Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
What Did You Watch? 2012-05-24 (Thursday)
31 views
Skip to first unread message
Ubiquitous
May 25, 2012, 4:19:30 AM5/25/12
to
I watched:
THE O'REILLY FACTOR
• Spitting in the eye of America ..
• Is Obama's foreign policy helping?
• News Quiz: Getting away with murder edition
THE BOB NEWHART SHOW:
"The Way We Weren't". At Howard and Ellen's engagement party, Howard is
nervous about meeting his former girlfriend, who Bob dated a week before
he married Emily.
KATHY:
I was too tired from my workout to stay awake, so I bailed about halfway
through.
What did you watch?
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
THE O'REILLY FACTOR
• Spitting in the eye of America ..
• Is Obama's foreign policy helping?
• News Quiz: Getting away with murder edition
THE BOB NEWHART SHOW:
"The Way We Weren't". At Howard and Ellen's engagement party, Howard is
nervous about meeting his former girlfriend, who Bob dated a week before
he married Emily.
KATHY:
I was too tired from my workout to stay awake, so I bailed about halfway
through.
What did you watch?
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Obveeus
May 25, 2012, 6:14:35 AM5/25/12
to
"Ubiquitous" <web...@polaris.net> wrote:
> What did you watch?
AWAKE: series finale. I would have preferred it if the show had ended
differently, but at least the finale brought closure to the storylines.
shawn
May 25, 2012, 6:52:57 AM5/25/12
to
On Fri, 25 May 2012 04:19:30 -0400, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net>
wrote:
>I watched:
>
>
>What did you watch?
I watched
"So You Think Can Dance" - Looks like they found some good dancers for
this season as well as more people that were just out to get some free
air time. I still can't believe that one guy that was so against the
SYTYCD is run and yet still came out to dance. If he was looking for
free publicity he got it, but I don't think it went the way he hoped.
Watching the little girl go through her own verion of her mom's dance
routine was adorable and just great TV.
"Rookie Blue" - So now we have a new rookie added into the mix, but
without quite the same naiviette of the previous rookies since he's
coming in with four years military experience in Afghanistan (I
think). Oh, and he's got a romantic connection to Charlotte Sullivan's
character in the past. I can't quite recall what happened with Andy's
(Missy Peregrym) character in the past season but she's still
suspended at the start of the show and is due for her final
evaluation/meeting with the board that will decide if she can go back
on the job or not. Of course she ends up involved in finding a girl
that's been missing for years even though she's not on the job at this
point. At least no one makes huge mistakes in this episode, but there
is always next week.
wrote:
>I watched:
>
>
>What did you watch?
I watched
"So You Think Can Dance" - Looks like they found some good dancers for
this season as well as more people that were just out to get some free
air time. I still can't believe that one guy that was so against the
SYTYCD is run and yet still came out to dance. If he was looking for
free publicity he got it, but I don't think it went the way he hoped.
Watching the little girl go through her own verion of her mom's dance
routine was adorable and just great TV.
"Rookie Blue" - So now we have a new rookie added into the mix, but
without quite the same naiviette of the previous rookies since he's
coming in with four years military experience in Afghanistan (I
think). Oh, and he's got a romantic connection to Charlotte Sullivan's
character in the past. I can't quite recall what happened with Andy's
(Missy Peregrym) character in the past season but she's still
suspended at the start of the show and is due for her final
evaluation/meeting with the board that will decide if she can go back
on the job or not. Of course she ends up involved in finding a girl
that's been missing for years even though she's not on the job at this
point. At least no one makes huge mistakes in this episode, but there
is always next week.
Steve Newport
May 25, 2012, 8:26:39 AM5/25/12
to
THE O'REILLY FACTOR
• Spitting in the eye of America
• Getting away with murder
• Spitting in the eye of America
---------------------------------------
SN: The FNC does both daily.
*********************************
anim8rFSK
May 25, 2012, 9:18:15 AM5/25/12
to
In article <jpnfaj$pd9$3...@dont-email.me>,
This ... may be the worst show I've ever seen. There's not a laugh in
the entire hour. It's actually worse than the ads made it look. A
couple good actors are ruined by the terrible material and presentation,
and the rest come across like they're in an early audition and should
have been cut. Most of the lines you can say in advance (but wouldn't
want to) but only after you've dropped your expectations as far as you
possibly could.
The first ep rips off the set up for STRIPES with the slacker being
dumped by his girlfriend, and then just sort of meanders through 'can he
get another date' with stuff somebody thought was clever, but isn't. Of
course the dates all end up banging the black guy, 'cause, well, that's
what chicks and black guys do. Oh, yeah, the maid also bangs the black
guy, 'cause that's what maids and black guys do. The cute waitress from
the ads is in it, but all her scenes are in the ads (oddly, the show
routinely uses different takes than the ads do, and they aren't nearly
as good) and she doesn't show up again.
The second ep has J.K. Simmons as J. Jonah Jameson in the only
uninteresting performance I've ever seen him give. The crazy cat lady
almost bangs the black guy, 'cause that's what crazy cat ladies and
black guys do. The episode is spent looking for coffee in other offices
and shitting condoms filled with flour to get that authentic drug runner
experience; no, it's not nearly as funny as I made it sound.
The highlight of the entire hour? The unfunny guy whose girlfriend just
dumped him is taking a bath. The unfunny guy whose girlfriend's father
thinks he's gay comes in to make sure the first unfunny guy isn't
suicidal. After a brief unfunny pep talk, the second unfunny guy gets
up and leaves, letting out a girlish giggle and saying "I can see your
balls"
And that's absolutely as good as MEN AT WORK got.
--
So we're all agreed that Clod is as stupid as Charlie Sheen?
Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote:
> I watched:
>
> THE O'REILLY FACTOR
> • Spitting in the eye of America ..
> • Is Obama's foreign policy helping?
> • News Quiz: Getting away with murder edition
>
> THE BOB NEWHART SHOW:
> "The Way We Weren't". At Howard and Ellen's engagement party, Howard is
> nervous about meeting his former girlfriend, who Bob dated a week before
> he married Emily.
>
> KATHY:
> I was too tired from my workout to stay awake, so I bailed about halfway
> through.
>
> What did you watch?
I watched 2 episodes of the premiere of MEN AT WORK.
> I watched:
>
> THE O'REILLY FACTOR
> • Spitting in the eye of America ..
> • Is Obama's foreign policy helping?
> • News Quiz: Getting away with murder edition
>
> THE BOB NEWHART SHOW:
> "The Way We Weren't". At Howard and Ellen's engagement party, Howard is
> nervous about meeting his former girlfriend, who Bob dated a week before
> he married Emily.
>
> KATHY:
> I was too tired from my workout to stay awake, so I bailed about halfway
> through.
>
> What did you watch?
This ... may be the worst show I've ever seen. There's not a laugh in
the entire hour. It's actually worse than the ads made it look. A
couple good actors are ruined by the terrible material and presentation,
and the rest come across like they're in an early audition and should
have been cut. Most of the lines you can say in advance (but wouldn't
want to) but only after you've dropped your expectations as far as you
possibly could.
The first ep rips off the set up for STRIPES with the slacker being
dumped by his girlfriend, and then just sort of meanders through 'can he
get another date' with stuff somebody thought was clever, but isn't. Of
course the dates all end up banging the black guy, 'cause, well, that's
what chicks and black guys do. Oh, yeah, the maid also bangs the black
guy, 'cause that's what maids and black guys do. The cute waitress from
the ads is in it, but all her scenes are in the ads (oddly, the show
routinely uses different takes than the ads do, and they aren't nearly
as good) and she doesn't show up again.
The second ep has J.K. Simmons as J. Jonah Jameson in the only
uninteresting performance I've ever seen him give. The crazy cat lady
almost bangs the black guy, 'cause that's what crazy cat ladies and
black guys do. The episode is spent looking for coffee in other offices
and shitting condoms filled with flour to get that authentic drug runner
experience; no, it's not nearly as funny as I made it sound.
The highlight of the entire hour? The unfunny guy whose girlfriend just
dumped him is taking a bath. The unfunny guy whose girlfriend's father
thinks he's gay comes in to make sure the first unfunny guy isn't
suicidal. After a brief unfunny pep talk, the second unfunny guy gets
up and leaves, letting out a girlish giggle and saying "I can see your
balls"
And that's absolutely as good as MEN AT WORK got.
--
So we're all agreed that Clod is as stupid as Charlie Sheen?
Obveeus
May 25, 2012, 9:25:53 AM5/25/12
to
I forgot all about that new series. From your summary, it sounds like I
lucked out.
lucked out.
mj
May 25, 2012, 9:40:14 AM5/25/12
to
tdciago
May 25, 2012, 10:01:07 AM5/25/12
to
On May 25, 4:19 am, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote:
> KATHY:
> I was too tired from my workout to stay awake, so I bailed about halfway
> through.
The biggest laugh I got in this week's episode was Kathy's take on
> KATHY:
> I was too tired from my workout to stay awake, so I bailed about halfway
> through.
Lifetime's new slogan: "Your life. Your time. F**k men."
THE LATE LATE SHOW WITH CRAIG FERGUSON (CBS) - I've been watching
Craig every night since his Scotland episodes, and I'm addicted.
Maybe I'm just loopy by this hour, but I think this show is the most
consistently funny thing on television. Last night, Alfred Molina was
the guest and it was like eavesdropping on two hilarious guys in a
pub. And Geoff Peterson is by far the best sidekick on late night. I
only wish this show was available On Demand so I could get to sleep
earlier.
suzeeq
May 25, 2012, 10:02:46 AM5/25/12
to
Ubiquitous
May 25, 2012, 10:18:20 AM5/25/12
to
anim...@cox.net wrote:
>I watched 2 episodes of the premiere of MEN AT WORK.
>
>This ... may be the worst show I've ever seen.
"Very unfunny".
>I watched 2 episodes of the premiere of MEN AT WORK.
>
>This ... may be the worst show I've ever seen.
Sounds painful. Have I misheard TBS's slogan as "very funny" all this time?
--
So we're all agreed that Clod is as stupid as Steve Newport?
Ubiquitous
May 25, 2012, 10:19:50 AM5/25/12
to
tdc...@aol.com wrote:
>On May 25, 4:19 am, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote:
>> KATHY:
>> I was too tired from my workout to stay awake, so I bailed about halfway
>> through.
>
>The biggest laugh I got in this week's episode was Kathy's take on
>Lifetime's new slogan: "Your life. Your time. F**k men."
Heh heh. Did Kathy manage to not veer into her lame leftist partisian
>On May 25, 4:19 am, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote:
>> KATHY:
>> I was too tired from my workout to stay awake, so I bailed about halfway
>> through.
>
>The biggest laugh I got in this week's episode was Kathy's take on
>Lifetime's new slogan: "Your life. Your time. F**k men."
nonsense?
anim8rFSK
May 25, 2012, 10:35:48 AM5/25/12
to
In article <jpo193$4ih$1...@dont-email.me>, "Obveeus" <Obv...@aol.com>
wrote:
> "anim8rFSK" <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> > I watched 2 episodes of the premiere of MEN AT WORK.
>
>
> I forgot all about that new series.
I would have too if I wasn't watching the Las Vegas reruns in the
afternoon; they advertise it a lot there, probably because James Leasure
is on both.
From your summary, it sounds like I
> lucked out.
Very much so. It's not even bad funny, where it's good to mock. It's
just Springtime for Hitler slack jawed awful.
wrote:
> "anim8rFSK" <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> > I watched 2 episodes of the premiere of MEN AT WORK.
>
>
> I forgot all about that new series.
afternoon; they advertise it a lot there, probably because James Leasure
is on both.
From your summary, it sounds like I
> lucked out.
just Springtime for Hitler slack jawed awful.
tdciago
May 25, 2012, 10:23:23 AM5/25/12
to
On May 25, 10:19 am, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote about
KATHY:
week. We did, however, get plenty of side boob from Miley Cyrus and
Kim Zolciak.
