See or Watch a movie on TV
P.T.
watch TV or a TV program". What is the correct verb to use if the TV
program in question is a movie?
e.g. I watched/saw "Gone with the wind" on ABC last night.
Tony Cooper
wrote:
Frankly, I don't think anyone gives a damn which you use. As far as
I'm concerned, they're interchangeable in this context. The only
distinction I would make is that I would say "I went to see a movie"
and not "I went to watch a movie". Once there, though, I either
watched it or saw it.
--
Tony Cooper aka: tony_co...@yahoo.com
Provider of Jots, Tittles, and Oy!s
sand
wrote:
>I understand that the correct usage is to say "to see a movie" and "to
As I understand the usage, to see something means to to be aware of
its existence. To watch something usually infers paying attention to
something over a period of time. Either one could apply to a film but
there is a slightly different implication as to what impression the
film might have made.
Jan Sand
Mark Brader
> I understand that the correct usage is to say "to see a movie" and "to
> watch TV or a TV program".
It's more subtle than that. "See" is correct when considering seeing
the movie or TV show as a single action that you either have done or
have not done, and "watch" is correct when you're considering it as
an extended action that you might be in the middle of.
It happens that "watch" doesn't come up very often with regard to movies
shown in cinemas, because people watching a movie in a cinema are rarely
doing anything else at the same time worth talking about. But if someone
was talking on the phone, for example, you might want them to put it away
and *watch* the movie -- not *see* the movie.
> What is the correct verb to use if the TV program in question is a movie?
As above.
> e.g. I watched/saw "Gone with the wind" on ABC last night.
"I tried to *see* it last night, but while I was *watching* it, the power
went off."
--
Mark Brader "The world little knows or cares the storm through
Toronto which you have had to pass. It asks only if you
m...@vex.net brought the ship safely to port." -- Joseph Conrad
My text in this article is in the public domain.
david56
> On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 15:46:25 -0400, "P.T." <ptno...@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
>>I understand that the correct usage is to say "to see a movie" and "to
>>watch TV or a TV program". What is the correct verb to use if the TV
>>program in question is a movie?
>>
>>e.g. I watched/saw "Gone with the wind" on ABC last night.
>
> Frankly, I don't think anyone gives a damn which you use. As far as
> I'm concerned, they're interchangeable in this context. The only
> distinction I would make is that I would say "I went to see a movie"
> and not "I went to watch a movie". Once there, though, I either
> watched it or saw it.
My grandmother, born 1892, would go into her drawing room in the evening
to "look at" the television. I suppose she grew up without an
appropriate verb and adapted what she did to the wireless: "listen to".
I've just remembered that she always locked the back door when she was
looking at the television. If we found the back door locked we knew
that we had to knock on the drawing room window.
--
David
I say what it occurs to me to say.
=====
The address is valid today, but I will change it to keep ahead of the
spammers.
Don Aitken
<bass.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>Tony Cooper wrote:
>> On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 15:46:25 -0400, "P.T." <ptno...@sympatico.ca>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>I understand that the correct usage is to say "to see a movie" and "to
>>>watch TV or a TV program". What is the correct verb to use if the TV
>>>program in question is a movie?
>>>
>>>e.g. I watched/saw "Gone with the wind" on ABC last night.
>>
>> Frankly, I don't think anyone gives a damn which you use. As far as
>> I'm concerned, they're interchangeable in this context. The only
>> distinction I would make is that I would say "I went to see a movie"
>> and not "I went to watch a movie". Once there, though, I either
>> watched it or saw it.
>
>My grandmother, born 1892, would go into her drawing room in the evening
>to "look at" the television. I suppose she grew up without an
>appropriate verb and adapted what she did to the wireless: "listen to".
>
In the early days of British radio, you "listened in". The audience
were referred to as "listeners-in". This usage (which was standard in
BBC publications) is occasionally found as late as WWII, although most
people were saying "listeners" by then.
--
Don Aitken
Richard R. Hershberger
> P.T. writes:
> > I understand that the correct usage is to say "to see a movie" and "to
> > watch TV or a TV program".
>
> It's more subtle than that. "See" is correct when considering seeing
> the movie or TV show as a single action that you either have done or
> have not done, and "watch" is correct when you're considering it as
> an extended action that you might be in the middle of.
>
> It happens that "watch" doesn't come up very often with regard to movies
> shown in cinemas, because people watching a movie in a cinema are rarely
> doing anything else at the same time worth talking about. But if someone
> was talking on the phone, for example, you might want them to put it away
> and *watch* the movie -- not *see* the movie.
This is a distinction which I very much doubt is widely observed.
Richard Hershberger
Charles Riggs
<bass.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>My grandmother, born 1892, would go into her drawing room in the evening
>to "look at" the television. I suppose she grew up without an
>appropriate verb and adapted what she did to the wireless: "listen to".
Didn't people in pre-TV days often say they planned to "watch" the
radio, or wireless? Look at some old pictures: they actually did
gather around their radios, and watch them.
--
Charles Riggs
Graham Ramsay
Although...
"Did you see that quiz show on the TV last night?"
"No, I watched the film on the other side"
Isn't quite the same as...
"Did you watch that quiz show on the TV last night?"
"No, I saw the film on the other side"
Maybe it depends on who's in charge of the remote?
I would certainly go and see a film at the cinema.
When there, I would watch it.
--
Graham Ramsay
Blairgowrie (UK)
>"Richard R. Hershberger" wrote
Donna Richoux
> That's as I understand it.
> Although...
>
> "Did you see that quiz show on the TV last night?"
> "No, I watched the film on the other side"
The other side of what? This expression is not familiar to me at all.
--
Puzzled -- Donna Richoux
Jacqui
> Graham Ramsay wrote:
>
>> That's as I understand it.
>> Although...
>>
>> "Did you see that quiz show on the TV last night?"
>> "No, I watched the film on the other side"
>
> The other side of what? This expression is not familiar to me at all.
Archaic (as far as TV goes) UK usage. There were two TV channels until
1963, and three channels up to 1982, and for most people the evening
viewing was either ITV or BBC1, BBC2 didn't get all that much of a
look-in. So if you weren't watching the quiz show on BBC1, you were
watching the film on the other side, ITV.
People were quite territorial about this: you were either a BBC family
or an ITV family. Both DH and I come from BBC families, we almost
*never* watched ITV, and yet there's very little reason for that. For
us, BBC2 was "the other side" to BBC1, we never even considered ITV as
an option. Even now I rarely look at the schedules for ITV, it's such
an ingrained habit to ignore it.
Jac
Simon R. Hughes
On the other side of the television (from the days when there were
only two TV channels in Britain).
--
Simon R. Hughes
War is Peace!
Graham Ramsay
> >
> > "Did you see that quiz show on the TV last night?"
> > "No, I watched the film on the other side"
>
> The other side of what? This expression is not familiar to me at all.
Sorry Donna.
Side = channel.
"Can you switch the TV over please?"
"What do you want to watch"
"The news thanks"
"What side is it on"
"BBC1"
I may be showing my age here.
John Dean
Oh, what a shame. There's been this wonderful quiz show 'Who Wants to Be a
Millionaire' - you would have loved it.
--
John Dean
Oxford
De-frag to reply
R F
> Archaic (as far as TV goes) UK usage. There were two TV channels until
> 1963, and three channels up to 1982,
How could the British people have tolerated this?
Okay, I guess a lot of Americans used to have just a few broadcast
channels, but in the New York TV market, back in the day, we had:
Channel 2 WCBS
Channel 4 WNBC
Channel 5 WNEW? (Then independent, now owned by Fox)
Channel 7 WABC
Channel 9 WOR (Secaucus, NJ - then independent, now UPN)
Channel 11 WPIX (Then independent, now WB)
Channel 13 WNET (Public television - Newark NJ)
Plus the fuzzy UHF channels, like Channels 21, 25, 31, whatever. One
of them was the one that showed _Viva Allegre_. Another of them was
showing _Lost in Space_ reruns for a while.
> People were quite territorial about this: you were either a BBC family
> or an ITV family. Both DH and I come from BBC families, we almost
> *never* watched ITV, and yet there's very little reason for that.
So, like, was Monty Python BBC, and Benny Hill ITV? Monty Python was
always shown on public television stations in the US (TTBOMK), along
with other "high-church" British TV programming, like _Masterpiece
Theatre_. But Benny Hill was shown on Channel 9 (WOR) in the New York
market; it wouldn't have been considered acceptable on one of the
network-affiliate stations, let along a public television station.
(Don't try to deny that Benny Hill was British, Simon!)
Robert Bannister
> On Sun, 27 Apr 2003, Jacqui wrote:
>
>
>>Archaic (as far as TV goes) UK usage. There were two TV channels until
>>1963, and three channels up to 1982,
>
>
> How could the British people have tolerated this?
They were much better off. I had a return to this way of life during the
14 years I lived in country Australia: 2 channels - ABC and the
commercial Golden West Network.
When I came to the Big City, there were already 4 channels and now there
are more, but what do you get? There are still the same number of good
programmes shown per week - six at the most - and most frequently they
are on at the same time. How these people with their satellites and 40+
channels manage, I don't know - I expect they still have a choice of
about half a dozen decent programmes a week.
--
Rob Bannister
Laura F Spira
That's interesting: I'm surprised that the distinction persisted into
your generation. Although my parents already owned a TV [1] at the time
of the Coronation [2] we didn't acquire a set that would receive ITV
until well into the 1960s and I missed many programmes that my husband
watched as a youngster. We didn't discover this cultural mismatch until
a visit to the late lamented Museum of the Moving Image where tapes of
old TV shows were played.
