Re: So Much sci-fi, so few posts?
atlas bugged
news:hl19ud$bvc$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> Cross posting this to see if anyone is out there reading, and which of
> these 3 NG's may be still active?
It's always been sci-fi's nature to be like an iceberg. Every now and then,
it's the finest stuff in any genre (historically, for example, see 2001, and
currently, AVATAR seems all the rage,) but usually the 95% below the
waterline is even worse than the worst of other genres.
See Sturgeon's Law, which seems to apply with a vengeance in the famous
sci-fi author's own genre. Maybe that's why he noticed the "law" in the
first place.
My news server doesn't even seem to resolve the new "syfy" group, and it's
no wonder, since the station shows little worth talking about.
CAPRICA is certainly of interest right now, it's cutting-edge. But I've a
feeling SGU's bread-and-butter approach to grinding out decent stories will
eventually dominate.
>
>
> --
> JK Sinrod
> www.MyConeyIslandMemories.com
>
>
JK Coney
"atlas bugged" <atlasbug...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3h5h5g....@news.alt.net...
> "JK Coney" <jkc...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:hl19ud$bvc$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Cross posting this to see if anyone is out there reading, and which of
>> these 3 NG's may be still active?
>
> It's always been sci-fi's nature to be like an iceberg. Every now and
> then, it's the finest stuff in any genre (historically, for example, see
> 2001, and currently, AVATAR seems all the rage,) but usually the 95% below
> the waterline is even worse than the worst of other genres.
>
> See Sturgeon's Law, which seems to apply with a vengeance in the famous
> sci-fi author's own genre. Maybe that's why he noticed the "law" in the
> first place.
>
> My news server doesn't even seem to resolve the new "syfy" group, and it's
> no wonder, since the station shows little worth talking about.
>
The question is why isn't anyone posting? Just because there's not much
great stuff, never stopped folks like you before? As for the SYFI group,
email your service provider and ask to have it uploaded. I asked mine,
news.eternal-september.org and they added it in a matter of days. Or just
add eternal to your reader.
--
JK Sinrod
www.MyConeyIslandMemories.com
Mac Breck
How about "Sanctuary" ? I just finished Season 1 on DVD (via Netflix).
SG-U was discussed awhile back, but many seemed to not care for it.
--
Mac Breck (KoshN)
-------------------------------
"Babylon 5: Crusade" (1999) - "War Zone"
Galen (to Gideon): "I've been penalized before for helping other
people. I've been trying to decide whether or not I should risk it
again."
Mac Breck
Why bother? alt.tv.scifi.channel still exists and has all the history.
No need to go to a different group, and lose all the history just
because the damned silly channel slightly changed its name. Post at
alt.tv.scifi.channel and be a rebel. :-)
atlas bugged
news:JbydnfmEZKOS5eXW...@supernews.com...
> atlas bugged wrote:
>> "JK Coney" <jkc...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>> news:hl19ud$bvc$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> Cross posting this to see if anyone is out there reading, and which
>>> of these 3 NG's may be still active?
>>
>> It's always been sci-fi's nature to be like an iceberg. Every now
>> and then, it's the finest stuff in any genre (historically, for
>> example, see 2001, and currently, AVATAR seems all the rage,) but
>> usually the 95% below the waterline is even worse than the worst of
>> other genres.
>>
>> See Sturgeon's Law, which seems to apply with a vengeance in the
>> famous sci-fi author's own genre. Maybe that's why he noticed the
>> "law" in the first place.
>>
>> My news server doesn't even seem to resolve the new "syfy" group, and
>> it's no wonder, since the station shows little worth talking about.
>>
>> CAPRICA is certainly of interest right now, it's cutting-edge. But
>> I've a feeling SGU's bread-and-butter approach to grinding out decent
>> stories will eventually dominate.
>
> How about "Sanctuary" ? I just finished Season 1 on DVD (via Netflix).
> SG-U was discussed awhile back, but many seemed to not care for it.
SG-U *is* on probation, but we've seen that company has a proven track
record. I'm still staying with it.
As a businessman, I admire both SANCTUARY and WAREHOUSE 13 for their seeming
"great leap" in producing good-looking sci-fi on a threadbare budget.
But what matters is the story. Both seem especially weak in this regard.
I have had this dichotomy for decades - I admired TRON, but hated it.
So what do you think of SANCTUARY? I've only watched a few.
Mac Breck
> "Mac Breck" <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:JbydnfmEZKOS5eXW...@supernews.com...
>> atlas bugged wrote:
>>> "JK Coney" <jkc...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>> news:hl19ud$bvc$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> Cross posting this to see if anyone is out there reading, and
>>>> which of these 3 NG's may be still active?
>>>
>>> It's always been sci-fi's nature to be like an iceberg. Every now
>>> and then, it's the finest stuff in any genre (historically, for
>>> example, see 2001, and currently, AVATAR seems all the rage,) but
>>> usually the 95% below the waterline is even worse than the worst of
>>> other genres.
>>>
>>> See Sturgeon's Law, which seems to apply with a vengeance in the
>>> famous sci-fi author's own genre. Maybe that's why he noticed the
>>> "law" in the first place.
>>>
>>> My news server doesn't even seem to resolve the new "syfy" group,
>>> and it's no wonder, since the station shows little worth talking
>>> about.
>>>
>>> CAPRICA is certainly of interest right now, it's cutting-edge.
I dropped BSG after Season 3 & Razor, sold my DVDs and have absolutely
no desire to watch BSG Season 4 or Caprica. I liked the BSG miniseries
and Season 1, but started liking it less and less as the seasons went
on. To me, when I dropped it, it was nothing but a trashy daytime soap
set in space. :-P
>>> But
>>> I've a feeling SGU's bread-and-butter approach to grinding out
>>> decent stories will eventually dominate.
I'll give it a chance when it hits DVD (Netflix). SG-1 and SG-A built
up a lot of goodwill with me.
>> How about "Sanctuary" ? I just finished Season 1 on DVD (via
>> Netflix). SG-U was discussed awhile back, but many seemed to not
>> care for it.
>
> SG-U *is* on probation, but we've seen that company has a proven track
> record. I'm still staying with it.
>
> As a businessman, I admire both SANCTUARY and WAREHOUSE 13 for their
> seeming "great leap" in producing good-looking sci-fi on a threadbare
> budget.
I'm _amazed_ at how good "Sanctuary" looks, e.g. compared to the Babylon
5 "Lost Tales" DVD (Some of the scenes on "Lost Tales" look really flat
, i.e. 2D, to me.) Regarding "Sanctuary," I haven't been able to
suspend disbelief that easily since "Babylon 5." I _wish_ "Crusade" and
"Lost Tales" could be continued (Yes, I know it'll never happen.) using
the same 4096x2048 resolution, techniques, equipment, effects house and
some of the people they have on "Sanctuary."