KATHY:
> Heh heh. Did Kathy manage to not veer into her lame leftist partisian
> nonsense?
I don't recall any political references on the show at all this
> nonsense?
week. We did, however, get plenty of side boob from Miley Cyrus and
Kim Zolciak.
Ubiquitous
May 25, 2012, 11:25:19 AM5/25/12
to
time.
--
So we're all agreed that Clod is as stupid as Steve Newport?
Ubiquitous
May 25, 2012, 11:27:17 AM5/25/12
to
anim...@cox.net wrote:
>"Obveeus" <Obv...@aol.com> wrote:
>> "anim8rFSK" <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>> > I watched 2 episodes of the premiere of MEN AT WORK.
>>
>> I forgot all about that new series.
>
>I would have too if I wasn't watching the Las Vegas reruns in the
>afternoon; they advertise it a lot there, probably because James Leasure
>is on both.
I must have obliterated it from my memory banks after seeing it so
>"Obveeus" <Obv...@aol.com> wrote:
>> "anim8rFSK" <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>> > I watched 2 episodes of the premiere of MEN AT WORK.
>>
>> I forgot all about that new series.
>
>I would have too if I wasn't watching the Las Vegas reruns in the
>afternoon; they advertise it a lot there, probably because James Leasure
>is on both.
relentlessly advertised.
--
So we're all agreed that Clod is as stupid as Steve Newport?
Arthur Lipscomb
May 25, 2012, 11:53:02 AM5/25/12
to
when I watched it last night. The ending didn't fully make sense to me.
On second viewing of the ending this morning I caught a line of
dialogue that I missed the first time around which while not making it
any better did clear things up a little. I think the coherence of the
series would have benefited from a second season since they seemed to
rush the finale in order to bring closure.
I watched:
Duets - The singing was OK but it didn't really grab my attention. I
may or may not watch again depending on what else is on. Now that I
think about it, the reason it wasn't engaging is the choice of
celebrities. I'd much rather watch the celebrities on The Voice sing
duets than this group. And since the mentors on The Voice *do* sing
duets with their mentees, this feels like a lesser version of the Voice.
Don't Trust the B (recorded) - I think I liked this slightly more than
others did.
Todd and the Book of Pure Evil (OnDemand) - "2 Girls, 1 Tongue" - The
show's second musical episode. The Phantom of Crowley High returns and
uses the book to switch places with Hannah. This causes a "Once More
With Feeling" effect where everyone starts to sing self-referential
songs. The songs...well they're explicit and...like this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ph6sINBRY14&feature=relmfu
and this (SPOILER)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E95yILCq7s4&feature=related
(Saved for later: Rookie Blue)
Obveeus
May 25, 2012, 12:17:22 PM5/25/12
to
"Arthur Lipscomb" <art...@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:
> On 5/25/2012 3:14 AM, Obveeus wrote:
>> "Ubiquitous"<web...@polaris.net> wrote:
>>
>>> What did you watch?
>>
>>
>> AWAKE: series finale. I would have preferred it if the show had ended
>> differently, but at least the finale brought closure to the storylines.
>
>
> Agreed. I was half asleep struggling to stay awake (no pun intended) when
> I watched it last night. The ending didn't fully make sense to me. On
> second viewing of the ending this morning I caught a line of dialogue that
> I missed the first time around which while not making it any better did
> clear things up a little. I think the coherence of the series would have
> benefited from a second season since they seemed to rush the finale in
> order to bring closure.
season interesting other than if the stuff from the first season suddenly
started playing out again.
> I watched:
>
> Duets - The singing was OK but it didn't really grab my attention. I may
> or may not watch again depending on what else is on. Now that I think
> about it, the reason it wasn't engaging is the choice of celebrities. I'd
> much rather watch the celebrities on The Voice sing duets than this group.
> And since the mentors on The Voice *do* sing duets with their mentees,
> this feels like a lesser version of the Voice.
it may already mean replicating a show that is overripe. Still, DUETS is
'summer fare' for a reason. It isn't supposed to be anything more than a
short run program to get TV fanatics through to the Fall.
suzeeq
May 25, 2012, 12:20:10 PM5/25/12
to
Arthur Lipscomb wrote:
> On 5/25/2012 3:14 AM, Obveeus wrote:
>> "Ubiquitous"<web...@polaris.net> wrote:
>>
>>> What did you watch?
>>
>> AWAKE: series finale. I would have preferred it if the show had ended
>> differently, but at least the finale brought closure to the storylines.
>>
>>
>
>
> Agreed. I was half asleep struggling to stay awake (no pun intended)
> when I watched it last night. The ending didn't fully make sense to me.
> On second viewing of the ending this morning I caught a line of
> dialogue that I missed the first time around which while not making it
> any better did clear things up a little. I think the coherence of the
> series would have benefited from a second season since they seemed to
> rush the finale in order to bring closure.
Which line was that? I wasn't paying close attention all the way
> On 5/25/2012 3:14 AM, Obveeus wrote:
>> "Ubiquitous"<web...@polaris.net> wrote:
>>
>>> What did you watch?
>>
>> AWAKE: series finale. I would have preferred it if the show had ended
>> differently, but at least the finale brought closure to the storylines.
>>
>>
>
>
> Agreed. I was half asleep struggling to stay awake (no pun intended)
> when I watched it last night. The ending didn't fully make sense to me.
> On second viewing of the ending this morning I caught a line of
> dialogue that I missed the first time around which while not making it
> any better did clear things up a little. I think the coherence of the
> series would have benefited from a second season since they seemed to
> rush the finale in order to bring closure.
through, so the ending was a twist that didn't seem to be tied in.
Mason Barge
May 25, 2012, 12:25:40 PM5/25/12
to
hope he gets an earlier timeslot, and maybe a bit more money, sometime
soon.
Mason Barge
May 25, 2012, 12:35:50 PM5/25/12
to
AWAKE series finale:
The explanation was utterly lame, but so what? Plus the first half hour
was rather tedious.
I thought for a while his wife was an angel and it was going to be
supernatural, and he'd end up okay with just his son alive. That would
have been better, it would have made the scene with the goodbye dinner
make sense. I have a feeling they were arguing about explaining the
double dream right to the last few days, since the goodbye dinner doesn't
work very well if she's still alive.
I expected more from these guys. I guess they had trouble putting their
hearts into it.
Grade: C
DUETS
Luckily this was taped and I could fast forward through 90% of it. On the
plus side, they gave the performers more than 90 or 120 seconds to sing, a
huge failing on most singing competitions.
On the minus side, everything else. Awful. The MC looks and acts like a
Mouseketeer with a beard. I bet sunshine comes out of his ass.
The judging was even worse than AI. The "superstar" judges were falling
all over themselves to say glowing things about the other "superstars"
performances, while the contestants listened from the Superstar Lounge.
My head felt like it was going to explode every time I heard "superstar".
Plus, you're expected to sit there and listen to Somebody Thicke sing. Hot
needles push deep into my flesh.
Ian J. Ball
May 25, 2012, 12:38:20 PM5/25/12
to
In article <jpnfaj$pd9$3...@dont-email.me>,
H2O (recorded) - Episodes #3.13 & 3.14: "To Have & To Hold Back" and
"Mermaid Magic".
Ep. 3.13 is actually probably my favorite from season #3: it has
almost no Bella & Will, it's mostly about Cleo and Lewis, it has Kim at
her most EVOL!!!ness, and it almost seems like a 'throwback' to the
first two seasons. But Lewis gets his write-out here :( and this
episode provides lots of fodder for Phoebe Tonkin to demonstrate some
range and emotional depth as an actress.
OTOH, I really *dislike* ep. #3.14. And the way #3.12, 3.13, and 3.14
play out is kind of weird - it's almost like they're out of continuity
(maybe filmed out of order?...). But episode #3.14 picks up exactly
where ep. #3.12 left off, almost as if ep. #3.13 never took place (one
of the things that irks me about ep. #3.14 is there is no side-reference
to Lewis' recent departure *at all*). Anyway, this episode is all about
my least favorite characters - Will, his annoying sister Sophie, and the
annoying-for-three-seasons-now Zane. Blech! The only good thing about it
is that it seems to be setting up some future trouble among Will, Rikki,
and Bella. But that doesn't even happen in the episode...
Eureka (recorded) - "Worst Case Scenario". Kind of a 'meh' episode.
Eureka is put in danger when their disaster-preparedness computer goes
all "Hal 9000" on them and actually tries to cause disasters in Eureka
for real. Meanwhile, Jo starts to suspect Alison, when Carter admits he
doesn't remember the conversation "he" and Jo had when Carter was in the
hospital. (I really don't feel this storyline came to a satisfactory
conclusion... :/ ) And, with Zane's help, Fargo gets back into 'Matrix
world' to see if Holly is alive (and I'll give you one guess as to
whether she is, or not!).
TBBT rerun - One of my least favorite episodes from the past season:
Leonard and Penny go on a "non-date"; Sheldon is scared by a bird on his
windowsill. This was one of the weakest episodes of the season.
Rules of Engagement rerun - One of my favorite episodes from this past
season: Audrey has throat problems and so can't talk - much to Jeff's
delight!; and Adam tries to prove that he doesn't get special attention
due to his looks, but due to his personality, with humorous results!
PoI rerun - A serviceable episode about a scrappy public advocate lawyer
who's on somebody's hit list. The better parts of the episode involve
Mr. Reese trying to figure out Mr. Finch's background. This is also the
first episode in which Det. Carter is "onboard", which leads to awkward
moments when Carter and Det. Fusco each think the other is "up to
something" when they are, in fact, both working for Reese/Finch without
knowing it!! :)
Recorded for later: H2O (ep. #3.16), Awake (series finale... :( ), and
Rook. Bleu!! (season premiere!!!).
--
"We're gonna need a lot of therapy." - the character Rachel in "Bunnyman"
(named 1 of the 5 Worst Horror Films of 2011 by 28DaysLaterAnalysis.com!!)
H2O (recorded) - Episodes #3.13 & 3.14: "To Have & To Hold Back" and
"Mermaid Magic".
Ep. 3.13 is actually probably my favorite from season #3: it has
almost no Bella & Will, it's mostly about Cleo and Lewis, it has Kim at
her most EVOL!!!ness, and it almost seems like a 'throwback' to the
first two seasons. But Lewis gets his write-out here :( and this
episode provides lots of fodder for Phoebe Tonkin to demonstrate some
range and emotional depth as an actress.
OTOH, I really *dislike* ep. #3.14. And the way #3.12, 3.13, and 3.14
play out is kind of weird - it's almost like they're out of continuity
(maybe filmed out of order?...). But episode #3.14 picks up exactly
where ep. #3.12 left off, almost as if ep. #3.13 never took place (one
of the things that irks me about ep. #3.14 is there is no side-reference
to Lewis' recent departure *at all*). Anyway, this episode is all about
my least favorite characters - Will, his annoying sister Sophie, and the
annoying-for-three-seasons-now Zane. Blech! The only good thing about it
is that it seems to be setting up some future trouble among Will, Rikki,
and Bella. But that doesn't even happen in the episode...
Eureka (recorded) - "Worst Case Scenario". Kind of a 'meh' episode.
Eureka is put in danger when their disaster-preparedness computer goes
all "Hal 9000" on them and actually tries to cause disasters in Eureka
for real. Meanwhile, Jo starts to suspect Alison, when Carter admits he
doesn't remember the conversation "he" and Jo had when Carter was in the
hospital. (I really don't feel this storyline came to a satisfactory
conclusion... :/ ) And, with Zane's help, Fargo gets back into 'Matrix
world' to see if Holly is alive (and I'll give you one guess as to
whether she is, or not!).
TBBT rerun - One of my least favorite episodes from the past season:
Leonard and Penny go on a "non-date"; Sheldon is scared by a bird on his
windowsill. This was one of the weakest episodes of the season.
Rules of Engagement rerun - One of my favorite episodes from this past
season: Audrey has throat problems and so can't talk - much to Jeff's
delight!; and Adam tries to prove that he doesn't get special attention
due to his looks, but due to his personality, with humorous results!