[1] It was given to my grandfather in part payment of an outstanding
debt in 1947. As a baby, I was apparently parked in a playpen in front
of the test card. The long-term effect of this remains unclear.
[2] The lucky few who owned TVs invited the neighbours in to view the
broadcast of the event - it was all very exciting.
--
Laura
(emulate St. George for email)
Matti Lamprhey
> On Sun, 27 Apr 2003, Jacqui wrote:
>
> > Archaic (as far as TV goes) UK usage. There were two TV channels
> > until 1963, and three channels up to 1982,
>
> How could the British people have tolerated this?
We borrowed your stiff upper lip, of course. It gets worse: there was
no daytime broadcasting apart from the test-card and short films
repeated daily for reference purposes. (I vaguely recall a film shown
on BBC at around 4pm daily which I believe was of Stourhead Gardens --
does anyone else remember it? This must have been in the late fifties.)
> Okay, I guess a lot of Americans used to have just a few broadcast
> channels, but in the New York TV market, back in the day, we had:
>
> Channel 2 WCBS
> Channel 4 WNBC
> Channel 5 WNEW? (Then independent, now owned by Fox)
> Channel 7 WABC
> Channel 9 WOR (Secaucus, NJ - then independent, now UPN)
> Channel 11 WPIX (Then independent, now WB)
> Channel 13 WNET (Public television - Newark NJ)
>
> Plus the fuzzy UHF channels, like Channels 21, 25, 31, whatever.
"Fuzzy UHF channels"? What were the other ones? Here in Britain, VHF
was the older, lower-definition mode and UHF the new 625-line mode still
used for analogue and now digital broadcasting.
> One of them was the one that showed _Viva Allegre_. Another of them
> was showing _Lost in Space_ reruns for a while.
>
> > People were quite territorial about this: you were either a BBC
> > family or an ITV family. Both DH and I come from BBC families, we
> > almost *never* watched ITV, and yet there's very little reason for
> > that.
>
> So, like, was Monty Python BBC, and Benny Hill ITV? Monty Python was
> always shown on public television stations in the US (TTBOMK), along
> with other "high-church" British TV programming, like _Masterpiece
> Theatre_.
Python was always strictly BBC and remains so.
> ... But Benny Hill was shown on Channel 9 (WOR) in the New York
> market; it wouldn't have been considered acceptable on one of the
> network-affiliate stations, let along a public television station.
> (Don't try to deny that Benny Hill was British, Simon!)
Benny Hill started out on BBC, and was thoroughly excellent. The gags
were mostly based on wordplay[1], and any sauciness was implied rather
than visual. Then he went over to ITV, and -- just as Jacqui says --
thereby became invisible to families like ours. I gather that those
programmes were a bit saucy.
[1] Typical example that I remember: Benny is in Liverpool Docks by a
big sign reading "Mersey Docks and Harbour Board"; he's surreptitously
adding "And Little Lambsy Divey".
Matti
Mike Oliver
> Okay, I guess a lot of Americans used to have just a few broadcast
> channels, but in the New York TV market, back in the day, we had:
>
> Channel 2 WCBS
Does CBS have Channel 2 in every major market except the Bay Area?
In the Bay Area it's KTVU, which I think is now Fox or at least
a Fox affiliate. When I was growing up it was independent, and
at some point got independent-minded enough to show R-rated
films without cutting out the nudity. I don't know whether Fox
put a damper on that or whether they felt the pressure from some
other direction, but regrettably they stopped.
Edward
I think the distinction might be comparable to that between "hear" and
"listen" - in other words, the degree of attention you are paying.
Most of the time I "see" things on TV - i.e. in one eye and out the
other. But if I am "watching", then I put down my book, send my
children out of the room, and remove my earplugs.
Edward
Donna Richoux
> R F wrote:
>
> > Okay, I guess a lot of Americans used to have just a few broadcast
> > channels, but in the New York TV market, back in the day, we had:
> >
> > Channel 2 WCBS
>
>
> Does CBS have Channel 2 in every major market except the Bay Area?
Not at all. Unless you'd like to define "major market" as "one where CBS
is on channel 2."
It wasn't 2 in three big cities I lived in, Phoenix, St. Louis, and
Boston.
Local CBS Affiliates
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/07/31/utility/main517034.shtml
The channel number isn't listed, so you have to open each link --
although sometimes you can spot the number near the end of the URL, like
Boston's:
www.cbsnews.com/forward/www.wbz4.com
I see that it is not 2 in Houston, Seattle, Miami, Denver, and Dallas. I
see that it is 2 in NY, LA, and Chicago.
--
Best -- Donna Richoux
Linz
"Jacqui" <sirlawren...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns936AEABAD62...@163.1.2.7...
> People were quite territorial about this: you were either a BBC family
> or an ITV family. Both DH and I come from BBC families, we almost
> *never* watched ITV, and yet there's very little reason for that. For
> us, BBC2 was "the other side" to BBC1, we never even considered ITV as
> an option. Even now I rarely look at the schedules for ITV, it's such
> an ingrained habit to ignore it.
Yup, this sounds very familiar. Of course, one reason we rarely consider ITV
as an option is that we live between transmitters and listings regions. If
we get the correct Radio Times for the BBC region we can watch, the
prominently listed ITV programmes are for the wrong region so even if we do
find something we'd like to watch on ITV the chances are high that it's not
on in our region.
Phil Carmody
As someone who feels relatively young amongst AUE-ers - no you're not
showing your age at all. In the seventies, when I was a nipper, it was
always "side". Even though there were three channels, to switch sides
was always to "the other side". My parents, of course, grew up with
fewer channels (0 as toddlers), which is where I got the phrase from.
Phil
Ross Howard
<matti-...@totally-official.com> wrote:
>Benny Hill started out on BBC, and was thoroughly excellent. The gags
>were mostly based on wordplay[1], and any sauciness was implied rather
>than visual. Then he went over to ITV, and -- just as Jacqui says --
>thereby became invisible to families like ours. I gather that those
>programmes were a bit saucy.
ITV Benny Hill was in the same vein as Dick "Ooh, you are awful, but I
like you" Emery -- but with lots more bikinis and reeskay doobly
ontawndries. (I have it on very good authority that Dick Emery chose
that stage name because of his lone mission to file the
licence-payer's patience down to the quick.)
The 1970s was a period when I suspect that television programmers on
some course were taught that middle-aged men dressed in drag was
Entertainment. As well as Messrs (or Mmes, if you prefer) Hill and
Emery's laugh-a-minute extravaganzas, no bank holiday was complete
without its Danny La Rue special on BBC and Stanley Baxter special on
ITV.
Now I come to think about it, the dragginess was so pervasive that
even the comediennes on the box looked like middle-aged men in drag
(cf. Hilda "Ooh, look at the time, it's twenty past... I must get a
lickle hand put on this watch" Baker).
Has 'e beeeeen?
Ross Howard
--------------------
(Kick ass for e-mail)
Jacqui
> Jacqui wrote:
>
>> Archaic (as far as TV goes) UK usage. There were two TV channels
>> until 1963, and three channels up to 1982,
>
> How could the British people have tolerated this?
They had other things to do. :) And decent national radio.
>> People were quite territorial about this: you were either a BBC
>> family or an ITV family. Both DH and I come from BBC families, we
>> almost *never* watched ITV, and yet there's very little reason
>> for that.
>
> So, like, was Monty Python BBC, and Benny Hill ITV? Monty Python
> was always shown on public television stations in the US (TTBOMK),
> along with other "high-church" British TV programming, like
> _Masterpiece Theatre_. But Benny Hill was shown on Channel 9
> (WOR) in the New York market; it wouldn't have been considered
> acceptable on one of the network-affiliate stations, let along a
> public television station. (Don't try to deny that Benny Hill was
> British, Simon!)
Yup. The Pythons were "very BBC" (being Oxbridge-educated), Benny Hill
was for the "vulgar masses" on ITV. :-) (Unfortunately that doesn't
explain the popularity of Are You Being Served? which was a BBC show,
but never mind.) The Pythons also had the advantage of having a BBC
"in" because Cleese had been on BBC Radio for some time, and on the
various David Frost shows with the Two Ronnies who were also BBC.
tv.cream.org (no www) might be able to identify the origin of other
British shows you remember, if you want to attempt to formulate a
theory about US showings of UK shows.
Where US imports were shown here: Dallas and Dynasty were both BBC, as
were The Dukes of Hazzard, Bermuda Triangle, The Hardy Boys and Nancy
Drew. ITV got The Fall Guy, The Six Million Dollar Man, The Incredible
Hulk, Hart to Hart. I can't remember any more right now, but I'm sure a
lot more will come to mind the minute I press send.
Jac
Ross Howard
<sirlawren...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Where US imports were shown here: Dallas and Dynasty were both BBC, as
>were The Dukes of Hazzard, Bermuda Triangle, The Hardy Boys and Nancy
>Drew. ITV got The Fall Guy, The Six Million Dollar Man, The Incredible
>Hulk, Hart to Hart. I can't remember any more right now, but I'm sure a
>lot more will come to mind the minute I press send.
A few more:
BBC: *Rowan & Martin's Laugh-In*, *The Andy Williams Show*,
*Bewitched!*, * Bonanza*, *The Virginian*,* Kojak*, *Columbo*,
*Cannon*,* Ironside*, *The Rockford Files*, *Moonlighting* and Bing
Crosby's Christmas specials.