Still waiting for "Warehouse 13" to come out on DVD.
> But what matters is the story. Both seem especially weak in this
> regard.
I'd say that "Sanctuary" is fine in that regard. The one minor problem
I'm having is that I'm so used to hearing Amanda Tapping speak as Carter
(on SG-1 & SG-A), with that accent, that it throws me off when she speak
on "Sanctuary." I don't know if her accent on "Sanctuary" is her
natural accent, or something else. It doesn't feel right to me. Maybe
I just have to get used to hearing her speak as Helen Magnus. <shrug>
> I have had this dichotomy for decades - I admired TRON, but hated it.
I never cared for it.
> So what do you think of SANCTUARY? I've only watched a few.
I just watched the whole season, four DVDs in a row over the last two
weeks, and rated it four out of five stars on Netflix. I like it a lot.
FYI, I haven't had Sci-Fi since 12/2003. Since then, I've been going
the DVD route on Netflix, and if I really like a show, I quit renting
that show on Netflix and instead buy the DVDs (like I did for
"Supernatural.").
JK Coney
>
> Why bother? alt.tv.scifi.channel still exists and has all the history.
> No need to go to a different group, and lose all the history just
> because the damned silly channel slightly changed its name. Post at
> alt.tv.scifi.channel and be a rebel. :-)
>
> --
> Mac Breck (KoshN)
That's why I crossposted this thread. I was feeling that our group had
possibly become fragmented with the new group taking some away from the old.
Apparently no one is posting much to any of them.
--
JK Sinrod
www.MyConeyIslandMemories.com
JK Coney
> atlas bugged wrote:
>
> How about "Sanctuary" ? I just finished Season 1 on DVD (via Netflix).
> SG-U was discussed awhile back, but many seemed to not care for it.
>
> --
> Mac Breck (KoshN)
Both Sanctuary and Warehouse have gone from OK to dreadful, IMHO. SG-U
is promising as well as Caprica. Right now the best sci-fi on TV is LOST!
--
JK Sinrod
www.MyConeyIslandMemories.com
Merrick Baldelli
<atlasbug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>SG-U *is* on probation, but we've seen that company has a proven track
>record. I'm still staying with it.
Proven record for sucking the marrow out of the bones and
leaving a worthless husk by the end, perhaps.
>As a businessman, I admire both SANCTUARY and WAREHOUSE 13 for their seeming
>"great leap" in producing good-looking sci-fi on a threadbare budget.
I concur on only one of your choices. And it's not Warehouse
the 13th: the Series, either.
>But what matters is the story. Both seem especially weak in this regard.
Correction, what matters is the ability to suspend
disbelief... If one cannot do that with science fiction (or any story
for that matter); it doesn't have a rat's chance of escaping a sinking
ship.
>So what do you think of SANCTUARY? I've only watched a few.
Jim G said it best here, which I concur. You should go look
for that comment.
--
-=-=-/ )=*=-='=-.-'-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
_( (_ , '_ * . Merrick Baldelli
(((\ \> /_1 `
(\\\\ \_/ /
-=-\ /-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
\ _/ Who are these folks and why have they
/ / stopped taking their medication?
- Captain Infinity
Anim8rFSK
"Mac Breck" <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I'd say that "Sanctuary" is fine in that regard. The one minor problem
> I'm having is that I'm so used to hearing Amanda Tapping speak as Carter
> (on SG-1 & SG-A), with that accent, that it throws me off when she speak
> on "Sanctuary." I don't know if her accent on "Sanctuary" is her
> natural accent, or something else. It doesn't feel right to me. Maybe
> I just have to get used to hearing her speak as Helen Magnus. <shrug>
Whatever that mutant accent of hers is, it isn't "natural"
--
As Adam West as Bruce Wayne as Batman said in "Smack in the Middle"
the second half of the 1966 BATMAN series pilot when Jill St. John
as Molly as Robin as Molly fell into the Batmobile's atomic pile:
"What a terrible way to go-go"
A Watcher
> In article <jNydnfloZOUuOuXW...@supernews.com>,
> "Mac Breck" <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> I'd say that "Sanctuary" is fine in that regard. The one minor problem
>> I'm having is that I'm so used to hearing Amanda Tapping speak as Carter
>> (on SG-1 & SG-A), with that accent, that it throws me off when she speak
>> on "Sanctuary." I don't know if her accent on "Sanctuary" is her
>> natural accent, or something else. It doesn't feel right to me. Maybe
>> I just have to get used to hearing her speak as Helen Magnus. <shrug>
>
> Whatever that mutant accent of hers is, it isn't "natural"
>
I found it hard to adjust to her new role and couldn't get interested in
the series. I keep seeing Col Carter on screen.
rwgibson13
> In article <jNydnfloZOUuOuXWnZ2dnUVZ_qSdn...@supernews.com>,
> Â "Mac Breck" <macthevor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > I'd say that "Sanctuary" is fine in that regard. Â The one minor problem
> > I'm having is that I'm so used to hearing Amanda Tapping speak as Carter
> > (on SG-1 & SG-A), with that accent, that it throws me off when she speak
> > on "Sanctuary." Â I don't know if her accent on "Sanctuary" is her
> > natural accent, or something else. Â It doesn't feel right to me. Â Maybe
> > I just have to get used to hearing her speak as Helen Magnus. <shrug>
>
> Whatever that mutant accent of hers is, it isn't "natural"
Exactly. Everytime I watch that series, I really do get the feeling
it's taking place on an alternate Earth.
RWG (maybe other tv producers should take note? :-)
Merrick Baldelli
wrote:
>> natural accent, or something else. It doesn't feel right to me. Maybe
>> I just have to get used to hearing her speak as Helen Magnus. <shrug>
>
>Whatever that mutant accent of hers is, it isn't "natural"
Please don't make me laugh. I bruised a rib this morning
falling on a sheet of ice while avoiding my cat. Laughing hurts...
Mark Nobles
> On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 19:45:01 -0500, "atlas bugged"
> <atlasbug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >SG-U *is* on probation, but we've seen that company has a proven track
> >record. I'm still staying with it.
>
> Proven record for sucking the marrow out of the bones and
> leaving a worthless husk by the end, perhaps.
It's much better than SG-Atlantis, and actually it's pretty much
exactly what ST-Voyager was supposed to be.
>
> >As a businessman, I admire both SANCTUARY and WAREHOUSE 13 for their seeming
> >"great leap" in producing good-looking sci-fi on a threadbare budget.
>
> I concur on only one of your choices. And it's not Warehouse
> the 13th: the Series, either.
Is today Backwards Day or Bizarro Day? Because that's the only way you
could say that.