PoI rerun - A serviceable episode about a scrappy public advocate lawyer
who's on somebody's hit list. The better parts of the episode involve
Mr. Reese trying to figure out Mr. Finch's background. This is also the
first episode in which Det. Carter is "onboard", which leads to awkward
moments when Carter and Det. Fusco each think the other is "up to
something" when they are, in fact, both working for Reese/Finch without
knowing it!! :)
Recorded for later: H2O (ep. #3.16), Awake (series finale... :( ), and
Rook. Bleu!! (season premiere!!!).
--
"We're gonna need a lot of therapy." - the character Rachel in "Bunnyman"
(named 1 of the 5 Worst Horror Films of 2011 by 28DaysLaterAnalysis.com!!)
Ian J. Ball
May 25, 2012, 12:54:05 PM5/25/12
to
In article <anim8rfsk-8686C...@news.easynews.com>,
have watched this. But I figured she was just a guest-star, so I skipped
this one... :/
> The first ep rips off the set up for STRIPES with the slacker being
> dumped by his girlfriend, and then just sort of meanders through 'can he
> get another date' with stuff somebody thought was clever, but isn't. Of
> course the dates all end up banging the black guy, 'cause, well, that's
> what chicks and black guys do. Oh, yeah, the maid also bangs the black
> guy, 'cause that's what maids and black guys do. The cute waitress from
> the ads is in it, but all her scenes are in the ads (oddly, the show
> routinely uses different takes than the ads do, and they aren't nearly
> as good) and she doesn't show up again.
Yeah, if Emily Foxler was actually in the main cast, I actually would
> dumped by his girlfriend, and then just sort of meanders through 'can he
> get another date' with stuff somebody thought was clever, but isn't. Of
> course the dates all end up banging the black guy, 'cause, well, that's
> what chicks and black guys do. Oh, yeah, the maid also bangs the black
> guy, 'cause that's what maids and black guys do. The cute waitress from
> the ads is in it, but all her scenes are in the ads (oddly, the show
> routinely uses different takes than the ads do, and they aren't nearly
> as good) and she doesn't show up again.
have watched this. But I figured she was just a guest-star, so I skipped
this one... :/
Ian J. Ball
May 25, 2012, 12:55:41 PM5/25/12
to
In article
<b05558fe-346f-4b5b...@5g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
Oh, Miley's not a "side boob" - she's a full-on *boob*! ;)
<b05558fe-346f-4b5b...@5g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
Arthur Lipscomb
May 25, 2012, 1:21:17 PM5/25/12
to
the red world was a dream then he says something about having a dream
within a dream and realizes the green world is a dream too. The first
time around I missed his acknowledging the red world was a dream and I
missed his line about there being a dream within a dream (the red/green
world). Once he realized *both* worlds were dreams, the green world
slowly faded away and he awoke to the real world where his family was
still alive.
suzeeq
May 25, 2012, 1:43:08 PM5/25/12
to
up - that both worlds were dreams. But did the accident really happen,
or did he dream that too?
Dano
May 25, 2012, 1:45:51 PM5/25/12
to
"suzeeq" wrote in message news:jpogb3$5b5$1...@dont-email.me...
===========================================
That's how I interpreted it. I think they deliberately left it vague and
indeterminate on purpose. Take it however you like. The end is what you
want it to mean.
That's how I interpreted it. I think they deliberately left it vague and
indeterminate on purpose. Take it however you like. The end is what you
want it to mean.
EGK
May 25, 2012, 1:59:48 PM5/25/12
to
ambiguous. His line was about realizing he could dream while inside another
dream. The ending could have just as easily been him dreaming another world
where his family was still intact.
The creator said if the show had continued, Britton would have woke up back
in his jail cell in the red world. We still wouldn't know which one was
real.
Alan Sepinwall interviews the creator of Awake with his take on the finale.:
http://www.hitfix.com//whats-alan-watching/awake-series-finale-interview-with-creator-kyle-killen
Arthur Lipscomb
May 25, 2012, 2:04:20 PM5/25/12
to
*am* glad there was a resolution it simply wasn't as satisfying as it
could have been. Even with both worlds being dreams and no conspiracy,
I would have liked a Keyser Söze moment that explained why we should
care about a dream this character had. Was there any greater meaning to
it all? It was all just a dream isn't very satisfying IMO, despite
being better than no answer at all.
Dano
May 25, 2012, 2:05:16 PM5/25/12
to
"EGK" wrote in message news:ouhvr7ttr58vj02bg...@4ax.com...
============================================
Exactly what I had feared. Better to end it like this.
Exactly what I had feared. Better to end it like this.
Obveeus
May 25, 2012, 2:41:47 PM5/25/12
to
"Arthur Lipscomb" <art...@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:
>>>>> On 5/25/2012 3:14 AM, Obveeus wrote:
>>>>>> AWAKE: series finale. I would have preferred it if the show had ended
>>>>>> differently, but at least the finale brought closure to the
>>>>>> storylines.
>
> I'm taking it as both worlds were dreams so there was no conspiracy.
That is what I saw as the end. No bad cops. No dead family members. No
accident. The whole series was like a bad season of DALLAS.
> I *am* glad there was a resolution it simply wasn't as satisfying as it
> could have been.
fate was sealed.
> Even with both worlds being dreams and no conspiracy, I would have liked a
> Keyser Söze moment that explained why we should care about a dream this
> character had. Was there any greater meaning to it all? It was all just
> a dream isn't very satisfying IMO, despite being better than no answer at
> all.
the dream and churned back into the dual worlds again as if they were both
real. They also could have had 'real world' events start to hint that the
stuff in his season #1 long dream might be coming true...so basically he had
a vision of the future, but how much of that vision should he trust. They
also could have had some camera pullback show us that scientists or aliens
or etc... had him hooked up to machines and they were playing with his brain
activity. All, in all, it was an enjoyable TV series that is probably just
as well laid to rest now rather than after more seasons of convolution.
anim8rFSK
May 25, 2012, 2:47:15 PM5/25/12
to
In article
<ijball-NO_SPAM-766...@news.eternal-september.org>,
ads; he asks out a waitress at a place I assume they frequent, she says
yes and ... that's the end of it. She's never seen or mentioned again.
Yes, guys sometimes get a 'yes' and then never follow through on it -
God knows I've been guilty of it myself - but it doesn't END there,
instead, your friends (rightfully) harangue you about not following up,
sometimes for the rest of your life. And if she works someplace you
frequent, you have to switch places or hide or something. And any of
that could have been turned into something funny ... but nooooooo.
--
So we're all agreed that Clod is as stupid as Charlie Sheen?
<ijball-NO_SPAM-766...@news.eternal-september.org>,
"Ian J. Ball" <ijball-...@mac.invalid> wrote:
> In article <anim8rfsk-8686C...@news.easynews.com>,
> anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > I watched 2 episodes of the premiere of MEN AT WORK.
> >
> > The first ep rips off the set up for STRIPES with the slacker being
> > dumped by his girlfriend, and then just sort of meanders through 'can he
> > get another date' with stuff somebody thought was clever, but isn't. Of
> > course the dates all end up banging the black guy, 'cause, well, that's
> > what chicks and black guys do. Oh, yeah, the maid also bangs the black
> > guy, 'cause that's what maids and black guys do. The cute waitress from
> > the ads is in it, but all her scenes are in the ads (oddly, the show
> > routinely uses different takes than the ads do, and they aren't nearly
> > as good) and she doesn't show up again.
>
> Yeah, if Emily Foxler was actually in the main cast, I actually would
> have watched this. But I figured she was just a guest-star, so I skipped
> this one... :/
And that's how dumb this show is. Every line she had but one is in the
> In article <anim8rfsk-8686C...@news.easynews.com>,
> anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > I watched 2 episodes of the premiere of MEN AT WORK.
> >
> > The first ep rips off the set up for STRIPES with the slacker being
> > dumped by his girlfriend, and then just sort of meanders through 'can he
> > get another date' with stuff somebody thought was clever, but isn't. Of
> > course the dates all end up banging the black guy, 'cause, well, that's
> > what chicks and black guys do. Oh, yeah, the maid also bangs the black
> > guy, 'cause that's what maids and black guys do. The cute waitress from
> > the ads is in it, but all her scenes are in the ads (oddly, the show
> > routinely uses different takes than the ads do, and they aren't nearly
> > as good) and she doesn't show up again.
>
> Yeah, if Emily Foxler was actually in the main cast, I actually would
> have watched this. But I figured she was just a guest-star, so I skipped
> this one... :/
ads; he asks out a waitress at a place I assume they frequent, she says
yes and ... that's the end of it. She's never seen or mentioned again.
Yes, guys sometimes get a 'yes' and then never follow through on it -
God knows I've been guilty of it myself - but it doesn't END there,
instead, your friends (rightfully) harangue you about not following up,
sometimes for the rest of your life. And if she works someplace you
frequent, you have to switch places or hide or something. And any of
that could have been turned into something funny ... but nooooooo.
--
So we're all agreed that Clod is as stupid as Charlie Sheen?
anim8rFSK
May 25, 2012, 2:53:19 PM5/25/12
to
In article <jpo8c6$h20$2...@dont-email.me>,
--
So we're all agreed that Clod is as stupid as Charlie Sheen?
Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote:
> anim...@cox.net wrote:
> >"Obveeus" <Obv...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> "anim8rFSK" <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> >> > I watched 2 episodes of the premiere of MEN AT WORK.
> >>
> >> I forgot all about that new series.
> >
> >I would have too if I wasn't watching the Las Vegas reruns in the
> >afternoon; they advertise it a lot there, probably because James Leasure
> >is on both.
>
> I must have obliterated it from my memory banks after seeing it so
> relentlessly advertised.
You are SO lucky.
> anim...@cox.net wrote:
> >"Obveeus" <Obv...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> "anim8rFSK" <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> >> > I watched 2 episodes of the premiere of MEN AT WORK.
> >>
> >> I forgot all about that new series.
> >
> >I would have too if I wasn't watching the Las Vegas reruns in the
> >afternoon; they advertise it a lot there, probably because James Leasure
> >is on both.
>
> I must have obliterated it from my memory banks after seeing it so
> relentlessly advertised.
--
So we're all agreed that Clod is as stupid as Charlie Sheen?
anim8rFSK
May 25, 2012, 3:18:31 PM5/25/12
to
In article <rjour7hi2tj4l3h8u...@4ax.com>,
shawn <nanof...@gNOTmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 25 May 2012 04:19:30 -0400, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net>
> wrote:
>
> >I watched:
> >
>
>
> >
> >What did you watch?
>
> "Rookie Blue" - So now we have a new rookie added into the mix, but
> without quite the same naiviette of the previous rookies since he's
> coming in with four years military experience in Afghanistan (I
> think). Oh, and he's got a romantic connection to Charlotte Sullivan's
> character in the past. I can't quite recall what happened with Andy's
> (Missy Peregrym) character in the past season but she's still
> suspended at the start of the show and is due for her final
> evaluation/meeting with the board that will decide if she can go back
> on the job or not. Of course she ends up involved in finding a girl
> that's been missing for years even though she's not on the job at this
> point. At least no one makes huge mistakes in this episode, but there
> is always next week.
I gave up on this mess after the first or second episode ... tried it
last night 'cause of The Shat. Why haven't the other cops shot the
blonde cop dead yet? At least have someone hit her in the face with a
2x4 at the end of every scene?
How did the kidnapper get his hands on the girl again? How did the cops
figure out he had her (the cops were talking about 'them' on the way to
the ferry)? Wasn't there a closer unit they could have called to
respond?
Could the final scene have BEEN more awkward?
shawn <nanof...@gNOTmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 25 May 2012 04:19:30 -0400, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net>
> wrote:
>
> >I watched:
> >
>
>
> >
> >What did you watch?
