(January 23, 2015 06:25 PM)
MEQ, my good friend, just a few rejoinders
(1) You may have had problems with some other people on some other boards regarding generation wars or differences or whatever. Of course anyone can discuss something not of their own generation, and people who say otherwise, or act with some form of hostility toward you for such a stupid reason, are idiots.
That said, neither the OP nor anyone else sought to make this thread exclusive to boomers, nor did anyone attack you, condescend to you, or tell you your views are uninformed, unintelligent, or unwelcome. I think you've been so angered or wounded by some previous bad experiences that you've now generalized
any
mention of a generation as inherently negative and are automatically primed to jump on such mention as an insult, a challenge to your own rights or intelligence or the validity of any observations you might make. However, there is simply nothing on this thread that gives any reason for such a reaction. On the contrary, it was you who introduced the discordant note, challenging the OP because he did nothing more than say that as a baby boomer he liked Rod Taylor because he grew up watching him. No one said your opinions didn't count, were dumb, or irrelevant, or that not having grown up with him your views were somehow less informed. No one brought up any "disqualifying" opinion at all. Yet you immediately took offense and went on the attack, in a most
defensive
way, lashing out at something that no one had said or inferred.
Sorry, but this is the truth. In your own words,
"We are watching classics. That's all that matters."
Quite so. No need, therefore, to jump in making unfounded accusations about things never said.
(2) All the aspects of women's struggles you raise are valid but have to do with
discrimination
, not "freedoms". Many people have freedoms that they may not be able to exercise to the full due to discrimination. But there is a difference. In any case, it's not germane (as it were) to this topic. I guarantee you that while you may enjoy being able to watch old movies and have "freedoms" supposedly not enjoyed by women who saw those films when they were new, the one has nothing to do with the other. I doubt that in, say, 1945 any woman (or black man, or anyone else who was the victim of discrimination) watched a film while thinking, "I don't have any freedoms outside this theater" or that, conversely, any such person watches that same film 70 years later while thinking, "How lucky I am to have freedoms people didn't have when this movie was made." Accuracy or applicability aside, it's an irrelevant observation.
I know there are a lot of stupid people who make stupid comments on IMDb. I'm sure you've had your share, perhaps particularly about generational issues. Even so, it clearly sounds as if you are too prone to see
any
mention of a generation as somehow hostile or negative, and to react accordingly and unfortunately. I suspect this is in fact seldom so, and it's certainly not so in this thread.
And as I said before, I think there
is
a difference in watching someone whose career develops as you're growing up (as with Rod Taylor and the baby boom generation), vs. seeing most of it in retrospect. I'm sure I do not have the same experience, feel the same things in quite the same way, about, say, Errol Flynn, as did people who grew up watching him as his career developed in the 30s, 40s and 50s, vs. coming across him afterward as I did. Like music: we always prefer the stuff we grew up with and have a special affinity for it. This doesn't mean people of a later generation (or an earlier one) can't appreciate it too, or that we can't appreciate other kinds of music, but there is a difference if you grew up with something.
Love and peace, respect and regards. -
hobnob53 — 11 years ago(January 26, 2015 11:06 PM)
You know, MEQ, I consider you a friend, but your last post really really angered me.
Nothing I have said can justify the comments you made above. You react with fury and resentment at the statement:
"There is a difference if you grew up with something."
Why? Of course there is a difference. To say otherwise is foolish and preposterous. It holds true of everyone, because it has directly to do with each person's life experiences.
I have read a great deal about the American Revolution. Does that give me the same experiences as someone who lived through it? I offered the example of Errol Flynn, who lived almost all his life and career before I was born (and what little overlap there was was irrelevant, since I knew nothing of him until well after his death). I cannot claim to have had the same experience of him, or see him in precisely the same way, as people who grew up watching him and his career develop (and wane). It doesn't mean my opinions are uninformed, worthless or invalid. Why is this notion so insulting to you?
This has nothing to do with anyone's ability to appreciate, like, discuss, enjoy, or become expert on, the work of any actor, director or whatnot, or any film. It certainly doesn't mean you're somehow disqualified from discussing them, much less appreciating them. If that were the case, few people on IMDb would be qualified to discuss very much.
Put another way.classic fans my age and younger will always be seen as "outsiders" when it comes to the wonderful world of older movies. No matter how many of those films we see and how well we discuss them, it will never be enough to most older viewers because we didn't grow up with those films.
No, that's the way
you
put it. As I said16d0, you seem to take automatic, unthinking and purely reactive umbrage at anything that strikes you as someone trying to demean you or elbow you out of a discussion on alleged "generational" grounds. This is even more evident here, where
nowhere
did the OP or anyone else say or even infer anything against you, your participation in the discussion, or your viewswhich, as far as Rod Taylor goes, were almost non-existent, so preoccupied have you been with attacking people over a fake issue no one had raised even subliminally. On the contrary, it was you who offensively raised this "us vs. me" issue and started in about it. No one else said a thing.
As for the following statement which you made: "we always prefer the stuff we grew up with and have a special affinity for it".as a matter of fact, I'm no fan of most 1980s music/movies/TV shows. I'll speak for myself regarding my tastes and how they compare to what I grew up with, thanks. I don't need to be told about my "special affinity". I'll tell you about my interests, not the other way around.
