Watched my first Hallmark movie - Candace Cameron Bure Discussion

[–] jonathan_k80 (6436) 2 years ago

I remember Hallmark's lame "Christmas in July" movies. Now they appear to be showing them year-round. I only know this because I've seen the channel listings; I wouldn't even consider watching a Christmas movie outside of December. It cheapens the experience of what should be a special time of year.

Who wants to see a Christmas movie in the middle of the miserable summer heat? I would like to know why they now feel the need to be airing this stuff all year long.

reply

[–] blue1981 (6459) 2 years ago

I’ll occasionally put on Christmas movies in the middle of the summer. Why? It can be a fun escape when the heat gets miserable and uncomfortable.

reply

[–] jonathan_k80 (6436) 2 years ago

That's like inviting a person who is on a diet to a banquet. They can look at the food but can't have it.

Christmas should be a special time of year. Don't trivialize it with this "Christmas in July" nonsense.

reply

[–] legnadibrom (5719) 2 years ago

jonathon, your mother is calling you for dinner and you need to wash your hands before sitting at the table

reply

[–] whoanelly (1558) 2 years ago

It’s a commercial/promotional strategy.

Hallmark Channel shows xmas movies in July as part of their annual “Christmas in July” promotion. That’s when the Hallmark stores introduce all the latest Hallmark ornaments— the new releases for the year.

reply

[–] jonathan_k80 (6436) 2 years ago

Of course. It's all about money, not Christmas.

reply

[–] whoanelly (1558) 2 years ago

Pretty much.

reply

[–] cyguration (3844) 2 years ago

Careful, some of their Christmas films have been infiltrated with the alphabet soup degeneracy.

reply

[–] blue1981 (6459) 2 years ago

I’ve seen the news that some of the movies they make have been infiltrated by the moral degeneracy of the left and Alphabet brigade. Since they make so many of these movies the bad ones can be easily ignored.

reply

[–] sslssg (27771) 2 years ago

OMG!!! Out of the 80+ movies they've made in the last 2 years, I've seen 2 that have had LGBTQ+ secondary characters!!! Someone call Santa!! Christmas is ruined!!!

reply

[–] blue1981 (6459) 2 years ago

Then put up on the gay channels where they belong.

reply

[–] sslssg (27771) 2 years ago

Yeah, nah. Sorry to tell you but LGBtQ+ people don't exist in a vacuum. One or two movies as secondary characters is hardly over representation. Perhaps you would like an all white/straight channel instead, and the rest of us can watch stories that actually represent the world in which we live.

reply

[–] blue1981 (6459) 2 years ago

We absolutely need such a channel since the left has a pure hatred of our existence.

reply

[–] sslssg (27771) 2 years ago

Oh please.

Yes, there are some on the far left who are extreme. Guess what, same thing on the right. Stop making an enemy of everyone who would like to be included, and maybe just include them? Ask yourself why it's so threatening to your existence to have a gay couple in a Christmas movie?

reply

[–] cyguration (3844) 2 years ago

Because Logo TV and Pink TV exist so people who want to see that stuff can watch it there.

Hallmark has traditionally been a straight, white, Christian-oriented channel and that's precisely who the majority of their audience is.

reply

[–] sslssg (27771) 2 years ago

Traditions change. Also, gay people just don't watch gay tv. By that logic, there's BET so why should there be a single black person on any show outside of that network?

Look if Hallmark had gay couples in every movie I'd agree with you. But seriously, I'm not up to date, but 1 out of 40 last year, and there are 41 new movies this year, and I've seen again 1. That's 2.5% of their movies.

There is no sex in Hallmark movies, so it's not like they are showing anything shocking. These Hallmark movies are available not just in the US, but in a lot of countries. Why would any business want to alienate viewers? The movies with slight diversity and deviation from the typical formulas seem to be some of the highest rated ones.