>
> "Rookie Blue" - So now we have a new rookie added into the mix, but
> without quite the same naiviette of the previous rookies since he's
> coming in with four years military experience in Afghanistan (I
> think). Oh, and he's got a romantic connection to Charlotte Sullivan's
> character in the past. I can't quite recall what happened with Andy's
> (Missy Peregrym) character in the past season but she's still
> suspended at the start of the show and is due for her final
> evaluation/meeting with the board that will decide if she can go back
> on the job or not. Of course she ends up involved in finding a girl
> that's been missing for years even though she's not on the job at this
> point. At least no one makes huge mistakes in this episode, but there
> is always next week.
I gave up on this mess after the first or second episode ... tried it
last night 'cause of The Shat. Why haven't the other cops shot the
blonde cop dead yet? At least have someone hit her in the face with a
2x4 at the end of every scene?
How did the kidnapper get his hands on the girl again? How did the cops
figure out he had her (the cops were talking about 'them' on the way to
the ferry)? Wasn't there a closer unit they could have called to
respond?
Could the final scene have BEEN more awkward?
shawn
May 25, 2012, 4:11:33 PM5/25/12
to
On Fri, 25 May 2012 12:18:31 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net>
wrote:
>In article <rjour7hi2tj4l3h8u...@4ax.com>,
> shawn <nanof...@gNOTmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 25 May 2012 04:19:30 -0400, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I watched:
>> >
>>
>>
>> >
>> >What did you watch?
>>
>> "Rookie Blue" - So now we have a new rookie added into the mix, but
>> without quite the same naiviette of the previous rookies since he's
>> coming in with four years military experience in Afghanistan (I
>> think). Oh, and he's got a romantic connection to Charlotte Sullivan's
>> character in the past. I can't quite recall what happened with Andy's
>> (Missy Peregrym) character in the past season but she's still
>> suspended at the start of the show and is due for her final
>> evaluation/meeting with the board that will decide if she can go back
>> on the job or not. Of course she ends up involved in finding a girl
>> that's been missing for years even though she's not on the job at this
>> point. At least no one makes huge mistakes in this episode, but there
>> is always next week.
>
>I gave up on this mess after the first or second episode ... tried it
>last night 'cause of The Shat. Why haven't the other cops shot the
>blonde cop dead yet? At least have someone hit her in the face with a
>2x4 at the end of every scene?
Because it would make Ian sad.. or sadder than he is.
Seriously she was the worst at the beginning of the first season.
Luckily the writers have improved her character over time. But they
all made really stupid career ending mistakes in the first season.
>How did the kidnapper get his hands on the girl again? How did the cops
>figure out he had her (the cops were talking about 'them' on the way to
>the ferry)? Wasn't there a closer unit they could have called to
>respond?
That I don't know unless they just assumed that she would go back to
him (which did seem to be what happened based on how she was acting
around him.) It's not unusual for someone that's been kept in
captivity for so long and especially when you consider how young she
was when he first kidnapped her. As for them being involved in
capturing him that's a standard TV trope. The stars of the show will
always be the closest to the villain even when normally there would
many other units much closer or better able to arrest the criminal.
>Could the final scene have BEEN more awkward?
That was badly written. I got what they were trying to put across but
the sense of humor (that I assume was intended there) just didn't come
across. I blame that on the writers, actors and director. All of them
failed to improve on what could have been a decent scene.
wrote:
>In article <rjour7hi2tj4l3h8u...@4ax.com>,
> shawn <nanof...@gNOTmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 25 May 2012 04:19:30 -0400, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I watched:
>> >
>>
>>
>> >
>> >What did you watch?
>>
>> "Rookie Blue" - So now we have a new rookie added into the mix, but
>> without quite the same naiviette of the previous rookies since he's
>> coming in with four years military experience in Afghanistan (I
>> think). Oh, and he's got a romantic connection to Charlotte Sullivan's
>> character in the past. I can't quite recall what happened with Andy's
>> (Missy Peregrym) character in the past season but she's still
>> suspended at the start of the show and is due for her final
>> evaluation/meeting with the board that will decide if she can go back
>> on the job or not. Of course she ends up involved in finding a girl
>> that's been missing for years even though she's not on the job at this
>> point. At least no one makes huge mistakes in this episode, but there
>> is always next week.
>
>I gave up on this mess after the first or second episode ... tried it
>last night 'cause of The Shat. Why haven't the other cops shot the
>blonde cop dead yet? At least have someone hit her in the face with a
>2x4 at the end of every scene?
Seriously she was the worst at the beginning of the first season.
Luckily the writers have improved her character over time. But they
all made really stupid career ending mistakes in the first season.
>How did the kidnapper get his hands on the girl again? How did the cops
>figure out he had her (the cops were talking about 'them' on the way to
>the ferry)? Wasn't there a closer unit they could have called to
>respond?
him (which did seem to be what happened based on how she was acting
around him.) It's not unusual for someone that's been kept in
captivity for so long and especially when you consider how young she
was when he first kidnapped her. As for them being involved in
capturing him that's a standard TV trope. The stars of the show will
always be the closest to the villain even when normally there would
many other units much closer or better able to arrest the criminal.
>Could the final scene have BEEN more awkward?
the sense of humor (that I assume was intended there) just didn't come
across. I blame that on the writers, actors and director. All of them
failed to improve on what could have been a decent scene.
Ian J. Ball
May 25, 2012, 4:19:28 PM5/25/12
to
On May 25, 12:18 pm, anim8rFSK <anim8r...@cox.net> wrote:
> In article <rjour7hi2tj4l3h8u8h8lpha056do03...@4ax.com>,
die!! :p
> In article <rjour7hi2tj4l3h8u8h8lpha056do03...@4ax.com>,
> shawn <nanoflo...@gNOTmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 May 2012 04:19:30 -0400, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net>
> > wrote:
>
> > >I watched:
>
> > >What did you watch?
>
> > "Rookie Blue" - So now we have a new rookie added into the mix, but
> > without quite the same naiviette of the previous rookies since he's
> > coming in with four years military experience in Afghanistan (I
> > think). Oh, and he's got a romantic connection to Charlotte Sullivan's
> > character in the past. I can't quite recall what happened with Andy's
> > (Missy Peregrym) character in the past season but she's still
> > suspended at the start of the show and is due for her final
> > evaluation/meeting with the board that will decide if she can go back
> > on the job or not. Of course she ends up involved in finding a girl
> > that's been missing for years even though she's not on the job at this
> > point. At least no one makes huge mistakes in this episode, but there
> > is always next week.
>
> I gave up on this mess after the first or second episode ... tried it
> last night 'cause of The Shat. Why haven't the other cops shot the
> blonde cop dead yet? At least have someone hit her in the face with a
> 2x4 at the end of every scene?
Like Mara from "House of Anubis", Gail Peck is too beautiful to
> > On Fri, 25 May 2012 04:19:30 -0400, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net>
> > wrote:
>
> > >I watched:
>
> > >What did you watch?
>
> > "Rookie Blue" - So now we have a new rookie added into the mix, but
> > without quite the same naiviette of the previous rookies since he's
> > coming in with four years military experience in Afghanistan (I
> > think). Oh, and he's got a romantic connection to Charlotte Sullivan's
> > character in the past. I can't quite recall what happened with Andy's
> > (Missy Peregrym) character in the past season but she's still
> > suspended at the start of the show and is due for her final
> > evaluation/meeting with the board that will decide if she can go back
> > on the job or not. Of course she ends up involved in finding a girl
> > that's been missing for years even though she's not on the job at this
> > point. At least no one makes huge mistakes in this episode, but there
> > is always next week.
>
> I gave up on this mess after the first or second episode ... tried it
> last night 'cause of The Shat. Why haven't the other cops shot the
> blonde cop dead yet? At least have someone hit her in the face with a
> 2x4 at the end of every scene?
die!! :p
Ubiquitous
May 25, 2012, 5:41:01 PM5/25/12
to
ijball-...@mac.invalid wrote:
> tdciago <tdc...@aol.com> wrote:
>> On May 25, 10:19 am, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote about
>> KATHY:
>> > Heh heh. Did Kathy manage to not veer into her lame leftist partisian
>> > nonsense?
>>
>> I don't recall any political references on the show at all this
>> week. We did, however, get plenty of side boob from Miley Cyrus and
>> Kim Zolciak.
>
>Oh, Miley's not a "side boob" - she's a full-on *boob*! ;)
In Newport's words, she's a "total cunt".
> tdciago <tdc...@aol.com> wrote:
>> On May 25, 10:19 am, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote about
>> KATHY:
>> > Heh heh. Did Kathy manage to not veer into her lame leftist partisian
>> > nonsense?
>>
>> I don't recall any political references on the show at all this
>> week. We did, however, get plenty of side boob from Miley Cyrus and
>> Kim Zolciak.
>
>Oh, Miley's not a "side boob" - she's a full-on *boob*! ;)
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
anim8rFSK
May 25, 2012, 6:04:51 PM5/25/12
to
In article <jpou9f$siq$4...@dont-email.me>,
Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote:
> ijball-...@mac.invalid wrote:
> > tdciago <tdc...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> On May 25, 10:19 am, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote about
>
> >> KATHY:
> >> > Heh heh. Did Kathy manage to not veer into her lame leftist partisian
> >> > nonsense?
> >>
> >> I don't recall any political references on the show at all this
> >> week. We did, however, get plenty of side boob from Miley Cyrus and
> >> Kim Zolciak.
> >
> >Oh, Miley's not a "side boob" - she's a full-on *boob*! ;)
>
> In Newport's words, she's a "total cunt".
As opposed to Jamie Lee Curtis, who's a "partial cunt"
> ijball-...@mac.invalid wrote:
> > tdciago <tdc...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> On May 25, 10:19 am, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote about
>
> >> KATHY:
> >> > Heh heh. Did Kathy manage to not veer into her lame leftist partisian
> >> > nonsense?
> >>
> >> I don't recall any political references on the show at all this
> >> week. We did, however, get plenty of side boob from Miley Cyrus and
> >> Kim Zolciak.
> >
> >Oh, Miley's not a "side boob" - she's a full-on *boob*! ;)
>
> In Newport's words, she's a "total cunt".
anim8rFSK
May 25, 2012, 6:05:18 PM5/25/12
to
Mason Barge
May 25, 2012, 6:06:57 PM5/25/12
to
Ian J. Ball
May 25, 2012, 6:07:31 PM5/25/12
to
In article <jpnm2c$48r$1...@dont-email.me>, "Obveeus" <Obv...@aol.com>
wrote:
> "Ubiquitous" <web...@polaris.net> wrote:
>
> > What did you watch?
>
> AWAKE: series finale. I would have preferred it if the show had ended
> differently, but at least the finale brought closure to the storylines.
+1
> "Ubiquitous" <web...@polaris.net> wrote:
>
> > What did you watch?
>
> AWAKE: series finale. I would have preferred it if the show had ended
> differently, but at least the finale brought closure to the storylines.
anim8rFSK
May 25, 2012, 6:08:11 PM5/25/12
to
In article <kgpvr7t4hp0mg2u01...@4ax.com>,
Wow
> Luckily the writers have improved her character over time. But they
> all made really stupid career ending mistakes in the first season.
>
> >How did the kidnapper get his hands on the girl again? How did the cops
> >figure out he had her (the cops were talking about 'them' on the way to
> >the ferry)? Wasn't there a closer unit they could have called to
> >respond?
>
> That I don't know unless they just assumed that she would go back to
> him (which did seem to be what happened based on how she was acting
> around him.) It's not unusual for someone that's been kept in
> captivity for so long and especially when you consider how young she
> was when he first kidnapped her. As for them being involved in
> capturing him that's a standard TV trope. The stars of the show will
> always be the closest to the villain even when normally there would
> many other units much closer or better able to arrest the criminal.
Yeah, but they made a big deal about racing and navigating their way
there, which was annoying. Now if they'd actually TAKEN the suspended
girl, the only one who had seen the victim, it would have made slightly
more sense.
> Luckily the writers have improved her character over time. But they
> all made really stupid career ending mistakes in the first season.
>
> >How did the kidnapper get his hands on the girl again? How did the cops
> >figure out he had her (the cops were talking about 'them' on the way to
> >the ferry)? Wasn't there a closer unit they could have called to
> >respond?