ITV: *The Beverly Hillbillies*, *Marcus Welby, MD*, *The Streets of
San Francisco* and Perry Como's Christmas specials.
*Mr. Ed* and the Lucille Ball show under all its various names was
also shown, but I can't remember for sure on which "side". My instinct
says the BBC, though.
In other words, at least in the '60s and '70s, the BBC got the cream
and ITV the crap. (By the early '80s ITV had woken up and upped the
quality of its imports, most notably by snapping up *Hill Street
Blues*).
Rider: Time marches on and my memory marches off, so apologies for any
false attributions in the above. I would have listed *The Addams
Family* and its me-too *The Munsters* as well as *My Favo(u)rite
Martian* and its me-too *Mork and Mindy* but I can't remember what
channels they were on.
Jacqui
> Jacqui wrote:
>
>>Where US imports were shown here: Dallas and Dynasty were both
>>BBC, as were The Dukes of Hazzard, Bermuda Triangle, The Hardy
>>Boys and Nancy Drew. ITV got The Fall Guy, The Six Million Dollar
>>Man, The Incredible Hulk, Hart to Hart. I can't remember any more
>>right now, but I'm sure a lot more will come to mind the minute I
>>press send.
>
> A few more:
>
> BBC: *Rowan & Martin's Laugh-In*, *The Andy Williams Show*,
> *Bewitched!*, * Bonanza*, *The Virginian*,* Kojak*, *Columbo*,
> *Cannon*,* Ironside*, *The Rockford Files*, *Moonlighting* and
> Bing Crosby's Christmas specials.
>
> ITV: *The Beverly Hillbillies*, *Marcus Welby, MD*, *The Streets
> of San Francisco* and Perry Como's Christmas specials.
And Quincy and Magnum, PI, now I remember.
> Rider: Time marches on and my memory marches off, so apologies for
> any false attributions in the above. I would have listed *The
> Addams Family* and its me-too *The Munsters* as well as *My
> Favo(u)rite Martian* and its me-too *Mork and Mindy* but I can't
> remember what channels they were on.
Mork and Mindy was ITV, as was Little House on the Prairie. I can only
remember The Addams Family and The Munsters on C4, in 1982, so that's
no help, and I've never seen My Favorite Martian at all so I have no
idea about that.
Jac
R F
> On Mon, 28 Apr 2003 11:32:15 +0000 (UTC), Jacqui
> <sirlawren...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Where US imports were shown here: Dallas and Dynasty were both BBC, as
> >were The Dukes of Hazzard, Bermuda Triangle, The Hardy Boys and Nancy
> >Drew. ITV got The Fall Guy, The Six Million Dollar Man, The Incredible
> >Hulk, Hart to Hart. I can't remember any more right now, but I'm sure a
> >lot more will come to mind the minute I press send.
>
> A few more:
>
> BBC: *Rowan & Martin's Laugh-In*, *The Andy Williams Show*,
> *Bewitched!*, * Bonanza*, *The Virginian*,* Kojak*, *Columbo*,
> *Cannon*,* Ironside*, *The Rockford Files*, *Moonlighting* and Bing
> Crosby's Christmas specials.
>
> ITV: *The Beverly Hillbillies*, *Marcus Welby, MD*, *The Streets of
> San Francisco* and Perry Como's Christmas specials.
>
> *Mr. Ed* and the Lucille Ball show under all its various names was
> also shown, but I can't remember for sure on which "side". My instinct
> says the BBC, though.
>
> In other words, at least in the '60s and '70s, the BBC got the cream
> and ITV the crap. (By the early '80s ITV had woken up and upped the
> quality of its imports, most notably by snapping up *Hill Street
> Blues*).
So you think of _Kojak_ as being the "cream", eh? How many years have
you been living in Spain again?
I'd add that _The Six Million Dollar Man_ was an excellent show, and
_The Incredible Hulk_ wasn't bad. Both were very influential
culturally. The only thing memorable about _Hart to Hart_ was the
theme song.
R F
> > So, like, was Monty Python BBC, and Benny Hill ITV? Monty Python
> > was always shown on public television stations in the US (TTBOMK),
> > along with other "high-church" British TV programming, like
> > _Masterpiece Theatre_. But Benny Hill was shown on Channel 9
> > (WOR) in the New York market; it wouldn't have been considered
> > acceptable on one of the network-affiliate stations, let along a
> > public television station. (Don't try to deny that Benny Hill was
> > British, Simon!)
>
> Yup. The Pythons were "very BBC" (being Oxbridge-educated), Benny Hill
> was for the "vulgar masses" on ITV. :-) (Unfortunately that doesn't
> explain the popularity of Are You Being Served? which was a BBC show,
> but never mind.) The Pythons also had the advantage of having a BBC
> "in" because Cleese had been on BBC Radio for some time, and on the
> various David Frost shows with the Two Ronnies who were also BBC.
>
> tv.cream.org (no www) might be able to identify the origin of other
> British shows you remember, if you want to attempt to formulate a
> theory about US showings of UK shows.
I had a theory, but this site makes it dead wrong. What is or was
"Thames Television"? As I recall, they were responsible for
producing _The Benny Hill Show_, or the version that got to the US,
and I thought they were also responsible for two other shows which
followed _Benny Hill_ on Channel 9: _Dave Allen At Large_ and _The
Paul Hogan Show_. But this site reveals _Dave Allen At Large_ to be a
BBC show. I tried watching _Dave Allen At Large_ a few times, but it
was too painful. As far as I could tell, it was basically an
intoxicated guy sitting in a chair on an otherwise bare stage,
drinking a glass of whiskey and obsessively brushing lint off his
trousers, mumbling about something or other while the audience laughed
roaringly, plus some comedic sketches thrown in. I didn't understand
what Dave was saying, but the comedic sketches were of the same
lowbrow-bawdy tradition of Northwestern European comedy that was seen
on _Benny Hill_. _The Paul Hogan Show_ (Australian, but delivered via
British intermediaries) also had lowbrow-bawdy-tradition comedic
sketches.
> Where US imports were shown here: Dallas and Dynasty were both BBC,
The immense popularity of these shows in Britain was a common source of
amusement to (some of us) Americans back in the day, as I recall. Then
again, the immense popularity of these shows in the US was a source of
amusement too.
> as were The Dukes of Hazzard, Bermuda Triangle, The Hardy Boys and Nancy
> Drew.
Now that's more understandable. I haven't thought much about _The
Bermuda Triangle_ since the late 'Seventies, but I did have the board
game. _The Hardy Boys_ had one of the greatest instrumental TV show
themes.
Jacqui
> Jacqui wrote:
>> tv.cream.org (no www) might be able to identify the origin of
>> other British shows you remember, if you want to attempt to
>> formulate a theory about US showings of UK shows.
>
> I had a theory, but this site makes it dead wrong. What is or was
> "Thames Television"?
ITV. Anything on that site that doesn't say BBC is likely to be ITV,
which is/was broken up into various companies such as Anglia, Thames,
LWT, etc.
> As I recall, they were responsible for
> producing _The Benny Hill Show_, or the version that got to the
> US
That would be right. As pointed out elsewhere, BH was on BBC first
(before my time though <g>) but the "Hills Angels" era stuff is all
ITV. A number of comedians switched channels in the 1970s - the
Goodies, Morecambe and Wise - and the style of comedy did seem to
alter.
> and I thought they were also responsible for two other shows
> which followed _Benny Hill_ on Channel 9: _Dave Allen At Large_
> and _The Paul Hogan Show_. But this site reveals _Dave Allen At
> Large_ to be a BBC show.
Yes, Allen's always been a mainstay of the BBC. I personally don't much
like him either, but he's quite popular. I think you have to be a
particular age or something to really appreciate him.
>> Where US imports were shown here: Dallas and Dynasty were both
>> BBC,
>
> The immense popularity of these shows in Britain was a common
> source of amusement to (some of us) Americans back in the day, as
> I recall. Then again, the immense popularity of these shows in
> the US was a source of amusement too.
AFAIR we watched Dallas but never Dynasty. Similarly, Knots Landing was
tolerated (also BBC) but I can't recall anything else in the same vein
being watched in our house.
>> as were The Dukes of Hazzard, Bermuda Triangle, The Hardy Boys
>> and Nancy Drew.
>
> Now that's more understandable. I haven't thought much about _The
> Bermuda Triangle_ since the late 'Seventies, but I did have the
> board game. _The Hardy Boys_ had one of the greatest instrumental
> TV show themes.
Thank goodness - someone else *remembers* The Bermuda Triangle! I
occasionally mention it to British viewers of similar age to me and
they all look blank, although they remember TDoH and THB&ND, both of
which were shown in the same timeslot (early evening, Saturday).
Jac
R F
> > Okay, I guess a lot of Americans used to have just a few broadcast
> > channels, but in the New York TV market, back in the day, we had:
> >
> > Channel 2 WCBS
> > Channel 4 WNBC
> > Channel 5 WNEW? (Then independent, now owned by Fox)
> > Channel 7 WABC
> > Channel 9 WOR (Secaucus, NJ - then independent, now UPN)
> > Channel 11 WPIX (Then independent, now WB)
> > Channel 13 WNET (Public television - Newark NJ)
> >
> > Plus the fuzzy UHF channels, like Channels 21, 25, 31, whatever.