Now I realize that there are non white people in Hallmark movies, but your straight, white, christian-oriented are still the majority.

reply

[–] strntz (10836) 2 years ago

White? LOL, my wife lives on that channel, and she's most decidedly *not* white.

It's true that most of their movies have white-centric stories with black characters in secondary roles, but this is changing.

reply

[–] cyguration (3844) 2 years ago

It's true that most of their movies have white-centric stories with black characters in secondary roles, but this is changing.

But WHY does every channel have to cater itself to a minority of its viewership? Literally, you have Lifetime, ABC, NBC, BET, Telemundo, and EVERY single other channel out there that caters to your whims, why can't just ONE channel stay traditional that represents the MAJORITY of America?

It's bizarre to me that people want to invade, corrupt, and disassemble everything that doesn't cater 100% to them.

reply

[–] strntz (10836) 2 years ago

But WHY does every channel have to cater itself to a minority of its viewership?

That's a different issue, one that I'm not in favor of.

For instance, my wife's favorite show is Dancing With the Stars. The past host Tom Bergeron was a fan favorite and was perfect. He was charming and witty. He was summarily dismissed because they replaced him with a woman (1) of color (2). If she was also a transgender, they could have hit the trifecta. Another was State Farm's replacement of "Jake" with a black actor. Why not create a new character? Swapping out white Jake for black Jake is offensive. Imagine if the situation was reversed?

reply

[–] cyguration (3844) 2 years ago

It's funny because I don't like Dancing With The Stars but even I liked Tom Bergeron. He had a very inviting persona, and made the show feel... dare I say it... welcoming. His energy, persona, and even his gait matched the show... and again, I don't even like or watch Dancing With The Stars.

I only briefly heard about his replacement but I never even understood why?

If she was also a transgender, they could have hit the trifecta.

Give it a couple of seasons and they'll find a way to squeeze one of them in there.

reply

[–] strntz (10836) 2 years ago

It's funny because I don't like Dancing With The Stars but even I liked Tom Bergeron.

I only watch it because my wife likes it, and God knows how many stupid action or puerile comedies she's had to sit through when I'm watching. It's the least I can do really. Full disclosure: I did not watch this past series because they had a lesbian (no problem) dance with another woman (problem). I have no problem with gays and support gay marriage, but I just don't want to see two women or two men dance. It's my choice. I'll watch next season unless they get more weird.

Bergeron had a great wit that was not scripted. He often picked on stodgy Len and would say funny things based on what Len said or did. He was a natural talent. Tyra Banks, as much as I liked her in the past, is over her head.

reply

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

I'm a straight, white Christian and I love that Hallmark is incorporating more diversity and adding more gay characters.

reply

[–] cyguration (3844) 2 years ago

Why not just watch the gay channel for gay stories, then?

They make up 1.6% of the population, and majority of people do not want to see that kind of content invading their favorite viewing habits. That's not to mention they're over-represented and showcased on literally every single other channel.

I say leave a normal channel for normal people who don't want to see that, especially since they've overtaken every other cable and national network station.

reply

[–] sslssg (27771) 2 years ago

Here's the thing. Just because a movie has a secondary character who is gay, it doesn't make it a "gay" story. What if people just want to watch Christmas movies, but to see different people and different stories within those Christmas movies? Why should a movie which has 2 characters in it, who don't fit the white, Christian, demographic have to be on a channel that is separate?

I don't know where you live, and I don't know what your experiences are, but I live in a place which has many different people. I mean, thinking that we should each have our own tv channel is really like saying we should all have our own neighbourhoods and never intermingle.

Also, it's over 5% not 1%

reply

[–] cyguration (3844) 2 years ago

Why should a movie which has 2 characters in it, who don't fit the white, Christian, demographic have to be on a channel that is separate?

Because that's exactly what those other channels are for, in which case there isn't ONE channel out there that doesn't cater to those kind of people.

I mean, thinking that we should each have our own tv channel is really like saying we should all have our own neighbourhoods and never intermingle.

