Alexis on "Lost"
David Milligan
"Lost" .... Janna Austen (1 episode, 2010)
- LA X: Part 2 (2010) TV episode .... Janna Austen
No other details right now. Unless it conflicts with something that
I'm already watching, I guess I'll tune in.
--
David E. Milligan
http://daviderl31.blogspot.com/
Rob Jensen
<david...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0088127/
>
>"Lost" .... Janna Austen (1 episode, 2010)
> - LA X: Part 2 (2010) TV episode .... Janna Austen
>
> No other details right now. Unless it conflicts with something that
>I'm already watching, I guess I'll tune in.
Oh, geez. She looks absolutely *nothing* like Evangeline Lilly. But
then again, Robin Weigert looks absolutely nothing like Elizabeth
Mitchell and the show miscast Weigert as Mitchell's sister. (rolls
eyes).
-- Rob
PS: Mind you, I'm starting to watch Deadwood and I lurve Weigert as
Calamity Jane.
Your Name
"David Milligan" <david...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:hdemj7$9hn$2...@news.eternal-september.org...
> http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0088127/
>
> "Lost" .... Janna Austen (1 episode, 2010)
> - LA X: Part 2 (2010) TV episode .... Janna Austen
>
> No other details right now. Unless it conflicts with something
that
> I'm already watching, I guess I'll tune in.
Unfortunately Lost isn't really a show you can tune in for only a couple of
episodes or tune int late for. Lost is one huge on-going storyline, one
that's becoming increasingly boring, strange, and silly as the seasons
continue.
Cory
> http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0088127/
>
> "Lost" .... Janna Austen (1 episode, 2010)
> - LA X: Part 2 (2010) TV episode .... Janna Austen
>
> No other details right now. Unless it conflicts with something that
> I'm already watching, I guess I'll tune in.
How in the hell can someone be in only ONE episode of Lost??? That is
total nonsense, given that the story happens entirely ON AN ISLAND...
and do not even THINK of getting me started on all of the OTHER
stupidity that is associated with that stupid-ass show (LOST, *not*
Gilmore Girls, for the clueless).
--- Cory
Rob Jensen
wrote:
According to Ausiello last night, IMDB's listing is not true.
-- Rob
Your Name
"Cory" <my_whe...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:ZcOKm.29747$Xf2....@newsfe12.iad...
If you actually watched even one episode of the show after the pilot you'd
know that Lost has flashbacks and flashforwards that take place not on the
island and with some new characters who are never actually on the island.
Watch a few more episodes you'd know that the "Others" and the people in
1977 (where some of the characters have travelled back in time to) can
actually come and go from the island using a submarine (until Lock blew it
up in about 2008).
Lost may not be a very good show any more and fast became boring, slow, and
silly (thanks to resorting to sci-fi answers), but you're the one who is
clueless.
David Milligan
"Your Name" <your...@isp.com> wrote in message
news:hdhp22$22j$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
on the show, but I'd only watched to see AB, not because I have any interest
in the show itself.
Rob Jensen
<david...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Not that it matters now since apparently she's NOT going to be
>on the show, but I'd only watched to see AB, not because I have any interest
>in the show itself.
I think that you should reconsider the show and start watching the
DVDs from the beginning.
-- Rob
Your Name
"Rob Jensen" <Shut...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:pbsuf59m34l4m4tnp...@4ax.com...
Yep, but stop at the end of season 3 ... it's all down hill from there with
silly scifi answers like time travel. :-(
David Milligan
It's one of those shows that aired when I was already watching
something on another channel, and my (ancient) VCR won't change channels.
While work is slow and the paycheck is small, spending any extra $$ is put
on hold. Maybe one day when they are all but giving them away I will see
about buying the DVDs.
Rob Jensen
<david...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>"Rob Jensen" <Shut...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:pbsuf59m34l4m4tnp...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 18:21:17 -0500, "David Milligan"
>> <david...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Not that it matters now since apparently she's NOT going to be
>>>on the show, but I'd only watched to see AB, not because I have any
>>>interest
>>>in the show itself.