>
> "Fuzzy UHF channels"? What were the other ones? Here in Britain, VHF
> was the older, lower-definition mode and UHF the new 625-line mode still
> used for analogue and now digital broadcasting.
The other ones were VHF. UHF channels were the ones above 13. In
Brooklyn and Queens we got excellent reception of the VHF channels back
in the day (there was no cable TV in those boroughs till the
mid-'Eighties). To get UHF reception, you needed to use that other
sort of roundish antenna, but it never seemed to work well. At best, a
UHF channel would come in somewhat fuzzy or snowy; at worst, you
wouldn't be able to get it at all.
I think that may have been a peculiarity of the way the broadcast
channels were divided up in the New York market, though, maybe
something to do with the earliness of it. The closer
and/or more signal-strong stations were the older VHF ones. When we'd
go to other regions the UHF channels came in fairly clearly, like
Channel 56 in Boston (an independent commercial station which showed
kids' programming on weekday afternoons).
Mark Brader
> > ... but in the New York TV market, back in the day, we had:
> >
> > Channel 2 WCBS
> > Channel 4 WNBC
...
> > Channel 7 WABC
Mike Oliver:
> Does CBS have Channel 2 in every major market except the Bay Area?
No, but there are a number of markets where CBS and NBC are on channels
2 and 4 in some order, and ABC is on channel 7. This happened because:
* Physically# adjacent channels are not assigned in the same city,
to reduce interference.
* Low-numbered channels are better because on lower frequencies you
can transmit farther with the same power, and because they come
first in listings.
* Channel 1 was withdrawn from the TV band before the networks
got started, so the two best channels available in the same
city were 2 and 4.
* At one time it was proposed that channels 2-6 should also be
withdrawn. Since channels 2 and 4 had been taken by the first
two% networks in several markets, ABC decided to gamble on this
happening and asked for channel 7 instead of 5#.
# - Channels 4 and 5 are not physically adjacent, when explains how
the pattern Richard listed for New York is possible. Neither are
6 and 7, which is why it was known that if more channels were
removed then channel 7 would be the lowest.
% - There was also the DuMont Network, which failed in the 1950s.
I don't know about their channel assignments.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto "Ever wonder why they call the screen
m...@vex.net a vacuum tube?" -- Kent Paul Dolan
My text in this article is in the public domain.
Mark Brader
> > Plus the fuzzy UHF channels, like Channels 21, 25, 31, whatever.
> "Fuzzy UHF channels"? What were the other ones?
In the US and Canada, channels 2-13 are VHF and 14-69 are UHF. The
UHF band formerly extended to channel 83, but about 20 years ago the
upper channels, like channel 1, were reassigned and removed from TV use.
The higher the channel number, the higher the frequency and the less
far the signal can be transmitted at the same power level. In addition,
since UHF broadcasting started later, at one time people might not have
had the correct antennas to receive it properly. Hence "fuzzy".
> Here in Britain, VHF was the older, lower-definition mode and UHF
> the new 625-line mode still used ...
Matti means "was used for". VHF and UHF are frequency bands and have
nothing to do with the broadcasting format. But if this is how it was
done, I can see how he might find Richard's remark surprising.
--
Mark Brader "A moment's thought would have shown him,
Toronto but a moment is a long time and thought
m...@vex.net is a painful process." -- A. E. Housman
Ross Howard
wrote:
>So you think of _Kojak_ as being the "cream", eh? How many years have
>you been living in Spain again?
Yeah, but the competition was comparing it with *Marcus Welby, MD*,
remember. If you want a real duff one on the Beeb, try *Cannon*. Did
anyone actually watch that in the States?
Matti Lamprhey
> R F wibbled:
> >
> > I had a theory, but this site makes it dead wrong. What is or was
> > "Thames Television"?
>
> ITV. Anything on that site that doesn't say BBC is likely to be ITV,
> which is/was broken up into various companies such as Anglia, Thames,
> LWT, etc.
For "broken up" read "franchised out on a regional basis" to give a more
precise impression, I think, because, unlike the BBC, ITV has always
been just a name for the channel rather than an organization. Anglia
Television covered the East Anglia region. Thames and LWT (London
Weekend Television) shared the London area in some way that I'm unclear
about. Granada was up north somewhere. The situation became messy when
these companies started producing programmes which were then shown in
other regions, and even on the BBC.
Matti
Ross Howard
wrote:
>On Mon, 28 Apr 2003, Jacqui wrote:
>
>> > So, like, was Monty Python BBC, and Benny Hill ITV? Monty Python
>> > was always shown on public television stations in the US (TTBOMK),
>> > along with other "high-church" British TV programming, like
>> > _Masterpiece Theatre_. But Benny Hill was shown on Channel 9
>> > (WOR) in the New York market; it wouldn't have been considered
>> > acceptable on one of the network-affiliate stations, let along a
>> > public television station. (Don't try to deny that Benny Hill was
>> > British, Simon!)
>>
>> Yup. The Pythons were "very BBC" (being Oxbridge-educated), Benny Hill
>> was for the "vulgar masses" on ITV. :-) (Unfortunately that doesn't
>> explain the popularity of Are You Being Served? which was a BBC show,
>> but never mind.) The Pythons also had the advantage of having a BBC
>> "in" because Cleese had been on BBC Radio for some time, and on the
>> various David Frost shows with the Two Ronnies who were also BBC.
>>
>> tv.cream.org (no www) might be able to identify the origin of other
>> British shows you remember, if you want to attempt to formulate a
>> theory about US showings of UK shows.
>
>I had a theory, but this site makes it dead wrong. What is or was
>"Thames Television"?
ITV has always been split into regional franchises. Thames Television
was the London weekday franchise for a long time. Other names that
might ring bells: LWT (London, weekends), Granada (Manchester,
Mon-Fri) and our very own ABC (Manchester, weekends -- the latter was
responsible for, among other gems, *The Avengers*.
>As I recall, they were responsible for
>producing _The Benny Hill Show_, or the version that got to the US,
>and I thought they were also responsible for two other shows which
>followed _Benny Hill_ on Channel 9: _Dave Allen At Large_ and _The
>Paul Hogan Show_. But this site reveals _Dave Allen At Large_ to be a
>BBC show. I tried watching _Dave Allen At Large_ a few times, but it
>was too painful. As far as I could tell, it was basically an
>intoxicated guy sitting in a chair on an otherwise bare stage,
>drinking a glass of whiskey and obsessively brushing lint off his
>trousers, mumbling about something or other while the audience laughed
>roaringly, plus some comedic sketches thrown in.
Yeah. Perhaps it's because you missed the ir.... oops. No, but
seriously
Frances Kemmish
>
> I had a theory, but this site makes it dead wrong. What is or was
> "Thames Television"? As I recall, they were responsible for
> producing _The Benny Hill Show_, or the version that got to the US,
> and I thought they were also responsible for two other shows which
> followed _Benny Hill_ on Channel 9: _Dave Allen At Large_ and _The
> Paul Hogan Show_. But this site reveals _Dave Allen At Large_ to be a
> BBC show. I tried watching _Dave Allen At Large_ a few times, but it
> was too painful. As far as I could tell, it was basically an
> intoxicated guy sitting in a chair on an otherwise bare stage,
> drinking a glass of whiskey and obsessively brushing lint off his
> trousers, mumbling about something or other while the audience laughed
> roaringly, plus some comedic sketches thrown in. I didn't understand
> what Dave was saying, but the comedic sketches were of the same
> lowbrow-bawdy tradition of Northwestern European comedy that was seen
> on _Benny Hill_. _The Paul Hogan Show_ (Australian, but delivered via
> British intermediaries) also had lowbrow-bawdy-tradition comedic
> sketches.
>
I always loved Dave Allen. I suppose that his humour didn't travel too
well. That works in th other direction too: I could never see why anyone
thought Johnny Carson amusing.
>
>>Where US imports were shown here: Dallas and Dynasty were both BBC,
>
>
> The immense popularity of these shows in Britain was a common source of
> amusement to (some of us) Americans back in the day, as I recall. Then
> again, the immense popularity of these shows in the US was a source of
> amusement too.
>
Some of the popularity of Dallas (well, my watching it, anyway) was
because it was regularly ridiculed on Terry Wogan's morning radio, and
later TV programme. He commented on the fact that no-one ever ate their
breakfast, and that all their coathangers seemed to be the wire kind. He
was also very unkind about poor Lucy Ewing's weight problem. He
interviewed Larry Hagman on TV once, and Hagman seemed to find it all
pretty amusing too.
Fran
Frances Kemmish
> "Jacqui" <sirlawren...@hotmail.com> wrote...
>
>>R F wibbled:
>>
>>>I had a theory, but this site makes it dead wrong. What is or was
>>>"Thames Television"?
>>
>>ITV. Anything on that site that doesn't say BBC is likely to be ITV,
>>which is/was broken up into various companies such as Anglia, Thames,
>>LWT, etc.
>
>
> For "broken up" read "franchised out on a regional basis" to give a more
> precise impression, I think, because, unlike the BBC, ITV has always
> been just a name for the channel rather than an organization. Anglia
> Television covered the East Anglia region. Thames and LWT (London
> Weekend Television) shared the London area in some way that I'm unclear
> about.
"LOndon Weekend" didn't give you a hint?
> Granada was up north somewhere. The situation became messy when
> these companies started producing programmes which were then shown in
> other regions, and even on the BBC.
>
The companies also changed when new franchises were handed out. I know
that we got "ATV" at one time, and later "Central". Neither of them
seemed to care much about the East Midlands, though. We were on the edge
of about four different companies' areas, and news local to us never got
any coverage.