>
> >But what matters is the story. Both seem especially weak in this regard.
>
> Correction, what matters is the ability to suspend
> disbelief... If one cannot do that with science fiction (or any story
> for that matter); it doesn't have a rat's chance of escaping a sinking
> ship.
But it the strength of the story and the characters that allow me to
suspend belief. When you have those, you don't need much in the way of
flashy FX. Doctor Who and The Avengers demonstrate that. Avatar
demonstrates the opposite, that without a good story and characters a
film fails no matter how good the effects.
>
> >So what do you think of SANCTUARY? I've only watched a few.
>
> Jim G said it best here, which I concur. You should go look
> for that comment.
I can't find any comment about Sanctuary by him.
Davej
wrote:
> [...]
> CAPRICA is certainly of interest right now, it's cutting-edge. Â But I've a
> feeling SGU's bread-and-butter approach to grinding out decent stories will
> eventually dominate.
>
What, other than Caprica and Lost, is running right now?
Mark Nobles
> On Feb 14, 6:51ÔøΩam, "atlas bugged" <atlasbuggedbys...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > [...]
> > CAPRICA is certainly of interest right now, it's cutting-edge. ÔøΩBut I've a
> > feeling SGU's bread-and-butter approach to grinding out decent stories will
> > eventually dominate.
> >
>
> What, other than Caprica and Lost, is running right now?
CSI: Horatio
Mac Breck
>> wrote:
>>> [...]
>>> CAPRICA is certainly of interest right now, it's cutting-edge. �But
>>> I've a feeling SGU's bread-and-butter approach to grinding out
>>> decent stories will eventually dominate.
>>>
>>
>> What, other than Caprica and Lost, is running right now?
>
> CSI: Horatio
OK, now filter out what's unwatchable.
atlas bugged
news:160220100048164558%cmn-n...@comcast.net...
> Merrick Baldelli <mbal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 19:45:01 -0500, "atlas bugged"
>> <atlasbug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >SG-U *is* on probation, but we've seen that company has a proven track
>> >record. I'm still staying with it.
>>
>> Proven record for sucking the marrow out of the bones and
>> leaving a worthless husk by the end, perhaps.
>
> It's much better than SG-Atlantis, and actually it's pretty much
> exactly what ST-Voyager was supposed to be.
>>
>> >As a businessman, I admire both SANCTUARY and WAREHOUSE 13 for their
>> >seeming
>> >"great leap" in producing good-looking sci-fi on a threadbare budget.
>>
>> I concur on only one of your choices. And it's not Warehouse
>> the 13th: the Series, either.
>
> Is today Backwards Day or Bizarro Day? Because that's the only way you
> could say that.
I thought they were both using blue-screen extensively and generating sets
with them.
The sets, AIUI, are computer-creations good enough to satisfy a TV audience
that they weren't openly fake, and thus opening the door to a vast new range
of affordable settings
>>
>> >But what matters is the story. Both seem especially weak in this
>> >regard.
>>
>> Correction, what matters is the ability to suspend
>> disbelief... If one cannot do that with science fiction (or any story
>> for that matter); it doesn't have a rat's chance of escaping a sinking
>> ship.
>
> But it the strength of the story and the characters that allow me to
> suspend belief. When you have those, you don't need much in the way of
> flashy FX. Doctor Who and The Avengers demonstrate that. Avatar
> demonstrates the opposite, that without a good story and characters a
> film fails no matter how good the effects.
That's right. Avatar is technically Cameron's greatest realization, but
without an exemplary story, it is ultimately weak, indeed.
(I probably find Avatar's story as lacking as you do, but it's such a
splendid animation in 3D that I've watched it twice in theaters.)
Even first-year Star Trek looked cheesy to my 10-year-old eyes, but those
were some very sharp stories!
Suspension of disbelief is necessary but hardly sufficient for good sci-fi.
Davej
> Mark Nobles wrote:
> > Davej <galt...@hotmail.com> wrote:> >>> CAPRICA is certainly of interest right now, it's cutting-edge. ÊBut
> >>> I've a feeling SGU's bread-and-butter approach to grinding out
> >>> decent stories will eventually dominate.
>
> >> What, other than Caprica and Lost, is running right now?
>
> > CSI: Horatio
>
> OK, now filter out what's unwatchable.
>
Yeah, they'd have to push CSI out at least a few years into the future
for me to consider it legitimate science fiction, and I'm no fan of
the red headed guy.
Dimensional Traveler
> On Feb 16, 5:12 pm, "Mac Breck" <macthevor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Mark Nobles wrote:
>>> Davej <galt...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Feb 14, "atlas bugged" <atlas.@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> [...]
>>>>> I've a feeling SGU's bread-and-butter approach to grinding out
>>>>> decent stories will eventually dominate.
>>>> What, other than Caprica and Lost, is running right now?
>>> CSI: Horatio
>> OK, now filter out what's unwatchable.
>>
>
> Yeah, they'd have to push CSI out at least a few years into the future
> for me to consider it legitimate science fiction, and I'm no fan of
> the red headed guy.
His ability to teleport doesn't qualify as science fiction?
--
Murphy was an optimist.
Merrick Baldelli
<cmn-n...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Proven record for sucking the marrow out of the bones and
>> leaving a worthless husk by the end, perhaps.
>
>It's much better than SG-Atlantis, and actually it's pretty much
>exactly what ST-Voyager was supposed to be.
Funny, I thought BSG was closer to that mark, before it had
gone into the dark voyage of bad soap opera material. In the time
that I sat there watching SGU, I thought it more a bad "Big Brother"
-- particularly with the shower scene.
>> >As a businessman, I admire both SANCTUARY and WAREHOUSE 13 for their seeming
>> >"great leap" in producing good-looking sci-fi on a threadbare budget.
>>
>> I concur on only one of your choices. And it's not Warehouse
>> the 13th: the Series, either.
>
>Is today Backwards Day or Bizarro Day? Because that's the only way you
>could say that.
Says you... I could say that they only way you could suffer
through Warehouse the 13th: the Series is either you have suffered
from a near life threatening traumatic head injury or you're a
bleating sheep -- but hey... Even I know that different strokes are
for different folks.
>> >But what matters is the story. Both seem especially weak in this regard.
>>
>> Correction, what matters is the ability to suspend
>> disbelief... If one cannot do that with science fiction (or any story
>> for that matter); it doesn't have a rat's chance of escaping a sinking
>> ship.
>
>But it the strength of the story and the characters that allow me to
>suspend belief. When you have those, you don't need much in the way of
>flashy FX. Doctor Who and The Avengers demonstrate that. Avatar
>demonstrates the opposite, that without a good story and characters a
>film fails no matter how good the effects.
ibid.