>
> That I don't know unless they just assumed that she would go back to
> him (which did seem to be what happened based on how she was acting
> around him.) It's not unusual for someone that's been kept in
> captivity for so long and especially when you consider how young she
> was when he first kidnapped her. As for them being involved in
> capturing him that's a standard TV trope. The stars of the show will
> always be the closest to the villain even when normally there would
> many other units much closer or better able to arrest the criminal.
there, which was annoying. Now if they'd actually TAKEN the suspended
girl, the only one who had seen the victim, it would have made slightly
more sense.
>
> >Could the final scene have BEEN more awkward?
>
> That was badly written. I got what they were trying to put across but
> the sense of humor (that I assume was intended there) just didn't come
> across. I blame that on the writers, actors and director. All of them
> failed to improve on what could have been a decent scene.
And that weird music sting that came up ... just bad.
> >Could the final scene have BEEN more awkward?
>
> That was badly written. I got what they were trying to put across but
> the sense of humor (that I assume was intended there) just didn't come
> across. I blame that on the writers, actors and director. All of them
> failed to improve on what could have been a decent scene.
Ian J. Ball
May 25, 2012, 6:11:44 PM5/25/12
to
In article <jpof2d$tle$1...@dont-email.me>,
That's the *best* interpretation of what happened.
The worse interpretation is that the ending world was a *third* dream,
and then you get... well, a *mess*. :(
The worse interpretation is that the ending world was a *third* dream,
and then you get... well, a *mess*. :(
Ian J. Ball
May 25, 2012, 6:16:09 PM5/25/12
to
In article <bkcvr7ptijf76cek4...@4ax.com>,
30-minutes IMO...
> I thought for a while his wife was an angel and it was going to be
> supernatural, and he'd end up okay with just his son alive. That would
> have been better, it would have made the scene with the goodbye dinner
> make sense. I have a feeling they were arguing about explaining the
> double dream right to the last few days, since the goodbye dinner doesn't
> work very well if she's still alive.
>
> I expected more from these guys. I guess they had trouble putting their
> hearts into it.
>
> Grade: C
I'd rate it higher, just because I liked what came before more. But this
finale was a disappointment, I feel.
Whatever else you want to say about "Life on Mars" (U.S.), that ending
wasn't disappointing, more - WTF?!?!!
Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com> wrote:
> AWAKE series finale:
>
> The explanation was utterly lame, but so what? Plus the first half hour
> was rather tedious.
I disagree - the first half-hour was much more satisfying than the last
> AWAKE series finale:
>
> The explanation was utterly lame, but so what? Plus the first half hour
> was rather tedious.
30-minutes IMO...
> I thought for a while his wife was an angel and it was going to be
> supernatural, and he'd end up okay with just his son alive. That would
> have been better, it would have made the scene with the goodbye dinner
> make sense. I have a feeling they were arguing about explaining the
> double dream right to the last few days, since the goodbye dinner doesn't
> work very well if she's still alive.
>
> I expected more from these guys. I guess they had trouble putting their
> hearts into it.
>
> Grade: C
finale was a disappointment, I feel.
Whatever else you want to say about "Life on Mars" (U.S.), that ending
wasn't disappointing, more - WTF?!?!!
Eddie Grove
May 25, 2012, 6:31:18 PM5/25/12
to
is a dream. He wanted the dream back, and managed to dream where both
were alive. Why not, if you can choose to dream, and you can somehow
manage your dreams?
The thing was supposed to be open-ended. Red was clearly explained as a
dream, but you can't *know* that any world is real, including the green.
This viewpoint also meshes with the interview link someone posted.
Nevertheless, I am rewriting the ending in my head. Let's go SciFi.
Both worlds were real, and in the red he had a psychotic break, and in
the green he can dream a world where both wife and son are alive.
Insert mumbo-jumbo about how his conciousness can no longer jump to the
red universe, because the minds have become too dissimilar. So he gets
to dream again when he goes to sleep. Those who want infinite recursion
can say instead that his mind found a way to pop to another universe
where both are alive.
Eddie
Jim T.
May 25, 2012, 7:05:03 PM5/25/12
to
On Fri, 25 May 2012 12:35:50 -0400, Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>AWAKE series finale:
>
>The explanation was utterly lame, but so what? Plus the first half hour
>was rather tedious.
>
>I thought for a while his wife was an angel and it was going to be
>supernatural, and he'd end up okay with just his son alive. That would
>have been better, it would have made the scene with the goodbye dinner
>make sense. I have a feeling they were arguing about explaining the
>double dream right to the last few days, since the goodbye dinner doesn't
>work very well if she's still alive.
>
>I expected more from these guys. I guess they had trouble putting their
>hearts into it.
>
>Grade: C
I have to say I'm shocked by your and others reactions. I'd rate it as
among the best series finales of all time. It almost makes me glad the
series was canceled so we got this finale.
In the unlikely chance any of the writers or producers see this: Thank
you! I eagerly anticipate your next projects.
wrote:
>
>AWAKE series finale:
>
>The explanation was utterly lame, but so what? Plus the first half hour
>was rather tedious.
>
>I thought for a while his wife was an angel and it was going to be
>supernatural, and he'd end up okay with just his son alive. That would
>have been better, it would have made the scene with the goodbye dinner
>make sense. I have a feeling they were arguing about explaining the
>double dream right to the last few days, since the goodbye dinner doesn't
>work very well if she's still alive.
>
>I expected more from these guys. I guess they had trouble putting their
>hearts into it.
>
>Grade: C
among the best series finales of all time. It almost makes me glad the
series was canceled so we got this finale.
In the unlikely chance any of the writers or producers see this: Thank
you! I eagerly anticipate your next projects.
EGK
May 25, 2012, 7:13:08 PM5/25/12
to
idea he was just dreaming everything way too literally. The ending was
left ambiguous as to what was real. Even the creator of the show said if
the series had gone forward he would have woken up back in his cell in red
world. Nothing was really answered as to the nature of his dreams. At
the same time I thought it was a fitting finale that gave closure to the
series.
Icebreaker
May 25, 2012, 7:42:23 PM5/25/12
to
"Ian J. Ball" <ijb...@mac.com> wrote in message
news:96f482d0-c799-4621...@pr7g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
suzeeq
May 25, 2012, 11:18:28 PM5/25/12
to
Steve Newport
May 26, 2012, 2:08:04 AM5/26/12
to
From: web...@polaris.net (Ubiquitous)
SN: To be a TOTAL one, she should have to be a political conservative.
*********************************
she's a "total cunt".
------------------------------------
SN: To be a TOTAL one, she should have to be a political conservative.
*********************************
David Barnett
May 26, 2012, 3:13:28 AM5/26/12
to
In article <jpnfaj$pd9$3...@dont-email.me>,
web...@polaris.net says...
> What did you watch?
This morning I watched
SILENT WITNESS: Death Has No Dominion (Part 1)
and at present I am watching
DOWNTON ABBEY: 2-01 and I am not exactly thrilled by it.
--
David Barnett
web...@polaris.net says...
> What did you watch?
This morning I watched
SILENT WITNESS: Death Has No Dominion (Part 1)
and at present I am watching
DOWNTON ABBEY: 2-01 and I am not exactly thrilled by it.
--
David Barnett
Mason Barge
May 26, 2012, 1:01:44 PM5/26/12
to
normalized.
I thought it was a terrible ending, without more. They should have taken
7 or 8 minutes out of all the thriller stuff and shown him avoiding the
car crash in real life, that would have worked.
Or even better, for me, would be to go outright supernatural and have the
eerie romantic dinner with his wife be a "goodbye" and have her be an
actual ghost or spirit who had come back to protect him and her son. Then
the blue world could just become the real world.
She would have been something along the lines of on of the ghosts in A
Christmas Carol by forcing the red world into his mind, showing him what
terrible things might happen.
That would also have avoided the sticky gooey "nothing bad happened" last
scene.
Mason Barge
May 26, 2012, 1:07:44 PM5/26/12
to
On Fri, 25 May 2012 19:05:03 -0400, Jim T. <x@y.z> wrote:
drains the story of any significance whatsoever.
Mason Barge
May 26, 2012, 1:08:50 PM5/26/12
to
EGK
May 26, 2012, 1:10:08 PM5/26/12
to
On Sat, 26 May 2012 13:01:44 -0400, Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Fri, 25 May 2012 15:11:44 -0700, "Ian J. Ball"
><ijball-...@mac.invalid> wrote:
>>The worse interpretation is that the ending world was a *third* dream,
>>and then you get... well, a *mess*. :(
>
>There's zero support for that idea. Notice that the color is completely
>normalized.
That's not true. The conversaion he was having with the shrink was support
for it. He came to the realization that he could be having dreams within
dreams. So why not dream up a third scenario?
wrote:
>On Fri, 25 May 2012 15:11:44 -0700, "Ian J. Ball"
><ijball-...@mac.invalid> wrote:
>>The worse interpretation is that the ending world was a *third* dream,
>>and then you get... well, a *mess*. :(
>
>There's zero support for that idea. Notice that the color is completely
>normalized.
for it. He came to the realization that he could be having dreams within
dreams. So why not dream up a third scenario?
EGK
May 26, 2012, 1:21:59 PM5/26/12
to
On Sat, 26 May 2012 13:07:44 -0400, Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com>
What do you think "turtles all the way down" refers to?
Dano
May 26, 2012, 1:42:42 PM5/26/12
to
"Mason Barge" wrote in message
news:bd32s7l7p17nq6mha...@4ax.com...
=============================================
A vast oversimplification. Of course you must realize the ENTIRE premise
was about the question of reality versus the dream state. So why watch?
news:bd32s7l7p17nq6mha...@4ax.com...
A vast oversimplification. Of course you must realize the ENTIRE premise
was about the question of reality versus the dream state. So why watch?
suzeeq
May 26, 2012, 2:02:01 PM5/26/12
to
wife and son survived may also be a dream.
> Or even better, for me, would be to go outright supernatural and have the
> eerie romantic dinner with his wife be a "goodbye" and have her be an
> actual ghost or spirit who had come back to protect him and her son. Then
> the blue world could just become the real world.
>
> She would have been something along the lines of on of the ghosts in A
> Christmas Carol by forcing the red world into his mind, showing him what
> terrible things might happen.
>
> That would also have avoided the sticky gooey "nothing bad happened" last
> scene.
Seapig
May 26, 2012, 2:03:42 PM5/26/12
to
On May 25, 3:52 am, shawn <nanoflo...@gNOTmail.com> wrote:
> "So You Think Can Dance" - Looks like they found some good dancers for
> this season as well as more people that were just out to get some free
> air time. I still can't believe that one guy that was so against the
> SYTYCD is run and yet still came out to dance. If he was looking for
> free publicity he got it, but I don't think it went the way he hoped.
> Watching the little girl go through her own verion of her mom's dance
> routine was adorable and just great TV.
Maybe the a-hole guy thought the judges would keep him around just to
show how unbiased they are, or to give the show the villain that so
many reality shows think they need. I thought he danced pretty well,
so maybe the judges did turn on him.
I thought the "Exorcist" was the best, but we often see dancers make a
big splash at the auditions and then disappear quickly and quietly
from Vegas. I'm afraid he's going to be another one of them. I
didn't fall in love with any of the women, but the 20s-style girl who
led things off was kind of cute.
> "So You Think Can Dance" - Looks like they found some good dancers for
> this season as well as more people that were just out to get some free
> air time. I still can't believe that one guy that was so against the
> SYTYCD is run and yet still came out to dance. If he was looking for
> free publicity he got it, but I don't think it went the way he hoped.
> Watching the little girl go through her own verion of her mom's dance
> routine was adorable and just great TV.
Maybe the a-hole guy thought the judges would keep him around just to
show how unbiased they are, or to give the show the villain that so
many reality shows think they need. I thought he danced pretty well,
so maybe the judges did turn on him.