>>
>> I think that you should reconsider the show and start watching the
>> DVDs from the beginning.
>>
>> -- Rob
>
> It's one of those shows that aired when I was already watching
>something on another channel, and my (ancient) VCR won't change channels.
>While work is slow and the paycheck is small, spending any extra $$ is put
>on hold. Maybe one day when they are all but giving them away I will see
>about buying the DVDs.
You clearly don't go to stores that sell used CDs or to Amazon 'cause
that day be here.
-- Rob
Nick Knight
> On Sun, 15 Nov 2009 06:49:01 -0500, "David Milligan"
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >"Rob Jensen" <ShutUp...@aol.com> wrote in message
> >news:pbsuf59m34l4m4tnp...@4ax.com...
> >> On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 18:21:17 -0500, "David Milligan"
> >> <davider...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>> Not that it matters now since apparently she's NOT going to be
> >>>on the show, but I'd only watched to see AB, not because I have any
> >>>interest
> >>>in the show itself.
>
> >> I think that you should reconsider the show and start watching the
> >> DVDs from the beginning.
>
> >> -- Rob
>
> > It's one of those shows that aired when I was already watching
> >something on another channel, and my (ancient) VCR won't change channels.
> >While work is slow and the paycheck is small, spending any extra $$ is put
> >on hold. Maybe one day when they are all but giving them away I will see
> >about buying the DVDs.
>
> You clearly don't go to stores that sell used CDs or to Amazon 'cause
> that day be here.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
What rock are you living under Mr. Jenson? Around here they still
charge
an arm and two legs for those DVDs not to mention the sales tax was
just increased.
$53.99 for a dvd set that costs the studio 25 cents per dvd.
(there is what 5 dvds in a season?)_
I'll think about the DVDs when the cost comes down alot.
Your Name
"Nick Knight" <nickkni...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f82edb5c-b419-44a3...@p8g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
>
> What rock are you living under Mr. Jenson? Around here they still
> charge an arm and two legs for those DVDs not to mention the
> sales tax was just increased.
>
> http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_7_13?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-
> keywords=gilmore+girls+season+4&sprefix=Gilmore+Girls
>
> $53.99 for a dvd set that costs the studio 25 cents per dvd.
> (there is what 5 dvds in a season?)_
>
> I'll think about the DVDs when the cost comes down alot.
He was talking about the DVDs for the show "Lost", not Gilmore Girls. :-)
Rob Jensen
wrote:
>
>"Nick Knight" <nickkni...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:f82edb5c-b419-44a3...@p8g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> What rock are you living under Mr. Jenson? Around here they still
>> charge an arm and two legs for those DVDs not to mention the
>> sales tax was just increased.
>>
>> http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_7_13?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-
>> keywords=gilmore+girls+season+4&sprefix=Gilmore+Girls
>>
>> $53.99 for a dvd set that costs the studio 25 cents per dvd.
>> (there is what 5 dvds in a season?)_
Studio *manufacturing* costs for DVDs are 25 cents, but that's only if
you completely ignore the costs of actually making the episodes of the
given show. Many hit shows, including those on The CW/WB/UPN -- and
ESPECIALLY __ hour long shows __ , don't syndicate well, so the
studios don't make their money back on syndication alone (or even
mostly). In the cases of SF shows like Lost and dramedies *like* Gg
(although not Gg because, well, Gg was an unexpected phenomenon in
repeats on ABC Family), the production costs of the actual episodes
are by necessity being covered by DVD sales.
>> I'll think about the DVDs when the cost comes down alot.
>
>He was talking about the DVDs for the show "Lost", not Gilmore Girls. :-)
>
I was talking about DVDs period. If you can't find 'em for
significantly lower than even what Best Buy sells 'em for, you aren't
looking hard enough.
-- Rob