>> >So what do you think of SANCTUARY? I've only watched a few.
>>
>> Jim G said it best here, which I concur. You should go look
>> for that comment.
>
>I can't find any comment about Sanctuary by him.
*shrugs* Oh well, and I'm too lazy to do a search... Moving
on now.
atlas bugged
news:sc6nn5d1p031cl5kc...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 00:48:16 -0600, Mark Nobles
> <cmn-n...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>> Proven record for sucking the marrow out of the bones and
>>> leaving a worthless husk by the end, perhaps.
>>
>>It's much better than SG-Atlantis, and actually it's pretty much
>>exactly what ST-Voyager was supposed to be.
>
> Funny, I thought BSG was closer to that mark, before it had
> gone into the dark voyage of bad soap opera material. In the time
> that I sat there watching SGU, I thought it more a bad "Big Brother"
> -- particularly with the shower scene.
>
>>> >As a businessman, I admire both SANCTUARY and WAREHOUSE 13 for their
>>> >seeming
>>> >"great leap" in producing good-looking sci-fi on a threadbare budget.
>>>
>>> I concur on only one of your choices. And it's not Warehouse
>>> the 13th: the Series, either.
>>
>>Is today Backwards Day or Bizarro Day? Because that's the only way you
>>could say that.
>
> Says you... I could say that they only way you could suffer
> through Warehouse the 13th: the Series is either you have suffered
> from a near life threatening traumatic head injury or you're a
> bleating sheep -- but hey... Even I know that different strokes are
> for different folks.
The problem with Whorehouse 13 - IMNSHO - is that it can't decide what it
is. It wants to be sci-fi "lite" in the same comical vein that EUREKA has
managed to pull off (barely, but I think it succeeded,) but at the same time
it wants to have a little gravity. And, you're right, it's kind of a remake
the television series FRIDAY THE 13th (not the film series,) and that old,
cheaply made TV show *was* arguably better, at least I enjoyed it more than
W13.
>
>>> >But what matters is the story. Both seem especially weak in this
>>> >regard.
>>>
>>> Correction, what matters is the ability to suspend
>>> disbelief... If one cannot do that with science fiction (or any story
>>> for that matter); it doesn't have a rat's chance of escaping a sinking
>>> ship.
Yes, I'm still however saying it's the story that matters.
Anim8rFSK
<94492562-7373-4393...@f29g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
rwgibson13 <rwgib...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 15, 9:13�am, Anim8rFSK <ANIM8R...@cox.net> wrote:
> > In article <jNydnfloZOUuOuXWnZ2dnUVZ qSdn...@supernews.com>,
> > �"Mac Breck" <macthevor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I'd say that "Sanctuary" is fine in that regard. �The one minor problem
> > > I'm having is that I'm so used to hearing Amanda Tapping speak as Carter
> > > (on SG-1 & SG-A), with that accent, that it throws me off when she speak
> > > on "Sanctuary." �I don't know if her accent on "Sanctuary" is her
> > > natural accent, or something else. �It doesn't feel right to me. �Maybe
> > > I just have to get used to hearing her speak as Helen Magnus. <shrug>
> >
> > Whatever that mutant accent of hers is, it isn't "natural"
>
> Exactly. Everytime I watch that series, I really do get the feeling
> it's taking place on an alternate Earth.
Um, well, it is. :)
>
> RWG (maybe other tv producers should take note? :-)
--
Anim8rFSK
"atlas bugged" <atlasbug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Mark Nobles" <cmn-n...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:160220100048164558%cmn-n...@comcast.net...
> > Merrick Baldelli <mbal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 19:45:01 -0500, "atlas bugged"
> >> <atlasbug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >SG-U *is* on probation, but we've seen that company has a proven track
> >> >record. I'm still staying with it.
> >>
> >> Proven record for sucking the marrow out of the bones and
> >> leaving a worthless husk by the end, perhaps.
> >
> > It's much better than SG-Atlantis, and actually it's pretty much
> > exactly what ST-Voyager was supposed to be.
> >>
> >> >As a businessman, I admire both SANCTUARY and WAREHOUSE 13 for their
> >> >seeming
> >> >"great leap" in producing good-looking sci-fi on a threadbare budget.
> >>
> >> I concur on only one of your choices. And it's not Warehouse
> >> the 13th: the Series, either.
> >
> > Is today Backwards Day or Bizarro Day? Because that's the only way you
> > could say that.
>
> I thought they were both using blue-screen extensively and generating sets
> with them.
green screen
>
> The sets, AIUI, are computer-creations good enough to satisfy a TV audience
> that they weren't openly fake, and thus opening the door to a vast new range
> of affordable settings
Uh - in Sanctuary??? Sanctuary looks like ColecoVision.
Anim8rFSK
Dimensional Traveler <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
Or them having an ongoing private space program, holographic computers
far more advanced than Enterprise, routine airline transportation that
takes you from Miami to Brazil in a matter of minutes . . .
Mac Breck
True, but filtering out the unwatchable takes care of Caruso.
Mac Breck
> On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 00:48:16 -0600, Mark Nobles
> <cmn-n...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> As a businessman, I admire both SANCTUARY and WAREHOUSE 13 for
>>>> their seeming "great leap" in producing good-looking sci-fi on a
>>>> threadbare budget.
>>>
>>> I concur on only one of your choices. And it's not Warehouse
>>> the 13th: the Series, either.
>>
>> Is today Backwards Day or Bizarro Day? Because that's the only way
>> you could say that.
>
> Says you... I could say that they only way you could suffer
> through Warehouse the 13th: the Series is either you have suffered
> from a near life threatening traumatic head injury or you're a
> bleating sheep -- but hey... Even I know that different strokes are
> for different folks.
....or somebody may have just liked Joanne Kelly as Bianca in "The
Dresden Files" and now checks out whatever she's in when he happens upon
it (e.g. "National Lampoon's Going the Distance"). ;-) I'm going to
give "Warehouse 13" a look based on that. She's also the reason I'm
going to watch "Jeremiah" Seasons 1 & 2 (Yes, I know she's only in
Season 2.).
Mac Breck
Well, don't you think the green screen work in "Sanctuary" looked better
than a lot of the green screen work in "Babylon 5: The Lost Tales"
(2007) (V)? Oh, that's right, you never saw it.
Babylon 5: The Lost Tales (2007) (V, 1 DVD)
http://amazon.imdb.com/title/tt0871427/
Admittedly, B5:TLT was done on a $3 million budget, and they had to make
almost everything from scratch (because Warners lost, sold or destroyed
almost all 1999 and earlier B5 resources.), so 99.99% of what you see
came out of that $3 million (building rental, set construction, CGI
models, sequences and virtual sets, costumes, cast and crew salaries,
etc.). All they were able to use from the B5 thru Crusade days was a
starfury cockpit, a couple of costumes, and a piece of a wall that
included a doorway. Thank you WB for being such a good caretaker of B5
resources! <S>
David Milligan
do that?