I thought the "Exorcist" was the best, but we often see dancers make a
big splash at the auditions and then disappear quickly and quietly
from Vegas. I'm afraid he's going to be another one of them. I
didn't fall in love with any of the women, but the 20s-style girl who
led things off was kind of cute.
EGK
May 26, 2012, 2:08:48 PM5/26/12
to
returned to the real world at the end. The episode's name and the quote
from the shrink, "it's turtles all the way down" should have made it obvious
that the scene with his wife and son was another dream. Unless that's too
esoteric a quote?
suzeeq
May 26, 2012, 2:20:44 PM5/26/12
to
would make more sense. I don't recall that I've ever heard it before.
Obveeus
May 26, 2012, 2:23:23 PM5/26/12
to
but that is a political issue, not a psychological one.
EGK
May 26, 2012, 2:36:28 PM5/26/12
to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down
The origins of the turtle story are uncertain.
The most widely known version appears in Stephen Hawking's 1988 book A Brief
History of Time, which starts:
A well-known scientist (some say it was Bertrand Russell) once gave a
public lecture on astronomy. He described how the earth orbits around the
sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the center of a vast collection
of stars called our galaxy. At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at
the back of the room got up and said: "What you have told us is rubbish. The
world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant tortoise." The
scientist gave a superior smile before replying, "What is the tortoise
standing on?" "You're very clever, young man, very clever," said the old
lady. "But it's turtles all the way down!"
Obveeus
May 26, 2012, 2:37:23 PM5/26/12
to
>> I can't understand why people are thinking it was all a dream and he
>> returned to the real world at the end. The episode's name and the quote
>> from the shrink, "it's turtles all the way down" should have made it
>> obvious
>> that the scene with his wife and son was another dream. Unless that's
>> too
>> esoteric a quote?
>
> Well, if most of us knew the meaning behind the turtles line, maybe it
> would make more sense. I don't recall that I've ever heard it before.
It is a Stephen Hawking reference:
>> returned to the real world at the end. The episode's name and the quote
>> from the shrink, "it's turtles all the way down" should have made it
>> obvious
>> that the scene with his wife and son was another dream. Unless that's
>> too
>> esoteric a quote?
>
> Well, if most of us knew the meaning behind the turtles line, maybe it
> would make more sense. I don't recall that I've ever heard it before.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down
EGK
May 26, 2012, 2:47:38 PM5/26/12
to
>> I can't understand why people are thinking it was all a dream and he
>> returned to the real world at the end. The episode's name and the quote
>> from the shrink, "it's turtles all the way down" should have made it obvious
>> that the scene with his wife and son was another dream. Unless that's too
>> esoteric a quote?
>
>Well, if most of us knew the meaning behind the turtles line, maybe it
>would make more sense. I don't recall that I've ever heard it before.
How about this explanation from South Park's classic _Insheeption_ episode.
>> returned to the real world at the end. The episode's name and the quote
>> from the shrink, "it's turtles all the way down" should have made it obvious
>> that the scene with his wife and son was another dream. Unless that's too
>> esoteric a quote?
>
>Well, if most of us knew the meaning behind the turtles line, maybe it
>would make more sense. I don't recall that I've ever heard it before.
"It will be like a taco inside a taco, within a Taco Bell that's inside a
KFC within a mall that's inside your dream."
BTR1701
May 26, 2012, 3:13:37 PM5/26/12
to
In article <qg32s7t26ja4gus9f...@4ax.com>,
We've got one who could be Tricia Helfer's sister. Absolutely gorgeous.
They are out there.
They are out there.
BTR1701
May 26, 2012, 3:18:06 PM5/26/12
to
In article <jpr72s$lad$1...@dont-email.me>, "Obveeus" <Obv...@aol.com>
wrote:
It's a famous cosmological reference.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down
"Turtles all the way down" is a jocular expression of the infinite
regress problem in cosmology posed by the "unmoved mover" paradox. The
phrase was popularized by Stephen Hawking in 1988. The "turtle" metaphor
in the anecdote represents a popular expression of a "primitive
cosmological myth", viz. the flat earth supported on the back of a huge
turtle.
The most widely known version of the turtle story appears in Stephen
wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down
"Turtles all the way down" is a jocular expression of the infinite
regress problem in cosmology posed by the "unmoved mover" paradox. The
phrase was popularized by Stephen Hawking in 1988. The "turtle" metaphor
in the anecdote represents a popular expression of a "primitive
cosmological myth", viz. the flat earth supported on the back of a huge
turtle.
The most widely known version of the turtle story appears in Stephen
Hawking's 1988 book A Brief History of Time, which starts:
A well-known scientist (some say it was Bertrand Russell)
once gave a public lecture on astronomy. He described how
the earth orbits around the sun and how the sun, in turn,
orbits around the center of a vast collection of stars
called our galaxy. At the end of the lecture, a little old
lady at the back of the room got up and said: "What you have
told us is rubbish. The world is really a flat plate
supported on the back of a giant tortoise." The scientist
gave a superior smile before replying, "What is the tortoise
standing on?" "You're very clever, young man, very clever,"
said the old lady. "But it's turtles all the way down!"
A well-known scientist (some say it was Bertrand Russell)
once gave a public lecture on astronomy. He described how
the earth orbits around the sun and how the sun, in turn,
orbits around the center of a vast collection of stars
called our galaxy. At the end of the lecture, a little old
lady at the back of the room got up and said: "What you have
told us is rubbish. The world is really a flat plate
supported on the back of a giant tortoise." The scientist
gave a superior smile before replying, "What is the tortoise
standing on?" "You're very clever, young man, very clever,"
anim8rFSK
May 26, 2012, 3:40:54 PM5/26/12
to
In article <k692s7pjj3d0k5inj...@4ax.com>,
Great. Now I'm hungry.
--
NETFLIX is befouling the ends of shows with text & graphics and shrinkage
--
NETFLIX is befouling the ends of shows with text & graphics and shrinkage
Ian J. Ball
May 26, 2012, 3:55:38 PM5/26/12
to
On May 26, 11:08 am, EGK <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 26 May 2012 12:02:01 -0600, suzeeq <su...@imbris.com> wrote:
> >Mason Barge wrote:
> >> On Fri, 25 May 2012 15:11:44 -0700, "Ian J. Ball"
> >> <ijball-NO_S...@mac.invalid> wrote:
> On Sat, 26 May 2012 12:02:01 -0600, suzeeq <su...@imbris.com> wrote:
> >Mason Barge wrote:
> >> On Fri, 25 May 2012 15:11:44 -0700, "Ian J. Ball"
> >>> In article <jpof2d$tl...@dont-email.me>,
satisfying conclusion to this series.
Frankly, I'd rather go with "Missing's" ending than "Hey - this is yet
a *third* dream!!!" ending for this one.
chicagofan
May 26, 2012, 4:06:46 PM5/26/12
to
anim8rFSK wrote:
> In article<jpo193$4ih$1...@dont-email.me>, "Obveeus"<Obv...@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
>> "anim8rFSK"<anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>>> I watched 2 episodes of the premiere of MEN AT WORK.
>>
>> I forgot all about that new series.
> I would have too if I wasn't watching the Las Vegas reruns in the
> afternoon; they advertise it a lot there, probably because James Leasure
> is on both.
>
> From your summary, it sounds like I
>> lucked out.
> Very much so. It's not even bad funny, where it's good to mock. It's
> just Springtime for Hitler slack jawed awful.
>
ROTFL!!! That's a new expression to me... but I get your point. ;)
bj
> In article<jpo193$4ih$1...@dont-email.me>, "Obveeus"<Obv...@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
>> "anim8rFSK"<anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>>> I watched 2 episodes of the premiere of MEN AT WORK.
>>
>> I forgot all about that new series.
> I would have too if I wasn't watching the Las Vegas reruns in the
> afternoon; they advertise it a lot there, probably because James Leasure
> is on both.
>
> From your summary, it sounds like I
>> lucked out.
> Very much so. It's not even bad funny, where it's good to mock. It's
> just Springtime for Hitler slack jawed awful.
>
ROTFL!!! That's a new expression to me... but I get your point. ;)
bj
EGK
May 26, 2012, 4:17:28 PM5/26/12
to
On Sat, 26 May 2012 12:55:38 -0700 (PDT), "Ian J. Ball" <ijb...@mac.com>
wrote:
I realized they didn't have time to craft an ending to the series. I didn't
mind that it was left up in the air. I thought they did a good job giving
closure to the conspiracy plot while at the same time leaving me wondering
and contemplating the nature of his dreams.
wrote:
mind that it was left up in the air. I thought they did a good job giving
closure to the conspiracy plot while at the same time leaving me wondering
and contemplating the nature of his dreams.
Obveeus
May 26, 2012, 5:16:03 PM5/26/12
to
"anim8rFSK" <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
> EGK <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>> How about this explanation from South Park's classic _Insheeption_
>> episode.
>>
>> "It will be like a taco inside a taco, within a Taco Bell that's inside a
>> KFC within a mall that's inside your dream."
>
> Great. Now I'm hungry.
anim8rFSK
May 26, 2012, 5:21:33 PM5/26/12
to
In article <jprd4m$qi9$2...@dont-email.me>, chicagofan <m...@privacy.net>
wrote:
Oh, you've never seen Mel Brooks THE PRODUCERS?
Zero Mostel decides he could make a lot of money by selling overselling
percentages of a play and intentionally producing a flop. He finds
SPRINGTIME FOR HITLER and the audience reaction opening night is a
little like this:
http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/audience-500.jpg
wrote:
Zero Mostel decides he could make a lot of money by selling overselling
percentages of a play and intentionally producing a flop. He finds
SPRINGTIME FOR HITLER and the audience reaction opening night is a
little like this:
http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/audience-500.jpg
suzeeq
May 26, 2012, 6:19:11 PM5/26/12
to
suzeeq
May 26, 2012, 6:20:45 PM5/26/12
to
one of the others. One of the original lives is real, not a dream.
EGK
May 26, 2012, 6:31:29 PM5/26/12
to
thought he was coming to the realization that the green world was real and
he'd given up on the red world. Instead Britten's psychosis went even
deeper to the next "turtle".
Ian J. Ball
May 26, 2012, 6:30:38 PM5/26/12
to
bad as "all three worlds are dreams", but not as preferable as the
final world is the "real" one.
EGK
May 26, 2012, 6:36:24 PM5/26/12
to
On Sat, 26 May 2012 15:30:38 -0700 (PDT), "Ian J. Ball" <ijb...@mac.com>
wrote:
If the series had gone on, we would have seen it wasn't the real world
according to the creator. As it was, it's why I thought it made a good
ending to the series. It's left open to interpretation. People can view
it the way they want. Those who want a simplistic/happy ending can think he
just woke up from a nightmare. If you want to look deeper in to it, you
can view it as his psychosis becoming even worse.
wrote:
according to the creator. As it was, it's why I thought it made a good
ending to the series. It's left open to interpretation. People can view
it the way they want. Those who want a simplistic/happy ending can think he
just woke up from a nightmare. If you want to look deeper in to it, you
can view it as his psychosis becoming even worse.
suzeeq
May 26, 2012, 7:03:53 PM5/26/12
to
from the viewer's perspective, not Dr Evans.
anim8rFSK
May 26, 2012, 8:00:18 PM5/26/12
to
In article <jprh6k$k3g$1...@dont-email.me>, "Obveeus" <Obv...@aol.com>
wrote:
There was a side of KFC ...
wrote:
Ubiquitous
May 27, 2012, 9:25:06 AM5/27/12
to
>>> "Obveeus"<Obv...@aol.com> wrote:
>>> Very much so. MEN AT WORK's not even bad funny, where it's good to mock.
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
>>> Very much so. MEN AT WORK's not even bad funny, where it's good to mock.
>>> It's just Springtime for Hitler slack jawed awful.
>>
>> ROTFL!!! That's a new expression to me... but I get your point. ;)
>
>>
>> ROTFL!!! That's a new expression to me... but I get your point. ;)
>
>Oh, you've never seen Mel Brooks THE PRODUCERS?