Fran
>
Jacqui
> Some of the popularity of Dallas (well, my watching it, anyway)
> was because it was regularly ridiculed on Terry Wogan's morning
> radio, and later TV programme. He commented on the fact that
> no-one ever ate their breakfast, and that all their coathangers
> seemed to be the wire kind. He was also very unkind about poor
> Lucy Ewing's weight problem.
I thought it was her height problem. Wasn't she The Poison Dwarf?
Swellin' and the others weren't quite as memorably bad actors IIRC.
Jac
Ross Howard
<fkem...@optonline.net> wrote:
>R F wrote:
>>
>> I had a theory, but this site makes it dead wrong. What is or was
>> "Thames Television"? As I recall, they were responsible for
>> producing _The Benny Hill Show_, or the version that got to the US,
>> and I thought they were also responsible for two other shows which
>> followed _Benny Hill_ on Channel 9: _Dave Allen At Large_ and _The
>> Paul Hogan Show_. But this site reveals _Dave Allen At Large_ to be a
>> BBC show. I tried watching _Dave Allen At Large_ a few times, but it
>> was too painful. As far as I could tell, it was basically an
>> intoxicated guy sitting in a chair on an otherwise bare stage,
>> drinking a glass of whiskey and obsessively brushing lint off his
>> trousers, mumbling about something or other while the audience laughed
>> roaringly, plus some comedic sketches thrown in. I didn't understand
>> what Dave was saying, but the comedic sketches were of the same
>> lowbrow-bawdy tradition of Northwestern European comedy that was seen
>> on _Benny Hill_. _The Paul Hogan Show_ (Australian, but delivered via
>> British intermediaries) also had lowbrow-bawdy-tradition comedic
>> sketches.
>>
>
>I always loved Dave Allen. I suppose that his humour didn't travel too
>well. That works in th other direction too: I could never see why anyone
>thought Johnny Carson amusing.
I have a theory. You're absoultuely right, Johnny Carson wasn't funny.
Nor, in my opinion, are Letterman or Leno. But they're virtually the
only place on network television where people could get a laugh out of
jokes about LBJ's diction or Nixon's posture. Before the Simpsons,
American comedy shows -- at least the ones that ever made it over to
the UK --were considerably less socio-political in content than their
British counterparts.Even the "outer-there" stuff was more surreal
(Belushi's bees; fish-in-tux-era Steve Martin) than satirical.
That's the theory -- now placed in the microwave and ready to be
nuked.
Frances Kemmish
I recollect some comments about her weight, but her height was unfairly
criticised too. Poor girl, she couldn't control her height. Anyway, what
could you expect from someone who was messing around with her uncle. No
wonder she had problems.
Fran
Ross Howard
Lucy didn't have any "problem". In fact, nobody in *Dallas* had
"problems", because -- as Clive James in *The Observer* often used
to, er, observe -- they all had "prahlms". Swellin's was a drinken
prahlm; Lucy's was not so much a height prahlm as a no-neck prahlm;
and Bahbeh's was an unable-to-live-down-*The-Man-from-Atlantis*
prahlm.
One of my favourite moments in *Dallas* came in the episode when Jock
dahd. The family, desperate to know what had happened to him during
his trip exploring for new all wills, was waiting for news from "the
gubmint of South Amairca".
Padraig Breathnach
>"Jacqui" <sirlawren...@hotmail.com> wrote...
>> R F wibbled:
>> >
>> > I had a theory, but this site makes it dead wrong. What is or was
>> > "Thames Television"?
>>
>> ITV. Anything on that site that doesn't say BBC is likely to be ITV,
>> which is/was broken up into various companies such as Anglia, Thames,
>> LWT, etc.
>
>For "broken up" read "franchised out on a regional basis" to give a more
>precise impression, I think, because, unlike the BBC, ITV has always
>been just a name for the channel rather than an organization. Anglia
>Television covered the East Anglia region. Thames and LWT (London
>Weekend Television) shared the London area in some way that I'm unclear
>about.
>
Perhaps the "Weekend" part of "LWT" might help you.
PB
R F
Oy, oy, oy!
First, Carson: R J Valentine is more qualified than I [am] to comment
on Carson, but what I remember finding very funny about Carson was
that he told so many bad jokes, and he let you know that *he* thought
they were bad with body language and delivery. Another aspect of
Carson was the powerful shared national experience of it all. But the
bad jokes, they led to a whole *tradition* of consciously bad humor.
The humor is in the consciousness of the badness, see? Also, there
were the jokes that were sort of insider-viewer jokes, like about Ed
McMahon's drinking, or Johnny's divorces. And the absurdities, like
all the times David Brenner was a guest. Also, how Carson would
nurture the development of the American comedic tradition by having
rising-star standup comedians on the show. It's not supposed to be
"funny"; it's more like a religious experience for the postwar
secular American _Ummah_.
Second, Letterman. Letterman's show, in its heyday (its early years,
in the early 'Eighties), was a satirical treatment of the entire
postwar television medium. No, it was more than that; it was a
satirical treatment of the entirety of postwar American popular
culture. The form that this satire took was rather bizarre, to be
sure, and difficult to explain to cultural outsiders.
Third. "Before the Simpsons"?!? Your knowledge of _Saturday Night
Live_ seems to be limited to the pre-'Eighties cast. I myself believe
the "Not Ready for Prime Time Players" to be as overrated as
_Doonesbury_, something that you really have to be a cocaine-snorting
Baby Boomer circa 1978 to really appreciate. But in the 'Eighties the
show took some interesting and sophisticated new turns, and the work of
Eddie Murphy, Billy Crystal and Martin Short is particularly memorable.
At the same time, you had the even better _SCTV_ (which I guess was
Canadian, but Canada's attached). This is the comedic tradition on
which _The Simpsons_ was built. And _The Simpsons_ is not particularly
more socio-politically satirical than this earlier material.
Now, as for Jay Leno, who's post-_Simpsons_, you're right, but that's
the *new* world, not the *old* world. Jay Leno, even when he
potentially could be funny, destroys it all because he's just such an
embarrassment.
What I think you have to realize is that jokes about LBJ (huh?) and
Nixon are only so funny. Their comedic value is there, but it's
limited. What's funny is when Robin Williams can go on Carson and do
an impression of Reagan morphing into Nixon. What's the political
content there? Not really too much, except that politicians are silly
people to be ridiculed rather than feared or respected. What's
*funny* is how Robin Williams could so skillfully lampoon the voices
and mannerisms of these political figures. Was it you who was
pointing out that Nixon actually
said "I'm not a crook"? I think it was the fact that so many comedians
did it as "I am not a crook" that it came to be "remembered" that way.
It's not political satire -- it's making fun of Nixon's *voice* -- the
hyper-rhoticism, the shaking of the head. It's silly! Silliness, and
some underlying spiritual truth that the silliness expresses, is
what it's all about.
Sara Moffat Lorimer
> R F wrote:
> > On Sun, 27 Apr 2003, Jacqui wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Archaic (as far as TV goes) UK usage. There were two TV channels until
> >>1963, and three channels up to 1982,
> >
> >
> > How could the British people have tolerated this?
>
> They were much better off. I had a return to this way of life during the
> 14 years I lived in country Australia: 2 channels - ABC and the
> commercial Golden West Network.
When I lived in Jamaica, we had just one channel, JBC, and it broadcast
only in the evenings. As a 14-year-old, I found this unbearable.
Ross Howard
wrote:
>On Mon, 28 Apr 2003, Ross Howard wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 28 Apr 2003 12:49:49 -0400, Frances Kemmish
>> <fkem...@optonline.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >I always loved Dave Allen. I suppose that his humour didn't travel too
>> >well. That works in th other direction too: I could never see why anyone
>> >thought Johnny Carson amusing.
>>
>> I have a theory. You're absoultuely right, Johnny Carson wasn't funny.
>> Nor, in my opinion, are Letterman or Leno. But they're virtually the
>> only place on network television where people could get a laugh out of
>> jokes about LBJ's diction or Nixon's posture. Before the Simpsons,
>> American comedy shows -- at least the ones that ever made it over to
>> the UK --were considerably less socio-political in content than their
>> British counterparts.Even the "outer-there" stuff was more surreal
>> (Belushi's bees; fish-in-tux-era Steve Martin) than satirical.
>>
>> That's the theory -- now placed in the microwave and ready to be
>> nuked.
>
>Oy, oy, oy!
>
>First, Carson
[Snip a "guess you had to be there" that I'm ready to believe. The
same possibly applies to Dave Allen over here.]
>
>Second, Letterman.
[Snip and ditto, with Rik Mayall as the probable equivalent.]
>Third. "Before the Simpsons"?!? Your knowledge of _Saturday Night
>Live_ seems to be limited to the pre-'Eighties cast. I myself believe
>the "Not Ready for Prime Time Players" to be as overrated as
>_Doonesbury_, something that you really have to be a cocaine-snorting
>Baby Boomer circa 1978 to really appreciate.
Thank you! Chevy Chase is the unfunniest man alive.
>[...] the work of
>Eddie Murphy, Billy Crystal and Martin Short is particularly memorable.
Eddie Murphy sure blew it later though, didn't he. (Billy Crystal
doesn't count because he's Jewish, and American Jewish comedians have
always gone over well in Britain. Martin Short doesn't count either
because he's a pal of Steve Martin's, who I like.