Mac Breck
> "JK Coney" <jkc...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:hlaejd$nq4$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>
>> "Mac Breck" <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:JbydnfiEZKON5eXW...@supernews.com...
>>>
>>> Why bother? alt.tv.scifi.channel still exists and has all the
>>> history. No need to go to a different group, and lose all the
>>> history just because the damned silly channel slightly changed its
>>> name. Post at alt.tv.scifi.channel and be a rebel. :-)
>> That's why I crossposted this thread. I was feeling that our
>> group had possibly become fragmented with the new group taking some
>> away from the old. Apparently no one is posting much to any of them.
>>
>> --
>> JK Sinrod
>> www.MyConeyIslandMemories.com
>>
> I see people talking about crossposting all the time -- how
> do you do that?
Put multiple newsgroups in the Newsgroups line separated by a comma and
a space, but you only want to do it IF the post applies to those
newsgroups.
Frequently, miscreants and idiots crosspost to newsgroups that have
nothing to do with the thread. A favorite of theirs is to crosspost
everything they send, to rec.sport.pro-wrestling. Then, when people do
a quick reply without checking the Newsgroups line, their replies go
there as well, even though they had no intention to post to that group,
they have no interest in that group and do not read that group.
Always check the Newsgroups line and DELETE groups to which you don't
want to post.
I'm sending this reply to all of the groups on the above post, because I
don't know which group you're reading.
Merrick Baldelli
wrote:
>Or them having an ongoing private space program, holographic computers
>far more advanced than Enterprise, routine airline transportation that
>takes you from Miami to Brazil in a matter of minutes . . .
God, that episode with the CSI in NEO was clearly jumping the
shark. *facepalm*
Merrick Baldelli
wrote:
>Uh - in Sanctuary??? Sanctuary looks like ColecoVision.
Dude, I sprained my rib the other day..... Making me laugh
hurts.
atlas bugged
> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 08:52:10 -0700, Anim8rFSK <ANIM...@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>>Uh - in Sanctuary??? Sanctuary looks like ColecoVision.
That comment *is* clever, funny, and got's a grain of truth...but,
ultimately false...
>
> Dude, I sprained my rib the other day..... Making me laugh
> hurts.
Yeah, yeah, but the truth is, the technology is just better, cheaper,
faster. etc.,etc.
Every producer makes the call as to whether to go incredibly cheap (as with
skiffy's movies) or spend a boatload (like Whedon did on SERENITY or Moore
on BSG,) but either way, we're all getting so much more (cue Moore's law)
for our money, as it were. W13 isn't the best-looking, but it couldn't have
existed at all in the recent past.
Bad as the effects are in W13 and various Skiffy Saturday-night fare,
they're "good enuff" on some level.
I never confused the characters in FINAL FANTASY (or even AVATAR) with real
actors, but the writing is on the wall about what is now possible.
Anim8r and his peers may find W13 unwatchable, and I wouldn't blame him.
But for the vast unwashed masses who can have a good day with no more than
the well-written word (includes myself), all half-decent animations tend to
just be gravy. Bad as W13 is, its graphics and settings are actually better
than its writing. Rarely has the written word been more scarce than video
effects on a cost/benefit basis, but it seems we're getting there.
Anim8rFSK
"Mac Breck" <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Merrick Baldelli wrote:
> > On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 00:48:16 -0600, Mark Nobles
> > <cmn-n...@comcast.net> wrote:
> <snip>
> >>>> As a businessman, I admire both SANCTUARY and WAREHOUSE 13 for
> >>>> their seeming "great leap" in producing good-looking sci-fi on a
> >>>> threadbare budget.
> >>>
> >>> I concur on only one of your choices. And it's not Warehouse
> >>> the 13th: the Series, either.
> >>
> >> Is today Backwards Day or Bizarro Day? Because that's the only way
> >> you could say that.
> >
> > Says you... I could say that they only way you could suffer
> > through Warehouse the 13th: the Series is either you have suffered
> > from a near life threatening traumatic head injury or you're a
> > bleating sheep -- but hey... Even I know that different strokes are
> > for different folks.
>
> ....or somebody may have just liked Joanne Kelly as Bianca in "The
> Dresden Files" and now checks out whatever she's in when he happens upon
> it (e.g. "National Lampoon's Going the Distance"). ;-) I'm going to
> give "Warehouse 13" a look based on that. She's also the reason I'm
> going to watch "Jeremiah" Seasons 1 & 2 (Yes, I know she's only in
> Season 2.).
May as well watch Jack Hunter while you're at it.
Anim8rFSK
"David Milligan" <david...@yahoo.com> wrote:
You just did!
Anim8rFSK
"Mac Breck" <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> David Milligan wrote:
> > "JK Coney" <jkc...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> > news:hlaejd$nq4$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> >>
> >> "Mac Breck" <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:JbydnfiEZKON5eXW...@supernews.com...
> >>>
> >>> Why bother? alt.tv.scifi.channel still exists and has all the
> >>> history. No need to go to a different group, and lose all the
> >>> history just because the damned silly channel slightly changed its
> >>> name. Post at alt.tv.scifi.channel and be a rebel. :-)
> <snip>
> >> That's why I crossposted this thread. I was feeling that our
> >> group had possibly become fragmented with the new group taking some
> >> away from the old. Apparently no one is posting much to any of them.
> >>
> >> --
> >> JK Sinrod
> >> www.MyConeyIslandMemories.com
> >>
> > I see people talking about crossposting all the time -- how
> > do you do that?
>
> Put multiple newsgroups in the Newsgroups line separated by a comma and
> a space, but you only want to do it IF the post applies to those
> newsgroups.
Tiny nit: MTNewswatcher, at least, doesn't require a space, just the
comma
>
> Frequently, miscreants and idiots crosspost to newsgroups that have
> nothing to do with the thread. A favorite of theirs is to crosspost
> everything they send, to rec.sport.pro-wrestling. Then, when people do
> a quick reply without checking the Newsgroups line, their replies go
> there as well, even though they had no intention to post to that group,
> they have no interest in that group and do not read that group.
>
> Always check the Newsgroups line and DELETE groups to which you don't
> want to post.
>
> I'm sending this reply to all of the groups on the above post, because I
> don't know which group you're reading.
--
Anim8rFSK
"atlas bugged" <atlasbug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Merrick Baldelli" <mbal...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:7ckpn55numgkc82qk...@4ax.com...
> > On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 08:52:10 -0700, Anim8rFSK <ANIM...@cox.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>Uh - in Sanctuary??? Sanctuary looks like ColecoVision.