>
>Zero Mostel decides he could make a lot of money by selling overselling
>percentages of a play and intentionally producing a flop. He finds
>SPRINGTIME FOR HITLER and the audience reaction opening night is a
>little like this:
>
>http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/audience-500.jpg
I bet Newport is used to seeing that at work.
>
>Zero Mostel decides he could make a lot of money by selling overselling
>percentages of a play and intentionally producing a flop. He finds
>SPRINGTIME FOR HITLER and the audience reaction opening night is a
>little like this:
>
>http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/audience-500.jpg
--
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the
21st century."
Michael Black
May 27, 2012, 11:48:52 AM5/27/12
to
On Sun, 27 May 2012, Ubiquitous wrote:
> anim...@cox.net wrote:
>> chicagofan <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>>> anim8rFSK wrote:
>>>> "Obveeus"<Obv...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Very much so. MEN AT WORK's not even bad funny, where it's good to mock.
>>>> It's just Springtime for Hitler slack jawed awful.
>>>
>>> ROTFL!!! That's a new expression to me... but I get your point. ;)
>>
>> Oh, you've never seen Mel Brooks THE PRODUCERS?
>>
>> Zero Mostel decides he could make a lot of money by selling overselling
>> percentages of a play and intentionally producing a flop. He finds
>> SPRINGTIME FOR HITLER and the audience reaction opening night is a
>> little like this:
>>
>> http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/audience-500.jpg
>
> I bet Newport is used to seeing that at work.
>
Actually, it's a great documentary about putting on a show.
> anim...@cox.net wrote:
>> chicagofan <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>>> anim8rFSK wrote:
>>>> "Obveeus"<Obv...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Very much so. MEN AT WORK's not even bad funny, where it's good to mock.
>>>> It's just Springtime for Hitler slack jawed awful.
>>>
>>> ROTFL!!! That's a new expression to me... but I get your point. ;)
>>
>> Oh, you've never seen Mel Brooks THE PRODUCERS?
>>
>> Zero Mostel decides he could make a lot of money by selling overselling
>> percentages of a play and intentionally producing a flop. He finds
>> SPRINGTIME FOR HITLER and the audience reaction opening night is a
>> little like this:
>>
>> http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/audience-500.jpg
>
> I bet Newport is used to seeing that at work.
>
Zero Mostel, who's not exactly that appealing at his age, courts and woos
older women to get them to buy into a production. We don't see it, but I
don't think he'd stop at kissing the women if necessary
Gene Wilder comes to do his books, realizes one could get a lot of money
so long as the show is a flop (sounds like some of the accounting for
movies) and they proceed to do so. They need a bad script, bad actors and
all that, in order to ensure a failure.
So they pick this wonderful play about Adolf Hitler, by some guy who seems
to be hiding out from war crime prosecution. Then they pick the wonderful
LSD, who'd do well doing dinner theatre, but seems to be more interested
in doing a faux-beatnik type poetry. And they pick a flamboyant
director.
Unfortunately, it all comes together so while the audience is initially
aghast, they reverse themselves and decide it's camp or parody, and they
love it under that guise. The playwright is outraged, this is a serious
show.
Michael
Arthur Lipscomb
May 27, 2012, 2:06:03 PM5/27/12
to
and "Love Power."
chicagofan
May 27, 2012, 2:09:44 PM5/27/12
to
>>> "Obveeus"<Obv...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> From your summary, it sounds like I lucked out.
>>> Very much so. It's not even bad funny, where it's good to mock. It's
>>> just Springtime for Hitler slack jawed awful.
>>>
>> ROTFL!!! That's a new expression to me... but I get your point. ;)
>> bj
> Oh, you've never seen Mel Brooks THE PRODUCERS?
>
> Zero Mostel decides he could make a lot of money by selling overselling
> percentages of a play and intentionally producing a flop. He finds
> SPRINGTIME FOR HITLER and the audience reaction opening night is a
> little like this:
>
> http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/audience-500.jpg
Heheehee.... love the photo. While most were shocked, one woman was enjoying it. ;)
>>>> From your summary, it sounds like I lucked out.
>>> Very much so. It's not even bad funny, where it's good to mock. It's
>>> just Springtime for Hitler slack jawed awful.
>>>
>> ROTFL!!! That's a new expression to me... but I get your point. ;)
>> bj
> Oh, you've never seen Mel Brooks THE PRODUCERS?
>
> Zero Mostel decides he could make a lot of money by selling overselling
> percentages of a play and intentionally producing a flop. He finds
> SPRINGTIME FOR HITLER and the audience reaction opening night is a
> little like this:
>
> http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/audience-500.jpg
bj
Mason Barge
May 27, 2012, 2:39:42 PM5/27/12
to
What?" out of the movie version of Cabaret. Listening to Lotte Lenya
singing the latter while scrubbing the floor was right out of Berthold
Brecht.
Not to mention - Liza Minelli. Ugh.
BTR1701
May 27, 2012, 3:07:10 PM5/27/12
to
Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote:
> anim...@cox.net wrote:
>> chicagofan <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>>> anim8rFSK wrote:
>>>> "Obveeus"<Obv...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Very much so. MEN AT WORK's not even bad funny, where it's good to mock.
>>>> It's just Springtime for Hitler slack jawed awful.
>>>
>>> ROTFL!!! That's a new expression to me... but I get your point. ;)
>>
>> Oh, you've never seen Mel Brooks THE PRODUCERS?
>>
>> Zero Mostel decides he could make a lot of money by selling overselling
>> percentages of a play and intentionally producing a flop. He finds
>> SPRINGTIME FOR HITLER and the audience reaction opening night is a
>> little like this:
>>
>> http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/audience-500.jpg
>
> I bet Newport is used to seeing that at work.
LOL!
> anim...@cox.net wrote:
>> chicagofan <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>>> anim8rFSK wrote:
>>>> "Obveeus"<Obv...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Very much so. MEN AT WORK's not even bad funny, where it's good to mock.
>>>> It's just Springtime for Hitler slack jawed awful.
>>>
>>> ROTFL!!! That's a new expression to me... but I get your point. ;)
>>
>> Oh, you've never seen Mel Brooks THE PRODUCERS?
>>
>> Zero Mostel decides he could make a lot of money by selling overselling
>> percentages of a play and intentionally producing a flop. He finds
>> SPRINGTIME FOR HITLER and the audience reaction opening night is a
>> little like this:
>>
>> http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/audience-500.jpg
>
> I bet Newport is used to seeing that at work.
Every now and then you come up with a good one.
anim8rFSK
May 27, 2012, 3:12:58 PM5/27/12
to
William December Starr
May 27, 2012, 5:03:09 PM5/27/12
to
In article <Pine.LNX.4.64.12...@darkstar.example.net>,
Michael Black <et...@ncf.ca> said:
[ re "The Producers" (1968) ]
> So they pick this wonderful play about Adolf Hitler, by some guy
> who seems to be hiding out from war crime prosecution.
I had the impression that the guy was just a deluded Nazi groupie,
as opposed to ever having actually been one. But maybe that was
just because I didn't want to think badly of a character played by
Kenneth Mars.
-- wds
Michael Black <et...@ncf.ca> said:
[ re "The Producers" (1968) ]
> So they pick this wonderful play about Adolf Hitler, by some guy
> who seems to be hiding out from war crime prosecution.
as opposed to ever having actually been one. But maybe that was
just because I didn't want to think badly of a character played by
Kenneth Mars.
-- wds
Arthur Lipscomb
May 27, 2012, 5:14:08 PM5/27/12
to
don't think it can even work on the same level if he was just a groupie
of some type.
suzeeq
May 27, 2012, 7:02:18 PM5/27/12
to
chicagofan
May 27, 2012, 7:53:35 PM5/27/12
to
bj
Ubiquitous
May 27, 2012, 8:12:51 PM5/27/12
to
anim...@cox.net wrote:
>In article <jptqla$4o8$1...@dont-email.me>, chicagofan <m...@privacy.net>
>wrote:
>In article <jptqla$4o8$1...@dont-email.me>, chicagofan <m...@privacy.net>
>wrote:
>> Heheehee.... love the photo. While most were shocked, one woman was
enjoying it. ;)
>
>There's always one!
enjoying it. ;)
>
That reminds me of an ep of "It's Always Sunny..." in which Dennis and
Mac sing Dayman, only to get booed off the stage, but if you look
carefully, there's a guy in the audience enjoying it!
Michael Black
May 27, 2012, 10:13:18 PM5/27/12
to
I certainly took into account that in the time of the movie, 1968, it
wasn't that long after the way. So someone 20 in 1945 could be 43 in '68.
I did exaggerate the specific character, I made up that he was wanted for
war crimes. But he just came across as an outright nazis, he spoke of the
fuhrer in loving terms, he had the helmet, he had the luger. It was too
early to be making fun of neo-nazis, if they even existed at taht point.
He just seemed to be more a nazis than a neo-nazi.
It's okay to accept Kenneth Mars as a nazi and still like him. Mel Brooks
has said that in making fun of them, he's not making light of them, he's
dismissing them. Franz Liebkind is a bumbling nazi to make fun of him,
Mel isn't suggesting that they weren't dangerous.
Even though it was a remake, I like Mel's "To Be or Not To Be", because
there again he is making fun of the nazis, but he also shows (in comedy
terms) the danger and fear of them.
Michael
anim8rFSK
May 27, 2012, 11:04:42 PM5/27/12
to
In article <jpug0o$nrg$6...@dont-email.me>,
Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote:
> anim...@cox.net wrote:
> >In article <jptqla$4o8$1...@dont-email.me>, chicagofan <m...@privacy.net>
> >wrote:
>
> >> Heheehee.... love the photo. While most were shocked, one woman was
> enjoying it. ;)
> >
> >There's always one!
>
> That reminds me of an ep of "It's Always Sunny..." in which Dennis and
> Mac sing Dayman, only to get booed off the stage, but if you look
> carefully, there's a guy in the audience enjoying it!
Somebody always likes the talentless fat kid.
> anim...@cox.net wrote:
> >In article <jptqla$4o8$1...@dont-email.me>, chicagofan <m...@privacy.net>
> >wrote:
>
> >> Heheehee.... love the photo. While most were shocked, one woman was
> enjoying it. ;)
> >
> >There's always one!
>
> That reminds me of an ep of "It's Always Sunny..." in which Dennis and
> Mac sing Dayman, only to get booed off the stage, but if you look
> carefully, there's a guy in the audience enjoying it!
Ian J. Ball
May 28, 2012, 11:25:24 AM5/28/12
to
In article <anim8rfsk-96111...@news.easynews.com>,
--
"We're gonna need a lot of therapy." - the character Rachel in "Bunnyman"
(named 1 of the 5 Worst Horror Films of 2011 by 28DaysLaterAnalysis.com!!)
anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
> In article <jpug0o$nrg$6...@dont-email.me>,
> Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote:
> > anim...@cox.net wrote:
> > >In article <jptqla$4o8$1...@dont-email.me>, chicagofan <m...@privacy.net>
> > >wrote:
> >
> > >> Heheehee.... love the photo. While most were shocked,
> > >> one woman was enjoying it. ;)
> > >
> > >There's always one!
> >
> > That reminds me of an ep of "It's Always Sunny..." in which Dennis and
> > Mac sing Dayman, only to get booed off the stage, but if you look
> > carefully, there's a guy in the audience enjoying it!
>
> Somebody always likes the talentless fat kid.
Mean!
> In article <jpug0o$nrg$6...@dont-email.me>,
> Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote:
> > anim...@cox.net wrote:
> > >In article <jptqla$4o8$1...@dont-email.me>, chicagofan <m...@privacy.net>
> > >wrote:
> >
> > >> Heheehee.... love the photo. While most were shocked,
> > >> one woman was enjoying it. ;)
> > >
> > >There's always one!
> >
> > That reminds me of an ep of "It's Always Sunny..." in which Dennis and
> > Mac sing Dayman, only to get booed off the stage, but if you look
> > carefully, there's a guy in the audience enjoying it!
>
> Somebody always likes the talentless fat kid.