I'm completely fine with that. If I don't want to be around people who persists in committing the most heinous crimes then it's my choice, just like if I don't want to watch programming containing degeneracy, it should also be my choice.

It's funny that people who want wholesome content have nowhere to go for it, but you can literally find Left-wing propaganda on EVERY single national and cable channel out there. It's also funny that you're literally defending the coercion of media entertainment choices down to no choices at all; you're okay with forcing people who don't want to see that kind to see that kind of stuff.

Also, it's over 5% not 1%

From the CDC...

https://archive.md/LaRQy

Per Time Magazine...
"1.6% of adults aged 18 or over identified as gay, while another 0.7% identified as bisexual."

reply

[–] sslssg (27771) 2 years ago

That was from 2013.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/329708/lgbt-identification-rises-latest-estimate.aspx

https://www.statista.com/topics/1249/homosexuality/#dossierKeyfigures

I'm completely fine with that. If I don't want to be around people who persists in committing the most heinous crimes then it's my choice, just like if I don't want to watch programming containing degeneracy, it should also be my choice.

Yeah, you've lost me. If you can show me the hatred in these Hallmark movies, please do. Also note, that homosexuality doesn't have a political affiliation. There are gay people all over the spectrum. I've also pointed out, that the majority of Hallmark movies are straight, cis, white christian led which is not the reality of the population of the earth. So if I'm defending anything, it's just that I like to see realistic representation in the shows I watch. I'm not forcing anything. Again, if 1 out of 40 movies is forcing you to do something you don't want to do, I don't know what to tell you. You want something just for you, and Hallmark thinks that that isn't as profitable as including some other people who might consider shopping at their stores or getting their channel. Yay for capitalism?

reply

[–] cyguration (3844) 2 years ago

That was from 2013.

From your own Gallup article.... "1.4% as gay, 0.7% as lesbian and 0.6% as transgender."

So there's been a 0.2% drop in gays from 2013 to 2020. Technically, using my figures would have benefited your point more than using the latest poll results you linked to. 😂

I've also pointed out, that the majority of Hallmark movies are straight, cis, white christian led which is not the reality of the population of the earth.

But that is the majority of America, and Hallmark's focus is on American audiences, not the population of the Earth, just like 99% of China's mainland television programming is focused on *gasp* stories centered around the Chinese.

So if I'm defending anything, it's just that I like to see realistic representation in the shows I watch

Okay, then that means we should be seeing at most, only 12 - 13 black people for every 100 white people in Hallmark shows. Which means, two or three for every 10 whites.

We should also be seeing only one and a half gays/lesbians for every 100 normal couples within their programming, not one out of 40, which would be DOUBLE the real life demographics of gays in America. In fact, there appears to be more gays on television than Asians, even though Asians in America are three times the size of the gay/lesbian population.

reply

[–] sslssg (27771) 2 years ago

Where do you live? And I don't mean an address, I'm just curious because different cities have different demographics, as well as different countries, because again, Hallmark films are shown all over the world.

This commercial sums up Christmas in my neighbourhood, so I'm usually pretty happy when I see someone of Indian decent in Hallmark movie like Mingle all the Way, and having Raymond Ablack in Boyfriends of Christmas Past. Now I do consider India part of Asia, so there you are with some Asian representation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVhWn5rjjB4

If you also looked at the gallop poll Millennials identify 9.1% LGBTQ, and they are most network's target audiences.

reply

[–] cyguration (3844) 2 years ago

Where do you live? And I don't mean an address, I'm just curious because different cities have different demographics, as well as different countries, because again, Hallmark films are shown all over the world.

Suburbs. Majority white. There are smaller, poorer pockets where other minorities live.

If you also looked at the gallop poll Millennials identify 9.1% LGBTQ, and they are most network's target audiences.

LOL... Millennials are hopeless. Also, Hallmark's demographic veers 70% in the 50+ age bracket of the white female variety:
https://www.nationalmediaspots.com/network-demographics/Hallmark.pdf

Their highest rated and most watched content are those featuring straight-white couples who find romance:
http://www.thefutoncritic.com/ratings/2011/11/22/a-record-89-million-viewers-tune-in-and-celebrate-the-holiday-traditions-with-hallmark-channels-trio-of-new-original-christmas-movies-916220/20111122hallmark01/

https://www.thrillist.com/entertainment/nation/best-hallmark-channel-christmas-movies

reply

[–] sslssg (27771) 2 years ago

The first list is from 10 years ago and the second is from 2018. Hallmark has just started to diversify.

This is from 2019
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanberr/2019/01/11/widely-mocked-hallmarks-christmas-movies-are-hugely-popular/?sh=472f3ce55ca8

According to Crown Media, the parent of Hallmark and its sister network Hallmark Movies & Mysteries, the network attracted more female viewers (aged 18 to 49 and 25 to 54) than any other cable network during the fourth quarter. Furthermore, Hallmark’s Countdown to Christmas slate of holiday movies delivered more households and female viewers than ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox on Saturday nights in the 8 p.m. to 10 p.m. time slot during its nine-week run. The movies attracted an average audience of 3.5 million viewers and 641,000 women aged 25 to 54, the target demographic.

reply

[–] cyguration (3844) 2 years ago

Target demographic doesn't mean majority demographic. Those are two completely different metrics.

For instance, pro-wrestling's target demographic are 18 - 34 males, but that's one of the least tuned-in demographics for the content.

reply

[–] sslssg (27771) 2 years ago

This is from 2017

The kick-off for Countdown to Christmas drew 17.6 million viewers this year — up from 15.2 million in 2016. According to AdWeek, this November Hallmark was the most-watched cable network among 18- to 49-year-old and 25- to 54-year-old women.

Those viewers translate into a lot of advertising revenue. Christmas programming from Hallmark’s Countdown to Christmas and Hallmark Movies and Mysteries account for one-third of the company’s annual ad revenue.

https://www.marketplace.org/2017/12/27/christmas-movies-netflix-hallmark-channel-prince-numbers/

reply

[–] sslssg (27771) 2 years ago

Target demographic doesn't mean majority demographic. Those are two completely different metrics.

Yeah, I know that. I've also mentioned that they are trying to bring in new viewers. It's a company. Companies like to make money. The number of viewers that they would lose compared to what they would gain seems to be worth the risk to them.

I don't care if you watch or not. I like the diversity. I don't want to just see the same old. I also don't want to watch another network with all the same programming like a black channel or a gay channel. I like my Hallmark Christmas movies to have a variety of stories and characters. I don't think I'm the only one if the numbers are growing each year.

reply

[–] cyguration (3844) 2 years ago

The number of viewers that they would lose compared to what they would gain seems to be worth the risk to them.

But there are more non-gay white millennials than pro-gay minority millennials, so even that doesn't really hold up to scrutiny if we're talking about market share penetration, because they're targeting a much smaller and more controversial demographic with a smaller spending cap.

This is from 2017

Right, and the real tell will be what the final figures for 2021 are now that they've shown their true colors. 2017 is back from before they started to abandoned their core demographic, so those figures fit more in line with my point than yours since they didn't start with the "diverse" stuff until 2020.

I don't want to just see the same old. [...] I don't think I'm the only one if the numbers are growing each year.

They were growing. We'll see if that trajectory maintains, given their cancellation of some key programming and some viewers tuning out due to the gay storylines in some shows, we'll see if that growth persists when the 2021 figures become available.

reply

[–] SandyR (7355) 2 years ago

[deleted]

[–] SandyR (7355) a year ago

There must be a big market for these movies. There's multiple Hallmark channels that run them nonstop. It makes me think there's still people in entertainment willing to make movies that don't insult flyover country.

reply