>
> That comment *is* clever, funny, and got's a grain of truth...but,
> ultimately false...
> >
> > Dude, I sprained my rib the other day..... Making me laugh
> > hurts.
>
> Yeah, yeah, but the truth is, the technology is just better, cheaper,
> faster. etc.,etc.
>
> Every producer makes the call as to whether to go incredibly cheap (as with
> skiffy's movies) or spend a boatload (like Whedon did on SERENITY or Moore
> on BSG,) but either way, we're all getting so much more (cue Moore's law)
> for our money, as it were. W13 isn't the best-looking, but it couldn't have
> existed at all in the recent past.
>
> Bad as the effects are in W13 and various Skiffy Saturday-night fare,
> they're "good enuff" on some level.
>
> I never confused the characters in FINAL FANTASY (or even AVATAR) with real
> actors, but the writing is on the wall about what is now possible.
>
> Anim8r and his peers may find W13 unwatchable, and I wouldn't blame him.
Wait, how did I get on the anti W13 watchlist? I was talking about
Sanctuary. W13, while you can see the strings, is watchable. Sanctuary
is "take their names and break their crayons and never let them out of
the fast food industry again" bad.
> But for the vast unwashed masses who can have a good day with no more than
> the well-written word (includes myself), all half-decent animations tend to
> just be gravy. Bad as W13 is, its graphics and settings are actually better
Yes
> than its writing. Rarely has the written word been more scarce than video
> effects on a cost/benefit basis, but it seems we're getting there.
--
JK Coney
"David Milligan" <david...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:hlhr5h$dqo$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>>
> I see people talking about crossposting all the time -- how do you
> do that?
>
>
If I told you, I'd have to kill you....
--
JK Sinrod
www.MyConeyIslandMemories.com
Greg Goss
> "atlas bugged" <atlasbug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I thought they were both using blue-screen extensively and generating sets
>> with them.
>
>green screen
When (and why) did they switch from blue to green?
--
Tomorrow is today already.
Greg Goss, 1989-01-27
Mac Breck
> Sanctuary is "take their names and break their crayons and never let
> them out of the fast food industry again" bad.
Why?
Anim8rFSK
"Mac Breck" <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Anim8rFSK wrote:
> > Sanctuary is "take their names and break their crayons and never let
> > them out of the fast food industry again" bad.
>
> Why?
The horrible virtual set fx? They make my eyes bleed. Then there's teh
terrible acting and incredibly stupid writing and lack of any sort of
continuity, and they got rid of the hot blonde.
Harold Groot
Oh, a decade or so back was probably when they started shifting more
to green. It has to do with technology mostly (especially with
digital video) but blue is still used as well.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chroma_key
"Green is currently used as a backdrop more than any other color
because image sensors in digital video cameras are most sensitive to
green, due to the Bayer pattern allocating more pixels to the green
channel, this mimicks the human increased sensitivity to green
light.[5] Therefore the green camera channel contains the least
"noise" and can produce the cleanest key/matte/mask. Additionally,
less light is needed to illuminate green, again because of the higher
sensitivity to green in image sensors.[6] Bright green has also become
favored as a blue background may match a subject's eye color or common
items of clothing, such as jeans, or a dark-navy suit.
Blue was used before digital keying became commonplace because it was
necessary for the optical process, but it needed more illumination
than green. However, it is also further in the visual spectrum from
red, the predominant color in human skin.
The most important factor for a key is the color separation of the
foreground (the subject) and background (the screen) � a bluescreen
will be used if the subject is predominately green (for example
plants), despite the camera being more sensitive to green light.
In analog color TV, color is represented by the phase of the chroma
subcarrier relative to a reference oscillator. Chroma key is achieved
by comparing the phase of the video to the phase corresponding to the
preselected color. In-phase portions of the video are replaced by the
alternate background video.
In digital color TV, color is represented by three numbers (red,
green, blue). Chroma key is achieved by a simple numerical comparison
between the video and the preselected color. If the color at a
particular point on the screen matches (either exactly, or in a
range), then the video at that point is replaced by the alternate
background video."
====================================================================
For myself, the first place where I =noticed= green being used instead
of blue was on the TV show WHOSE LINE IS IT ANYWAY? (maybe 6 years
ago?). Of course, usually the whole point is that you DON'T notice,
but WLIIA? has a specific routine that features a person in front of a
Greenscreen. The person has no idea what is going on "behind" him
(that the home viewer can see, as can the studio audience via
monitors) and has to improvise based on a few outside comments....
======================================================================
Wiki doesn't give many specific dates, but it does mention
"In the 2002 film Spider-Man, in scenes where both Spider-Man and
Green Goblin are in the air, Spider-Man had to be shot in front of the
greenscreen and the Green Goblin had to be shot in front of a
bluescreen, because Spider-Man wears a costume which is red and blue
in color and the goblin wears a costume which is entirely green in
color. If both were shot in front of same screen, one character would
have been partially erased from the shot."
Mac Breck
> In article <A4GdnabH1P8aWuDW...@supernews.com>,
> "Mac Breck" <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Anim8rFSK wrote:
>>> Sanctuary is "take their names and break their crayons and never let
>>> them out of the fast food industry again" bad.
>>
>> Why?
>
> The horrible virtual set fx? They make my eyes bleed. Then there's
> teh terrible acting and incredibly stupid writing and lack of any
> sort of continuity,
Have you ever seen anything on TV in which you liked the virtual set fx,
acting, writing and continuity?
> and they got rid of the hot blonde.
I've only seen Sanctuary Season 1. Last I saw in previews of Seaon 2 on
the Season 1 DVD set, the hot blonde (Helen's daughter) was brainwashed
into working for the other side, the bad guys, and given powers like
Druitt (her dad).
Mac Breck
> In article <xrCdnYUJTO4Ug-HW...@supernews.com>,
> "Mac Breck" <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> ....or somebody may have just liked Joanne Kelly as Bianca in "The
>> Dresden Files" and now checks out whatever she's in when he happens
>> upon it (e.g. "National Lampoon's Going the Distance"). ;-) I'm
>> going to give "Warehouse 13" a look based on that. She's also the
>> reason I'm going to watch "Jeremiah" Seasons 1 & 2 (Yes, I know
>> she's only in Season 2.).
>
> May as well watch Jack Hunter while you're at it.
WTF? Jack Hunter? I'm afraid to ask. It's probably some Jack Mehoff
style joke or something.
Anim8rFSK
"Mac Breck" <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Anim8rFSK wrote:
> > In article <A4GdnabH1P8aWuDW...@supernews.com>,
> > "Mac Breck" <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Anim8rFSK wrote:
> >>> Sanctuary is "take their names and break their crayons and never let
> >>> them out of the fast food industry again" bad.