>Now, as for Jay Leno, who's post-_Simpsons_, you're right, but that's
>the *new* world, not the *old* world. Jay Leno, even when he
>potentially could be funny, destroys it all because he's just such an
>embarrassment.
Thank you!
[Rest snipped, because you nuked my theory as thoroughly as I'd
hoped.]
R J Valentine
When I lived in Jamaica (proper), we got 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, and 13, same
as on the Island. (My mom on the Island could pull 20 channels off the
12, but she had an antenna rotator and lived on the second-highest hill.)
Channel 5 was part of the Dumont Television Network when I was 14.
--
R. J. Valentine <mailto:r...@smart.net>
ken mohnkern
> I understand that the correct usage is to say "to see a movie" and "to
> watch TV or a TV program". What is the correct verb to use if the TV
> program in question is a movie?
Amazingly (to me, anyway), I was thinking about this very distinction
in the shower this morning.
My groggy mind concluded that "seeing" a movie is in a theater (or
drive-in), while "watching" is on tv, whether it's broadcast or a
rental.
I saw a movie this weekend. (in a theater)
I watched a movie this weekend. (on tv)
But talking about tv shows, they're almost interchangeable:
I watched "The West Wing" last night.
I saw "The West Wing" last night.
Linz
<sirlawren...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>R F wibbled:
>> and I thought they were also responsible for two other shows
>> which followed _Benny Hill_ on Channel 9: _Dave Allen At Large_
>> and _The Paul Hogan Show_. But this site reveals _Dave Allen At
>> Large_ to be a BBC show.
>
>Yes, Allen's always been a mainstay of the BBC. I personally don't much
>like him either, but he's quite popular. I think you have to be a
>particular age or something to really appreciate him.
Can we go with "something" please? I'm not /that/ much older than you!
>> Now that's more understandable. I haven't thought much about _The
>> Bermuda Triangle_ since the late 'Seventies, but I did have the
>> board game. _The Hardy Boys_ had one of the greatest instrumental
>> TV show themes.
>
>Thank goodness - someone else *remembers* The Bermuda Triangle! I
>occasionally mention it to British viewers of similar age to me and
>they all look blank, although they remember TDoH and THB&ND, both of
>which were shown in the same timeslot (early evening, Saturday).
You didn't ask me, did you. I remember The Bermuda Triangle.
Tony Cooper
wrote:
>\ But this site reveals _Dave Allen At Large_ to be a
>BBC show. I tried watching _Dave Allen At Large_ a few times, but it
>was too painful. As far as I could tell, it was basically an
>intoxicated guy sitting in a chair on an otherwise bare stage,
>drinking a glass of whiskey and obsessively brushing lint off his
>trousers, mumbling about something or other while the audience laughed
>roaringly, plus some comedic sketches thrown in. I didn't understand
>what Dave was saying, but the comedic sketches were of the same
>lowbrow-bawdy tradition of Northwestern European comedy that was seen
>on _Benny Hill_. _The Paul Hogan Show_ (Australian, but delivered via
>British intermediaries) also had lowbrow-bawdy-tradition comedic
>sketches.
Sure. And Mort Sahl was just a guy in a v-necked sweater reading a
newspaper. Shelley Berman was just a whiney Jew before Woody Allen
made whiney Jewishness an art form. Lenny Bruce was just a guy that
used offensive language. Lord Buckley was just a guy that stood up in
front of groups and talked the hip talk.
Honestly, Richard, anyone that defines humor as someone thumping a
juke box to make it play should not define humor.
--
Tony Cooper aka: tony_co...@yahoo.com
Provider of Jots, Tittles, and Oy!s
Linz
<ggu...@yadonkeyhoo.com> wrote:
>Lucy didn't have any "problem". In fact, nobody in *Dallas* had
>"problems", because -- as Clive James in *The Observer* often used
>to, er, observe -- they all had "prahlms". Swellin's was a drinken
>prahlm; Lucy's was not so much a height prahlm as a no-neck prahlm;
>and Bahbeh's was an unable-to-live-down-*The-Man-from-Atlantis*
>prahlm.
I still have three books of James's collected tv reviews - I didn't
see most of the programmes he reviewed (although I did see *Dallas*)
but the quality of writing still makes me laugh. I'm waiting for a
collection of Nancy Banks Smith.
>One of my favourite moments in *Dallas* came in the episode when Jock
>dahd. The family, desperate to know what had happened to him during
>his trip exploring for new all wills, was waiting for news from "the
>gubmint of South Amairca".
Thank you for the best laugh of the evening, Ross.
Tony Cooper
<ggu...@yadonkeyhoo.com> wrote:
>
>I have a theory. You're absoultuely right, Johnny Carson wasn't funny.
>Nor, in my opinion, are Letterman or Leno.
All three were stand-up comedians before the shows they are now known
for. Their monologs are supposed to be funny, and any skits done are
about as hit-and-miss as any humor on any show.
I don't think of any of the three shows as comedy shows, though. They
are supposed to be interview shows where the guest supplies the humor
and the host supplies the format and the straight lines. Hardly
Parkinson, but that's the format.
I see, or saw - in the case of Carson - all three as
a-bit-for-everyone programming. A monolog for people that like
stand-up humor, a skit for those that like sketches, interviews for
people that like a glimpse of the famous, and some music for those
that need to go to the bathroom before the commercial.
Graham Norton is similar - if a bit more off-the-wall - in his format.
He has the occasional good laugh, but more flat bits than good bits.
He's better on his own than as an interviewer. He doesn't do well at
all at drawing people out. Sometimes the guests have that look of
"What am I doing here?".
Is "Prime Time Glick" carried on that side of the pond? Martin Short,
as Jiminy Glick, probably pulls off outrageous as well as anyone in
the business.
Ross Howard
Yeah, but sometime sa cigar is just a cigar -- and George Burns
really *was* just an old guy smoking one (much as Jack Benny really
was just a guy who held his chin and raised his eyebrows a lot).
M. J. Powell
<matti-...@totally-official.com> writes
>"Jacqui" <sirlawren...@hotmail.com> wrote...
>> R F wibbled:
>> >
>> > I had a theory, but this site makes it dead wrong. What is or was
>> > "Thames Television"?
>>
>> ITV. Anything on that site that doesn't say BBC is likely to be ITV,
>> which is/was broken up into various companies such as Anglia, Thames,
>> LWT, etc.
>
>For "broken up" read "franchised out on a regional basis" to give a more
>precise impression, I think, because, unlike the BBC, ITV has always
>been just a name for the channel rather than an organization. Anglia
>Television covered the East Anglia region. Thames and LWT (London
>Weekend Television) shared the London area in some way that I'm unclear
>about.
Thames were weekdays. LWT weekends (Get with it, Matti!)
> Granada was up north somewhere.
Manchester.
TWW = Television Wales and West taken over by Harlech TV.
> The situation became messy when
>these companies started producing programmes which were then shown in
>other regions, and even on the BBC.
We (TWW) made a prog about Dylan Thomas, with Richard Burton as
narrator, just as he was becoming famous. No one on the ITV network
would take it unless they could take our credits off and put theirs on.
Eventually BBC Wales agreed to network it, complete with our credits.
Bravo BBC!
Remember 'Land of Song', Matti?
Mike
--
M.J.Powell
R H Draney
>
>On Mon, 28 Apr 2003 10:46:23 -0400, R F <rf...@sparky.cs.nyu.edu>
>wrote:
>
>>So you think of _Kojak_ as being the "cream", eh? How many years have
>>you been living in Spain again?
>
>Yeah, but the competition was comparing it with *Marcus Welby, MD*,
>remember. If you want a real duff one on the Beeb, try *Cannon*. Did
>anyone actually watch that in the States?
The fat cop?...sure...and Columbo (the shabby cop), Barnaby Jones (the old cop),
Ironside (the crippled cop), McCloud (the hick cop), Hawaii Five-O (the
mummified cop), Mannix (the cop who kept getting hit over the head), and the
most contrived detective show ever: "Longstreet"....
James Franciscus (late of "Mr Novak" and "Beneath the Planet of the Apes") as a
blind detective...his guide dog was named Pax....
It was either that or "Room 222"....r
Matti Lamprhey
> "Matti Lamprhey" <matti-...@totally-official.com> wrote:
> > [...]
> > Thames and LWT (London Weekend Television) shared the London
> > area in some way that I'm unclear about.
> >
> Perhaps the "Weekend" part of "LWT" might help you.
Surely it wasn't that simple? I'm going off to sulk now.
Matti
Sara Moffat Lorimer
> The fat cop?...sure...and Columbo (the shabby cop), Barnaby Jones (the old
> cop), Ironside (the crippled cop), McCloud (the hick cop), Hawaii Five-O
> (the mummified cop), Mannix (the cop who kept getting hit over the head),
> and the most contrived detective show ever: "Longstreet"....
More contrived than "Holmes and Yoyo"?
I have long suspected that I am the only person to have seen an episode
of "Holmes and Yoyo." Richard?
R H Draney
says...
There *are* worse things on earth than STS....
"The bunko squad?"..."the bunko squad"..."the bunko squad?"..."the bunko
squad"....
"Holmes and Yoyo" was better when they remade it as "Mann and Machine"....r
Evan Kirshenbaum
Of course I saw it. I'd call it a bit less contrived than, say, "Fish
Police".
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |On a scale of one to ten...
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |it sucked.
Palo Alto, CA 94304
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com
(650)857-7572
R F
I don't believe I have seen it.