Don't you start telling
me
a goddamned thing until you bloody well apologize for that statement. All
all
I said was a
generalized
statement that people prefer the stuff they grew up with. Okay, maybe I should have said "
most
people
tend to
prefer". Big deal. I wasn't trying to speak about you, interpret you, or
tell
you anything about yourself. That's an asinine and almost paranoid statement. It was, as any rational person could see, a perfectly inoffensive and general statement and nothing whatsoever, at all, in no way, shape or form, negative, nasty or accusatory, let alone personal about you. Nothing to do with you at all.
As for your remarks about what music you like and what you plan to listen to when done with your post, I'm sure such things are your preferences, but the defensiveness about them in this context is painfully obvious.
You really need to dial it back and stop imagining things that aren't there. Your totally unwarranted and inexcusable aggression about something
nobody
said is baffling, and telling. You seem to be looking for opportunities to lash out at people who are supposedly telling you that your opinions about things made before you were born are worthless and unwelcome, even when no one said any such thing.
All the OP, and everyone else on this thread, talked about was his earliest memories, as a baby boomer, about Rod Taylor. Neither he nor anyone said that their views were better, more informed, the only ones that counted, or that no non-boomer could have any valid or informed opinions.
And no one said anything even remotely critical about you or your opinions at all.
NOTHING. Out of nowhere you abruptly injected this defensive-aggressive nonsense about how your views were just as good as boomers'. NO ONE SAID THEY WEREN'T. NO ONE TOLD YOU YOU WEREN'T WELCOME. NO ONE CRITICIZED NON-BOOMERS. NO ONE CRITICIZED YOUR OPINIONS. Yet once again you see insult where none exists, and just had to start attacking others for things they never said. It seems you were just looking for an excuse to engage in more of these phony generational arguments, and if no one was going to say anything negative or insulting about you, you'll jum -
clore_2 — 11 years ago(January 27, 2015 02:40 PM)
I remember going to see
The Time Machine
on the day after Thanksgiving in 1960. I already knew of him as
Hong Kong
had been airing for about two months at that point. Seeing TV stars on the big screen was relatively new to me then - I was only nine and I guess that
Yellowstone Kelly
was my only other example at the time.
I remember that one Wednesday in February, 1961, as
Hong Kong
was about to start, there was a promo lasting about one minute and featuring Taylor. He said somethng along the lines of "Ok, before you change the channel, please listen. We hear a lot of excuses from people about why they don't watch our show, they like the show on the other channel, they have to take their dog for a walk We just want to mention that tonight, just for you, we're running another episode at 10pm/9 Central time, so you may want to give us an hour and maybe you'll come back next week at our regular time."
I'm paraphrasing, as this only aired once and the other show he was referring to had to be
Wagon Train
which was in the top five and airing on NBC, handily beating ABC and CBS. But it was such an endearing little bit, mostly because of Taylor's delivery and it showed that ABC was trying to salvage the program.
It ain't easy being green, or anything else, other5b4 than to be me -
clore_2 — 11 years ago(January 29, 2015 02:24 PM)
I watched a few
Hong Kong
episodes about a year ago, it holds up well, very nice production values and Taylor had everything one could want as a series lead. He had the looks, the build and he was charming.b68 He was the kind that back then, a kid wanted to grow up to be.
I barely remember
Men Into Space
but that may be because my sister preferred to watch Ricky Nelson at that hour. There were three of us, so in order to be fair, my mother assigned nights in which each one had control of the TV and we had to "trade" if we wanted to see something on each other's assigned night.
I guess I had nothing on my nights worth trading for that season or else I wasn't giving it up. I had Friday for example, and there was no way I'd give up my weekly does of
77 Sunset Strip
.
We each had two nights and my mother was satisfied with just Sunday as that was the night that
Maverick
aired and that was her favorite show at the time. She just preferred the humorous episodes to the serious ones.
It ain't easy being green, or anything else, other than to be me -
telegonus — 11 years ago(February 13, 2015 07:59 PM)
I remenber
Men Into Space
well, but not the specifics, the plots, just the ambiance, the boundless, bubbling optimism, sort of
Star Trek
for grade school kids. It was my introduction to William Lundigan, whom I got reacquainted with later on, on the later afternoon airing of the Warners murder mystery
The Case Of the Black Parrot
; and then came
Underwater City
, in the theater. I thought at the time that he'd been a bigger star than he ever really was, especially as I'd see his name in leading roles in major films, which I often chose
not
to watch, such as
I'd Climb the Highest Mountain
. The title kept me away, but it was Bill Lundigan, and an A picture from Fox, 1951, on
Saturday Night At the Movies
. -
ecarle — 11 years ago(January 31, 2015 03:00 PM)
While I enjoy the generational debate here, I think the point to talking about seeing these Rod Taylor performances as a Baby Boomer means you/we saw them in their ORIGINAL broadcasts or theatrical releases.
And that's a different memory than you will get if you see The Time Machine for the first time in 2015.
I use this example:
I saw "Bullitt" in 1968 during Christmas season after waiting on line for over an hour. Full house, giant palace theater, and EVERYBODY yelling and cheering during the car chase. Plus all the "outside the theater" feelings of 1968a dark political year(assassinations, riots, Vietnam) made just a bit more survivable watching Bullitt(a supercool Steve McQueen at his best) chase the bad guys all over San Francisco.
Today, you can put "Bullitt" in the DVD player and you will see the same movie we saw in 1968, but you won't get the same feelings about it, at all.