> >>
> >> Why?
> >
> > The horrible virtual set fx? They make my eyes bleed. Then there's
> > teh terrible acting and incredibly stupid writing and lack of any
> > sort of continuity,
>
> Have you ever seen anything on TV in which you liked the virtual set fx,
> acting, writing and continuity?
If I spend my time groaning at the horrible virtual sets, they've failed.
>
>
> > and they got rid of the hot blonde.
>
> I've only seen Sanctuary Season 1. Last I saw in previews of Seaon 2 on
> the Season 1 DVD set, the hot blonde (Helen's daughter) was brainwashed
> into working for the other side, the bad guys, and given powers like
> Druitt (her dad).
Yeah, well, prepare to say goodbye. :(
Anim8rFSK
que...@infionline.net (Harold Groot) wrote:
There's a scene in Superman The Movie where Chris Reeve's suit is bright
green instead of blue. I maintained for decades that that's how they
shot it: green suit, blue background, color shift the final composite.
They finally confirmed that's exactly what they did in the extras in the
latest releases, but they also changed the color timing on that shot so
he's blue again. :)
atlas bugged
news:ANIM8Rfsk-47B58...@news.dc1.easynews.com...
Oops. My bad.
To my untrained-sci-fi-consumer eye, both shows look like green-screen,
low-budget, but cost-effective efforts. Both look much better to me than
they have any right to, cost-adjusted.
I understand you are seeing a more substantial difference because you know
the biz. But surely you agree both are budget-driven, not
excellence-driven. So I conflate the two.
Dimensional Traveler
> In article <d7WdnRRmFpKrduDW...@supernews.com>,
> "Mac Breck" <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Anim8rFSK wrote:
>>> In article <A4GdnabH1P8aWuDW...@supernews.com>,
>>> "Mac Breck" <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Anim8rFSK wrote:
>>>>> Sanctuary is "take their names and break their crayons and never let
>>>>> them out of the fast food industry again" bad.
>>>> Why?
>>> The horrible virtual set fx? They make my eyes bleed. Then there's
>>> teh terrible acting and incredibly stupid writing and lack of any
>>> sort of continuity,
>> Have you ever seen anything on TV in which you liked the virtual set fx,
>> acting, writing and continuity?
>
> If I spend my time groaning at the horrible virtual sets, they've failed.
>>
>>> and they got rid of the hot blonde.
>> I've only seen Sanctuary Season 1. Last I saw in previews of Seaon 2 on
>> the Season 1 DVD set, the hot blonde (Helen's daughter) was brainwashed
>> into working for the other side, the bad guys, and given powers like
>> Druitt (her dad).
>
> Yeah, well, prepare to say goodbye. :(
>
--
Murphy was an optimist.
Dimensional Traveler
>
> Wiki doesn't give many specific dates, but it does mention
>
> "In the 2002 film Spider-Man, in scenes where both Spider-Man and
> Green Goblin are in the air, Spider-Man had to be shot in front of the
> greenscreen and the Green Goblin had to be shot in front of a
> bluescreen, because Spider-Man wears a costume which is red and blue
> in color and the goblin wears a costume which is entirely green in
> color. If both were shot in front of same screen, one character would
> have been partially erased from the shot."
And erasing the characters from the film would have been bad because...?
Greg Goss
>On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 14:23:44 -0700, Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:
>>When (and why) did they switch from blue to green?
>>--
>Oh, a decade or so back was probably when they started shifting more
>to green. It has to do with technology mostly (especially with
>digital video) but blue is still used as well.
(together with a number of cites referencing the early 2Ks)
Interesting. The first time I saw green was at the California
pavilion in Expo 86. They would put a family into a green-carpeted
shape vaguely like a low convertible. They then pointed a camera at
the family and the projection TV showed the family riding a UFO
looking at various tourist interest bits of California.
So if the conversion to green is only about ten years old, would that
sample fifteen years earlier be an outlier?
Anim8rFSK
"atlas bugged" <atlasbug...@gmail.com> wrote:
Sure. But IMHO W13 isn't remotely as bad as Sanctuary, W13 being helped
somewhat by the fact that it's a goofier more comedic show, and
therefore more forgiving. Also, the stuff W13 cobbles together - a
complete replica of the B&B around a corner in the Warehouse, that
nobody noticed before - is going to look fantastical no matter how it's
accomplished, and you're more accepting of it than Sanctuary that's
trying to pull off people just walking into fairly standard room
settings, and failing abysmally.
They both look low budget, but Sanctuary also looks bad.
Anim8rFSK
Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:
Video switched before film did; your example is video. '86 probably
would have been Ultimatte, which IIRC could be set up to work on blue or
green, as well as several other colors with varying degrees of success.
I seem to recall that gold was supposed to work well, which I found
surprising as it seems awfully close to flesh tones, but red was right
out.
Mac Breck
> In article <d7WdnRRmFpKrduDW...@supernews.com>,
> "Mac Breck" <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Anim8rFSK wrote:
>>> In article <A4GdnabH1P8aWuDW...@supernews.com>,
>>> "Mac Breck" <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Anim8rFSK wrote:
>>>>> Sanctuary is "take their names and break their crayons and never
>>>>> let them out of the fast food industry again" bad.
>>>>
>>>> Why?
>>>
>>> The horrible virtual set fx? They make my eyes bleed. Then there's
>>> teh terrible acting and incredibly stupid writing and lack of any
>>> sort of continuity,
>>
>> Have you ever seen anything on TV in which you liked the virtual set
>> fx, acting, writing and continuity?
>
> If I spend my time groaning at the horrible virtual sets, they've
> failed.
That's not an answer to the question.
<snip>
Anim8rFSK
"Mac Breck" <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Anim8rFSK wrote:
> > In article <d7WdnRRmFpKrduDW...@supernews.com>,
> > "Mac Breck" <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Anim8rFSK wrote:
> >>> In article <A4GdnabH1P8aWuDW...@supernews.com>,
> >>> "Mac Breck" <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Anim8rFSK wrote:
> >>>>> Sanctuary is "take their names and break their crayons and never
> >>>>> let them out of the fast food industry again" bad.
> >>>>
> >>>> Why?
> >>>
> >>> The horrible virtual set fx? They make my eyes bleed. Then there's
> >>> teh terrible acting and incredibly stupid writing and lack of any
> >>> sort of continuity,
> >>
> >> Have you ever seen anything on TV in which you liked the virtual set
> >> fx, acting, writing and continuity?
> >
> > If I spend my time groaning at the horrible virtual sets, they've
> > failed.
>
> That's not an answer to the question.