Off-topic, as it wasn't a cop show, but I believe I am the only person
to have seen an episode of _The New Odd Couple_.
Robert Bannister
I'd forgotten about teenagers. When I was a teenager, there was no
choice - you don't miss what you've never had. Nevertheless, I stick by
my premise: the more channels, the more rubbish, and the more chance
that the good programmes will be on at the same time. Of course,
nowadays we can record some of these, but... I think this is why I rent
so many videos and DVDs.
--
Rob Bannister
Robert Bannister
> R F wibbled:
>
>> Jacqui wrote:
>
>
>>>tv.cream.org (no www) might be able to identify the origin of
>>>other British shows you remember, if you want to attempt to
>>>formulate a theory about US showings of UK shows.
>>
>>I had a theory, but this site makes it dead wrong. What is or was
>>"Thames Television"?
>
>
> ITV. Anything on that site that doesn't say BBC is likely to be ITV,
> which is/was broken up into various companies such as Anglia, Thames,
> LWT, etc.
You don't remember Granada? You must be too young.
>
>
>>As I recall, they were responsible for
>>producing _The Benny Hill Show_, or the version that got to the
>>US
>
>
> That would be right. As pointed out elsewhere, BH was on BBC first
> (before my time though <g>) but the "Hills Angels" era stuff is all
> ITV. A number of comedians switched channels in the 1970s - the
> Goodies, Morecambe and Wise - and the style of comedy did seem to
> alter.
It certainly did. Slicker, but not as good.
>>and I thought they were also responsible for two other shows
>>which followed _Benny Hill_ on Channel 9: _Dave Allen At Large_
>>and _The Paul Hogan Show_. But this site reveals _Dave Allen At
>>Large_ to be a BBC show.
>
>
> Yes, Allen's always been a mainstay of the BBC. I personally don't much
> like him either, but he's quite popular. I think you have to be a
> particular age or something to really appreciate him.
I don't think you had to be a particular age at the time. I mean this
was decades ago - his competition was Val Doonican (spelling?). At the
time, Dave Allen was very funny, though I'm sure I wouldn't be able to
bear it now.
> Thank goodness - someone else *remembers* The Bermuda Triangle! I
> occasionally mention it to British viewers of similar age to me and
> they all look blank, although they remember TDoH and THB&ND, both of
> which were shown in the same timeslot (early evening, Saturday).
I don't remember it. Which decade are we talking about? I have a feeling
it must be 80s.
--
Rob Bannister
Robert Bannister
>>>"Thames Television"?
>>
>>ITV. Anything on that site that doesn't say BBC is likely to be ITV,
>>which is/was broken up into various companies such as Anglia, Thames,
>>LWT, etc.
>
>
> precise impression, I think, because, unlike the BBC, ITV has always
> been just a name for the channel rather than an organization. Anglia
> Weekend Television) shared the London area in some way that I'm unclear
> these companies started producing programmes which were then shown in
> other regions, and even on the BBC.
Are you sure that Granada or Grundy something other wasn't the precursor
to Thames? I vaguely remember there was some kind of row when Thames
first got the rights to London ITV, so there was definitely some other
company there before.
--
Rob Bannister
Robert Bannister
The BBC had a Dylan Thomas programme years before that. The reader was
Emlyn Williams (spelling?).
--
Rob Bannister
R H Draney
says...
Ron Glass (Harris from "Barney Miller") as the fussy one, and Demond Wilson
(Lamont from "Sanford and Son") as the messy one, right?...(you needn't answer;
I got them from memory but just confirmed the casting at IMDb)....
Back to cop shows, I'll see your "New Odd Couple" and raise you one "Last
Precinct"...any takers?...r
R F
> On Mon, 28 Apr 2003 11:38:34 -0400, R F <rf...@sparky.cs.nyu.edu>
> wrote:
>
> >\ But this site reveals _Dave Allen At Large_ to be a
> >BBC show. I tried watching _Dave Allen At Large_ a few times, but it
> >was too painful. As far as I could tell, it was basically an
> >intoxicated guy sitting in a chair on an otherwise bare stage,
> >drinking a glass of whiskey and obsessively brushing lint off his
> >trousers, mumbling about something or other while the audience laughed
> >roaringly, plus some comedic sketches thrown in. I didn't understand
> >what Dave was saying, but the comedic sketches were of the same
> >lowbrow-bawdy tradition of Northwestern European comedy that was seen
> >on _Benny Hill_. _The Paul Hogan Show_ (Australian, but delivered via
> >British intermediaries) also had lowbrow-bawdy-tradition comedic
> >sketches.
>
> Sure. And Mort Sahl was just a guy in a v-necked sweater reading a
> newspaper. Shelley Berman was just a whiney Jew before Woody Allen
> made whiney Jewishness an art form. Lenny Bruce was just a guy that
> used offensive language. Lord Buckley was just a guy that stood up in
> front of groups and talked the hip talk.
All before my time, C**p. Dave Allen was from the 'Seventies and was
shown on Channel 9 in the early 'Eighties. So it makes sense to
compare Dave Allen to what was going on in American humor and comedy in
the 'Seventies and early 'Eighties.
> Honestly, Richard, anyone that defines humor as someone thumping a
> juke box to make it play should not define humor.
I never said anything about the Fonz in the previous posting. _Happy
Days_ was a sitcom. The Fonz was a cultural icon, a demigod, a
superhero. But no one ever pretended that _Happy Days_ was
rip-roaringly funny. What kids liked about _Happy Days_ was the
*world* it gave them -- a mythical world that existed before the
oppressive and overmythologized 'Sixties, an alternative vision of what
post-'Sixties America could be (cf. the utopian teenage world
depicted in such sitcoms as _Welcome Back Kotter_ and _What's
Happening!_, which were set in the present day).
R F
For the US, really late 'Seventies (which includes most if not all of
1980).
R F
> Sara Moffat Lorimer wrote:
> > Robert Bannister wrote:
> >
> >
> >>R F wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Sun, 27 Apr 2003, Jacqui wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Archaic (as far as TV goes) UK usage. There were two TV channels until
> >>>>1963, and three channels up to 1982,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>How could the British people have tolerated this?
> >>
> >>They were much better off. I had a return to this way of life during the
> >>14 years I lived in country Australia: 2 channels - ABC and the
> >>commercial Golden West Network.
> >
> >
> > When I lived in Jamaica, we had just one channel, JBC, and it broadcast
> > only in the evenings. As a 14-year-old, I found this unbearable.
> >
>
> I'd forgotten about teenagers. When I was a teenager, there was no
> choice - you don't miss what you've never had. Nevertheless, I stick by
> my premise: the more channels, the more rubbish, and the more chance
> that the good programmes will be on at the same time.
I've always said the first part of that about cable TV. More bad
channels to choose from. But back in the day, in blessed television
markets like that of New York (...), there was a true richness of
offerings. This richness started to die out when cable TV became
available to most of New York's population in the mid-'Eighties.
Maria Conlon
> Didn't people in pre-TV days often say they planned to "watch" the
> radio, or wireless? Look at some old pictures: they actually did
> gather around their radios, and watch them.
I sure remember all of us (family and neighbors) sitting very close to
the radio, listening intently, before we had a TV. I'm not so sure we
stared at the radio, but we were definitely focused on the sound. Being
a bit younger than me, you may have missed some of the radio experience
of the late 1940s (or you may not remember). There were a couple of
scary shows I still remember. One ended with Sylvia's head on a pillow.
Nothing else of Sylvia, just her head.
The other shows I remember aren't "memorable" in the same way.
Maria Conlon
Tom Henderson
wrote:
>
>Frankly, I don't think anyone gives a damn which you use. As far as
>I'm concerned, they're interchangeable in this context. The only
>distinction I would make is that I would say "I went to see a movie"
>and not "I went to watch a movie". Once there, though, I either
>watched it or saw it.
What do you mean "Once there, though, I either watched it or saw it." /(sic)/
Jacqui
> Jacqui wrote:
>> ITV. Anything on that site that doesn't say BBC is likely to be
>> ITV, which is/was broken up into various companies such as
>> Anglia, Thames, LWT, etc.
>
> You don't remember Granada? You must be too young.
Of course I remember them. But 1. I am a southerner and 2. I put in
"etc" so that I didn't have to start naming hundreds and hundreds of
companies. Those three I named were on the particular page of tv.cream
that I was looking at when I typed.
I've been on a Granada show (on the BBC) for goodness sake!
Jac
sand
Orson Welles had a regular presentation and there was the Columbia
Workshop that did a radio version of de Maupassant's "the Horla" which
kept me awake at night for a week. And then there were the comics.
Jack Benny, Fred Allen, Burns and Allen, Bergen and McCarthy, amongst
others. And when I was much younger there was Uncle Don and the
Singing Lady and Jack Armstrong and Bobby Benson etc. I still have no
trouble remembering them. Later there was Henry Morgan and Bob and
Ray.
Jan Sand
Matti Lamprhey
>
> Remember 'Land of Song', Matti?
No, sorry -- I've only been here in Wales for 15 years, though.
Matti
Matti Lamprhey
>
> Are you sure that Granada or Grundy something other wasn't the
> precursor to Thames? I vaguely remember there was some kind of row
> when Thames first got the rights to London ITV, so there was
> definitely some other company there before.
As a member of a non-ITV family my knowledge is imperfect. I'm pretty
sure that Granada TV has always been based in Manchester and that its
franchises were northern.