--
"We're gonna need a lot of therapy." - the character Rachel in "Bunnyman"
(named 1 of the 5 Worst Horror Films of 2011 by 28DaysLaterAnalysis.com!!)
anim8rFSK
May 28, 2012, 3:21:42 PM5/28/12
to
In article
<ijball-NO_SPAM-D32...@news.eternal-september.org>,
<ijball-NO_SPAM-D32...@news.eternal-september.org>,
"Ian J. Ball" <ijball-...@mac.invalid> wrote:
> In article <anim8rfsk-96111...@news.easynews.com>,
> anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > In article <jpug0o$nrg$6...@dont-email.me>,
> > Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote:
> > > anim...@cox.net wrote:
> > > >In article <jptqla$4o8$1...@dont-email.me>, chicagofan <m...@privacy.net>
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > >> Heheehee.... love the photo. While most were shocked,
> > > >> one woman was enjoying it. ;)
> > > >
> > > >There's always one!
> > >
> > > That reminds me of an ep of "It's Always Sunny..." in which Dennis and
> > > Mac sing Dayman, only to get booed off the stage, but if you look
> > > carefully, there's a guy in the audience enjoying it!
> >
> > Somebody always likes the talentless fat kid.
>
> Mean!
Only because it's true.
> anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > In article <jpug0o$nrg$6...@dont-email.me>,
> > Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote:
> > > anim...@cox.net wrote:
> > > >In article <jptqla$4o8$1...@dont-email.me>, chicagofan <m...@privacy.net>
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > >> Heheehee.... love the photo. While most were shocked,
> > > >> one woman was enjoying it. ;)
> > > >
> > > >There's always one!
> > >
> > > That reminds me of an ep of "It's Always Sunny..." in which Dennis and
> > > Mac sing Dayman, only to get booed off the stage, but if you look
> > > carefully, there's a guy in the audience enjoying it!
> >
> > Somebody always likes the talentless fat kid.
>
> Mean!
Hunter
May 28, 2012, 5:14:03 PM5/28/12
to
On Fri, 25 May 2012 12:18:31 -0700, anim8rFSK <anim...@cox.net>
wrote:
>In article <rjour7hi2tj4l3h8u...@4ax.com>,
> shawn <nanof...@gNOTmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 25 May 2012 04:19:30 -0400, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I watched:
>> >
>>
>>
>> >
>> >What did you watch?
>>
>> "Rookie Blue" - So now we have a new rookie added into the mix, but
>> without quite the same naiviette of the previous rookies since he's
>> coming in with four years military experience in Afghanistan (I
>> think). Oh, and he's got a romantic connection to Charlotte Sullivan's
>> character in the past. I can't quite recall what happened with Andy's
>> (Missy Peregrym) character in the past season but she's still
>> suspended at the start of the show and is due for her final
>> evaluation/meeting with the board that will decide if she can go back
>> on the job or not. Of course she ends up involved in finding a girl
>> that's been missing for years even though she's not on the job at this
>> point. At least no one makes huge mistakes in this episode, but there
>> is always next week.
>
>I gave up on this mess after the first or second episode ... tried it
>last night 'cause of The Shat. Why haven't the other cops shot the
>blonde cop dead yet? At least have someone hit her in the face with a
>2x4 at the end of every scene?
>
>How did the kidnapper get his hands on the girl again?
-------
You mean after she disappeared from the scene of the pile up? That is
unknown. It is possible she went back to her kidnapper after her
escape attempt.
The back ground for those who don't know:
The person they mistakenly thought was the kidnapper, Doug Corbo the
Van driver was called by Alice the victim from the store she was at so
Corbo can take her to the hospital. Corbo knew her as the "daughter"
of his next door niehbor. John Gray, the guy who said to Andy and
Swarek earlier that he supposedly made a noise complaint against Corbo
who had supposedly constructed a out of code wall across his property
line and souldproofing his house. Swarek had met him earlier when John
gave him a tour of the house pretending to complain putting the blame
on Corbo to buy time.
>
> How did the cops
>figure out he had her (the cops were talking about 'them' on the way to
>the ferry)?
------
They assumed he had her. They raided Gray's house didn't find him
there then Diaz called the phone company under Jerry Barber's name
saying he didn't have time for a warrant and it was a case of a
missing girl. The phone company put them through to the last number
Gray called which was a Taxi service who in turn gave them the
destination of the cab he dropped Gray off at, namely the ferry
terminal
>
> Wasn't there a closer unit they could have called to
>respond?
-------
Typical dramatic tension. The heroes always rush to the scene even if
there should be a closer police unit to the destination. You see this
mostly with Cop shows that focus on detectives. In this case they
could've gave the discription of the girl and perp to any officers
closer but of course it wouldn't be dramatic for some faceless, no
name cop we never seen before make the capture, it has to be the known
heroes. :-)
>
>Could the final scene have BEEN more awkward?
--------
No. :-)
------>Hunter
"No man in the wrong can stand up against
a fellow that's in the right and keeps on acomin'."
-----William J. McDonald
Captain, Texas Rangers from 1891 to 1907
wrote:
>In article <rjour7hi2tj4l3h8u...@4ax.com>,
> shawn <nanof...@gNOTmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 25 May 2012 04:19:30 -0400, Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I watched:
>> >
>>
>>
>> >
>> >What did you watch?
>>
>> "Rookie Blue" - So now we have a new rookie added into the mix, but
>> without quite the same naiviette of the previous rookies since he's
>> coming in with four years military experience in Afghanistan (I
>> think). Oh, and he's got a romantic connection to Charlotte Sullivan's
>> character in the past. I can't quite recall what happened with Andy's
>> (Missy Peregrym) character in the past season but she's still
>> suspended at the start of the show and is due for her final
>> evaluation/meeting with the board that will decide if she can go back
>> on the job or not. Of course she ends up involved in finding a girl
>> that's been missing for years even though she's not on the job at this
>> point. At least no one makes huge mistakes in this episode, but there
>> is always next week.
>
>I gave up on this mess after the first or second episode ... tried it
>last night 'cause of The Shat. Why haven't the other cops shot the
>blonde cop dead yet? At least have someone hit her in the face with a
>2x4 at the end of every scene?
>
>How did the kidnapper get his hands on the girl again?
-------
You mean after she disappeared from the scene of the pile up? That is
unknown. It is possible she went back to her kidnapper after her
escape attempt.
The back ground for those who don't know:
The person they mistakenly thought was the kidnapper, Doug Corbo the
Van driver was called by Alice the victim from the store she was at so
Corbo can take her to the hospital. Corbo knew her as the "daughter"
of his next door niehbor. John Gray, the guy who said to Andy and
Swarek earlier that he supposedly made a noise complaint against Corbo
who had supposedly constructed a out of code wall across his property
line and souldproofing his house. Swarek had met him earlier when John
gave him a tour of the house pretending to complain putting the blame
on Corbo to buy time.
>
> How did the cops
>figure out he had her (the cops were talking about 'them' on the way to
>the ferry)?
------
They assumed he had her. They raided Gray's house didn't find him
there then Diaz called the phone company under Jerry Barber's name
saying he didn't have time for a warrant and it was a case of a
missing girl. The phone company put them through to the last number
Gray called which was a Taxi service who in turn gave them the
destination of the cab he dropped Gray off at, namely the ferry
terminal
>
> Wasn't there a closer unit they could have called to
>respond?
-------
Typical dramatic tension. The heroes always rush to the scene even if
there should be a closer police unit to the destination. You see this
mostly with Cop shows that focus on detectives. In this case they
could've gave the discription of the girl and perp to any officers
closer but of course it wouldn't be dramatic for some faceless, no
name cop we never seen before make the capture, it has to be the known
heroes. :-)
>
>Could the final scene have BEEN more awkward?
--------
No. :-)
------>Hunter
"No man in the wrong can stand up against
a fellow that's in the right and keeps on acomin'."
-----William J. McDonald
Captain, Texas Rangers from 1891 to 1907
~consul
May 30, 2012, 2:40:41 PM5/30/12
to
'tis on this 5/26/2012 11:36 AM, wrote EGK thus to say:
> On Sat, 26 May 2012 12:20:44 -0600, suzeeq<su...@imbris.com> wrote:
>> EGK wrote:
>>> returned to the real world at the end. The episode's name and the quote
>>> from the shrink, "it's turtles all the way down" should have made it obvious
> On Sat, 26 May 2012 12:20:44 -0600, suzeeq<su...@imbris.com> wrote:
>> EGK wrote:
>>> returned to the real world at the end. The episode's name and the quote
>>> from the shrink, "it's turtles all the way down" should have made it obvious
>> Well, if most of us knew the meaning behind the turtles line, maybe it
>> would make more sense. I don't recall that I've ever heard it before.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down
>> would make more sense. I don't recall that I've ever heard it before.
> A well-known scientist (some say it was Bertrand Russell) once gave a
> public lecture on astronomy. He described how the earth orbits around the
> sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the center of a vast collection
> of stars called our galaxy. At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at
> the back of the room got up and said: "What you have told us is rubbish. The
> world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant tortoise." The
> scientist gave a superior smile before replying, "What is the tortoise
> standing on?" "You're very clever, young man, very clever," said the old
> lady. "But it's turtles all the way down!"
Interesting read. When I heard her say it, I was thinking that it was related to the Native American stories that the world as we know it was on the back of a turtle, moving in the ocean. I'm from New York, I learned it from the Iroquise stories.
> public lecture on astronomy. He described how the earth orbits around the
> sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the center of a vast collection
> of stars called our galaxy. At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at
> the back of the room got up and said: "What you have told us is rubbish. The
> world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant tortoise." The
> scientist gave a superior smile before replying, "What is the tortoise
> standing on?" "You're very clever, young man, very clever," said the old
> lady. "But it's turtles all the way down!"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Turtle
--
"... respect, all good works are not done by only good folk. For here, at the end of all things, we shall do what needs to be done."
--till next time, consul -x- <<poetry.dolphins-cove.com>>
Jim G.
May 30, 2012, 3:48:17 PM5/30/12
to
BTR1701 sent the following on 5/26/2012 2:18 PM:
> It's a famous cosmological reference.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down
I can kinda see why people wouldn't be particularly interested in
philosophy or Russell, but it's depressing to think about how many
people haven't read (or listened to) Hawking's A BRIEF HISTORY OF TIME,
which also features the famous exchange.
--
Jim G. | Waukesha, WI
"I find it's best if you just ... go with it." -- Lincoln Lee, providing
us with FRINGE's "Every question just leads to more questions" moment
> It's a famous cosmological reference.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down
I can kinda see why people wouldn't be particularly interested in
philosophy or Russell, but it's depressing to think about how many
people haven't read (or listened to) Hawking's A BRIEF HISTORY OF TIME,
which also features the famous exchange.
--
Jim G. | Waukesha, WI
"I find it's best if you just ... go with it." -- Lincoln Lee, providing
us with FRINGE's "Every question just leads to more questions" moment
Mason Barge
May 31, 2012, 2:32:29 PM5/31/12
to
On Wed, 30 May 2012 14:48:17 -0500, "Jim G." <jimg...@geemail.com> wrote:
>BTR1701 sent the following on 5/26/2012 2:18 PM:
>> It's a famous cosmological reference.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down
>
>I can kinda see why people wouldn't be particularly interested in
>philosophy or Russell, but it's depressing to think about how many
>people haven't read (or listened to) Hawking's A BRIEF HISTORY OF TIME,
>which also features the famous exchange.
I read somewhere that something like 95% of the people who bought the book
>BTR1701 sent the following on 5/26/2012 2:18 PM:
>> It's a famous cosmological reference.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down
>
>I can kinda see why people wouldn't be particularly interested in
>philosophy or Russell, but it's depressing to think about how many
>people haven't read (or listened to) Hawking's A BRIEF HISTORY OF TIME,
>which also features the famous exchange.
didn't read more than 20 pages of it.
Obveeus
May 31, 2012, 2:35:24 PM5/31/12
to
Essays'. From what I was able to struggle through, Stephen Hawking is just
as much a philosopher as a scientist.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages