Sheesh, solex. Get a grip.
Sorry to insert myself into your beef with another comment, but I think you are being weirdly defensive and either wildly overreacting or egregiously misreading what was previously written.
Let us review what was said:
Some cable channels play to people in their 30s/40s. TONS of 80s films are featured everyday on Encore and a handful are on others, but to meet modern day demand, it's mostly newer junk. So in a way both sets of MTV generations get attention.
Let me translate for you. This is a mild-mannered way of saying that the main demographics being served by most cable movie programming are fans of CURRENT films ("modern day demand," "newer junk") and fans of NOSTALGIA programming of films from their youth during the 1980s ("some channels play to people in their 30s/40s").
It is, in my opinion, a pretty obvious observation. Do you notice a lot of movies from the silent era being played on mainstream cable? Or a lot of foreign movies from the '50s and '60s? Probably not.
"Some cable channels play to people in their 30s/40s" is in fact pretty much repeated by you when you write, "Most of the people who grew up with the channel (myself included) and its Canadian equivalent are in their 30's or 40's now; we aren't kids by a long shot." So you agree that you are "not a kid" although you grew up watching MTV but you get all worked up and insulted, somehow, by being included in the grouping of "both sets of MTV generations."
Further, you complain that the previous writer is "
...just calling all teenagers and the previous generation that viewed MTV nasty names," when the only "nasty name" s/he called you/them is "MTV generation." (Get out the smelling salts! I feel faint from such provocative language. How dare someone lump me together with other people who watched MTV! It's filthy and shocking!)
last dvd:
The Best of Mr. Peabody & Sherman (1959)
reply
share