I was brought up in Surrey, and this was covered by the London ITV
region. My hazy memories are of the ITV branding being "A.B.C." at the
time, which was the 1955-65 era. Thames Television was certainly not
around at the time.
Matti
Ross Howard
<matti-...@totally-official.com> wrote:
>As a member of a non-ITV family my knowledge is imperfect. I'm pretty
>sure that Granada TV has always been based in Manchester and that its
>franchises were northern.
>
>I was brought up in Surrey, and this was covered by the London ITV
>region. My hazy memories are of the ITV branding being "A.B.C." at the
>time, which was the 1955-65 era. Thames Television was certainly not
>around at the time.
I think you're right and I was wrong in a post yesterday, when I
claimed that ABC was the Mancunian weekend franchise. Remembering the
ABC logo (a multi-rayed sun) has dredged up the memory of Hughie
Greene's*Thank Your Lucky Stars* as being under the ABC flag, and
that was definitely on midweek. I also seem to have an image of David
Hamilton as a continuity announcer on ABC.
As for Granada, it was definitely the ITV that I watched as a nipper
(early '60s) in the Manchester area. I think Granada, Anglia and
Border TV were the only major content producers to keep their regional
franchises when they were up for renewal in the late '60s or early
'70s -- ABC, according to the new Matti theory I now share, would
have lost out to Thames and LWT and I also remember that Lew Grade's
ATV was replaced by Central. Yorkshire TV and Tyne-Tees also appeared
around that time, but I can't remember what they replaced. Perhaps
Frances remembers picking whatever preceded YTV in the East Midlands).
Jacqui
> As for Granada, it was definitely the ITV that I watched as a
> nipper (early '60s) in the Manchester area. I think Granada,
> Anglia and Border TV were the only major content producers to keep
> their regional franchises when they were up for renewal in the
> late '60s or early '70s -- ABC, according to the new Matti theory
> I now share, would have lost out to Thames and LWT and I also
> remember that Lew Grade's ATV was replaced by Central.
70s. I remember ATV being our local ITV station (I liked the logo) and
we didn't get Central until quite late.
Jac
Frances Kemmish
I don't really remember anything other than ATV and ABC, really. I found
this site, which has some history of the franchise process, which seems
to confirm the names, at least:
http://www.themacplace.btinternet.co.uk/itv.html
I do, however, remember a commercial that was on during the first
weekend that we had a TV that picked up ITV: "Little X corselette by
Silhouette: sixty-nine and six." It was repeated every fifteen minutes
for the whole weekend.
I don't remember being a BBC or ITV only watcher, either. We just
watched whichever channel was showing a Western.
Fran
Tony Cooper
I mean that either word applies. What is "/(sic)/"? Most of us use
the question mark to end a question. It's far simpler to type.
--
Tony Cooper aka: tony_co...@yahoo.com
Provider of Jots, Tittles, and Oy!s
M. J. Powell
<fkem...@optonline.net> writes
Wagon Train. Ward Bond/Rowdy Yates!
And that bloke with a 'Buntline Special', about 2ft long?
Mike
--
M.J.Powell
Frances Kemmish
Ward Bond was in Wagon Train, but Rowdy Yates (CLint Eastwood) was in
Rawhide.
> And that bloke with a 'Buntline Special', about 2ft long?
>
Was that "Have Gun; Will Travel"? I never understood that: I thought it
meant that having a gun meant that you could travel, so it didn't make
any sense. I don't think that appeared much on our TV stations. Maybe I
just managed to hide from it.
Fran
rzed
> M. J. Powell wrote:
[...]
>>>
>>> I don't remember being a BBC or ITV only watcher, either. We just
>>> watched whichever channel was showing a Western.
>>
>>
>> Wagon Train. Ward Bond/Rowdy Yates!
>>
>
> Ward Bond was in Wagon Train, but Rowdy Yates (CLint Eastwood) was
> in Rawhide.
>
>> And that bloke with a 'Buntline Special', about 2ft long?
>>
>
> Was that "Have Gun; Will Travel"? I never understood that: I
> thought it meant that having a gun meant that you could travel, so
> it didn't make any sense. I don't think that appeared much on our
> TV stations. Maybe I just managed to hide from it.
>
The Buntline special belonged to Wyatt Earp (played by Hugh O'Brian,
who was probably the fastest draw of the big-time TV cowboys in his
day).
--
rzed
Frances Kemmish
I remember Wyatt Earp being on. I guess I wasn't paying attention to his
gun (well I was quite young at the time).
Does anyone remember "Cabin in the Clearing". I used to hide behind the
sofa when it was on, because it was so scary.
Fran
R F
> In article <Pine.GSO.4.44.03042...@sparky.cs.nyu.edu>, R
> says...
> >
> >On Mon, 28 Apr 2003, Sara Moffat Lorimer wrote:
> >
> >> I have long suspected that I am the only person to have seen an episode
> >> of "Holmes and Yoyo." Richard?
> >
> >I don't believe I have seen it.
> >
> >Off-topic, as it wasn't a cop show, but I believe I am the only person
> >to have seen an episode of _The New Odd Couple_.
>
> Ron Glass (Harris from "Barney Miller") as the fussy one, and Demond Wilson
> (Lamont from "Sanford and Son") as the messy one, right?...(you needn't answer;
> I got them from memory but just confirmed the casting at IMDb)....
My first draft of that posting was to read: "... but I believe I am
the only person, besides R H Draney, to have seen an episode of _The
New Odd Couple_".
Skitt
I remember our family's first radio. It was a 1939 VEF, very similar in
appearance to the 1946 model shown at
http://oldradio.onego.ru/IMAGES/SMALL/vefsup.jpg
I was the one listening to it the most, and yes, I used to sit directly in
front of it, staring at its dial while listening to either music, or comedy
shows. I also recall getting a radio guide that listed every program and
record that was going to be transmitted by the Riga, and also Madona,
Kuldiga and Liepaja stations.
--
Skitt (in SF Bay Area) http://www.geocities.com/opus731/
I speak English well -- I learn it from a book!
-- Manuel (Fawlty Towers)
Don Aitken
The London area, and, I think, the Midlands, were split between
weekdays and weekends. The original programme companies were ATV, ABC
and Associated Redifusion, one of them holding two franchises, but I'm
not sure which. Granada originally had Yorkshire as well as
Lancashire, but lost it when YTV came along.
--
Don Aitken
Robert Bannister
I admit I'm not at all sure myself. My father built our first TV in 1947
- we had lots of visitors for a while - and of course television came
from Alexandra Palace. I remember the advent of ITV - I think we had to
attach a special gadget to the TV in order to receive it. You could well
be right about ABC, but I just can't remember.
--
Rob Bannister
Robert Bannister
> Robert Bannister wibbled:
>
>> Jacqui wrote:
>
>
>>> ITV. Anything on that site that doesn't say BBC is likely to be
>>> ITV, which is/was broken up into various companies such as
>>> Anglia, Thames, LWT, etc.
>>
>> You don't remember Granada? You must be too young.
>
>
> Of course I remember them. But 1. I am a southerner and 2. I put in
> "etc" so that I didn't have to start naming hundreds and hundreds of
> companies. Those three I named were on the particular page of
> tv.cream that I was looking at when I typed.
Others have confirmed I was wrong. It seems it was ABC and Associated
Rediffusion. I was living in Woodford Green, pretty close to London, at
the time. Thames came along later.
--
Rob Bannister
Laura F Spira
Thames certainly started around 1969/70 - I remember auditing at their
HQ in Teddington, where the highlight of the day was celebrity spotting
during lunch in the canteen.
--
Laura
(emulate St. George for email)
bruce bowser
> In article <vilqav47ihdvsk9b3...@4ax.com>, Ross says...
> >
> >On Mon, 28 Apr 2003 10:46:23 -0400, R F <rf...@sparky.cs.nyu.edu>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>So you think of _Kojak_ as being the "cream", eh? How many years have
> >>you been living in Spain again?
> >
> >Yeah, but the competition was comparing it with *Marcus Welby, MD*,
> >remember. If you want a real duff one on the Beeb, try *Cannon*. Did
> >anyone actually watch that in the States?
It ran six seasons. Its quite a show.
> The fat cop?...sure...and Columbo (the shabby cop), Barnaby Jones (the old cop),
> Ironside (the crippled cop), McCloud (the hick cop), Hawaii Five-O (the
> mummified cop), Mannix (the cop who kept getting hit over the head),
No. Mannix was a private investigator. Not a cop.
bruce bowser
> On Monday, April 28, 2003 at 4:05:56 PM UTC-4, R H Draney wrote:
> > In article <vilqav47ihdvsk9b3...@4ax.com>, Ross says...
> > >
> > >On Mon, 28 Apr 2003 10:46:23 -0400, R F <rf...@sparky.cs.nyu.edu>
> > >wrote:
> > >
> > >>So you think of _Kojak_ as being the "cream", eh? How many years have
> > >>you been living in Spain again?
> > >
> > >Yeah, but the competition was comparing it with *Marcus Welby, MD*,
> > >remember. If you want a real duff one on the Beeb, try *Cannon*. Did
> > >anyone actually watch that in the States?
>
> It ran six seasons. Its quite a show.
with 'Jake and the Fat man' (6 seasons).
> > The fat cop?...sure...and Columbo (the shabby cop), Barnaby Jones (the old cop),
> > Ironside (the crippled cop), McCloud (the hick cop), Hawaii Five-O (the
> > mummified cop), Mannix (the cop who kept getting hit over the head),
>
> No. Mannix was a private investigator. Not a cop.