>
> <snip>
I've never seen anything on TV where I liked the virtual set fx if I was
sitting there thinking about the virtual set fx, no; if they did it
right, you shouldn't notice it. An example would be the set extensions
in V. I routinely post about stuff I like as well as stuff I don't -
for instance, Chuck, Better Off Ted, Burn Notice, Pysch, all get passing
grades in every ep for acting and writing.
Harold Groot
>Greg Goss, 1989-01-27
What I had in mind for my "shifting more to green about 10 years back"
is when the balance tipped from "more bluescreen than greenscreen" to
"more greenscreen than bluescreen", not "when greenscreen first
appeared". But in any case that's just an estimate on my part. I
don't have specific data that would give a reliable date. I'm just
going on my recollection, and that's certainly not a random sample.
I think "bluescreen" is often used as a generic term in general
discussions even about projects that are actually using "greenscreen",
but that might just be because people don't know which is actually
being used. Maybe that will stick, or maybe with all the digital
video "greenscreen" will soon become the default term.
Dimensional Traveler
>
> I've never seen anything on TV where I liked the virtual set fx if I was
> sitting there thinking about the virtual set fx, no; if they did it
> right, you shouldn't notice it. An example would be the set extensions
> in V. I routinely post about stuff I like as well as stuff I don't -
> for instance, Chuck, Better Off Ted, Burn Notice, Pysch, all get passing
> grades in every ep for acting and writing.
>
Merrick Baldelli
wrote:
>Wait, how did I get on the anti W13 watchlist?
Beats me... I admit to hating it -- but I seem to recall you
liking it more than I did.
>I was talking about Sanctuary. W13, while you can see the strings, is watchable.
>Sanctuary is "take their names and break their crayons and never let them out of
>the fast food industry again" bad.
Wow... Amazing... Then again we know you to be a masochist
when it comes to SyFried so we know you secretly enjoy the pain
sometimes.
atlas bugged
> On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 08:59:00 -0700, Anim8rFSK <ANIM...@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>>Wait, how did I get on the anti W13 watchlist?
>
> Beats me... I admit to hating it -- but I seem to recall you
> liking it more than I did.
>
>>I was talking about Sanctuary. W13, while you can see the strings, is
>>watchable.
>>Sanctuary is "take their names and break their crayons and never let them
>>out of
>>the fast food industry again" bad.
>
> Wow... Amazing... Then again we know you to be a masochist
> when it comes to SyFried so we know you secretly enjoy the pain
> sometimes.
I give "SyFried" tons of slack, the benefit of every doubt, as it were. If
you're a genre fan, whaddaya gonna do?
I think the overall quality of programming is better on many other networks,
including the soap-opera channel and definitely on the "family" channels.
But I would rather watch marginal space-opera than excellent soap-opera.
Just a matter of preference.
Of course, the professional wrestling, and much else on the channel, sends
me packing.
I'm actually surprised I don't watch the Saturday night original movies.
Yes, they're THAT bad, and both SANCTUARY and W13 seem to come from the same
production house, though they're clearly a step up.
EUREKA is one where I'm glad I gave it chance. It's super-marginal too,
with the cheap effects and clownish characters. But they have charm, and
the show understands it's just a pleasant diversion. And it succeeds
thereby.
Mac Breck
So the virtual set fx there worked, but the acting and writing kept V
from getting a passing grade?
Regarding Sanctuary Season 1, I guess if the virtual set fx (and the fx
like the snake-like/fluke-like arm on the kid in the pilot), is better
than in the average Sci-Fi/Syfy Original movie (a.k.a. MST3K fodder),
I'm pleasantly surprised and cut it some slack, and once that is done I
can get into it and enjoy it.
> I routinely post about stuff I like as well as
> stuff I don't - for instance, Chuck, Better Off Ted, Burn Notice,
> Pysch, all get passing grades in every ep for acting and writing.
Too bad Better Off Ted looks like it's a goner.
Dimensional Traveler
> "Merrick Baldelli" <mbal...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:l21vn5hud2lg397no...@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 08:59:00 -0700, Anim8rFSK <ANIM...@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Wait, how did I get on the anti W13 watchlist?
>>
>> Beats me... I admit to hating it -- but I seem to recall you
>> liking it more than I did.
>>
>>> I was talking about Sanctuary. W13, while you can see the strings,
>>> is watchable.
>>> Sanctuary is "take their names and break their crayons and never let
>>> them out of
>>> the fast food industry again" bad.
>>
>> Wow... Amazing... Then again we know you to be a masochist
>> when it comes to SyFried so we know you secretly enjoy the pain
>> sometimes.
>
> I give "SyFried" tons of slack, the benefit of every doubt, as it were.
> If you're a genre fan, whaddaya gonna do?
>
Anim8rFSK
que...@infionline.net (Harold Groot) wrote:
I'd say greenscreen became the default term a couple years ago, which is
why I suggested we need another, more generic, and more accurate one.
Anim8rFSK
Dimensional Traveler <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
I do in rec.arts.tv :P
Anim8rFSK
Merrick Baldelli <mbal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 08:59:00 -0700, Anim8rFSK <ANIM...@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Wait, how did I get on the anti W13 watchlist?
>
> Beats me... I admit to hating it -- but I seem to recall you
> liking it more than I did.
Probably because it doesn't take it self seriously like Sancutary does.
>
> >I was talking about Sanctuary. W13, while you can see the strings, is
> >watchable.
> >Sanctuary is "take their names and break their crayons and never let them
> >out of
> >the fast food industry again" bad.
>
> Wow... Amazing... Then again we know you to be a masochist
> when it comes to SyFried so we know you secretly enjoy the pain
> sometimes.
'secretly'??
Anim8rFSK
"atlas bugged" <atlasbug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> EUREKA is one where I'm glad I gave it chance. It's super-marginal too,
> with the cheap effects and clownish characters. But they have charm, and
> the show understands it's just a pleasant diversion. And it succeeds
> thereby.
Yes!
Anim8rFSK
"Mac Breck" <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
V is marginal for me. If the dropped Morena I wouldn't have made it
through all 4 eps. It's not bad, it just didn't grab me. Technically
it was well done. I think it suffered from ABC making them gut the
script to be Obama friendly.
>
> Regarding Sanctuary Season 1, I guess if the virtual set fx (and the fx
> like the snake-like/fluke-like arm on the kid in the pilot), is better
> than in the average Sci-Fi/Syfy Original movie (a.k.a. MST3K fodder),
> I'm pleasantly surprised and cut it some slack, and once that is done I
> can get into it and enjoy it.
>
>
> > I routinely post about stuff I like as well as
> > stuff I don't - for instance, Chuck, Better Off Ted, Burn Notice,
> > Pysch, all get passing grades in every ep for acting and writing.
>
> Too bad Better Off Ted looks like it's a goner.
:(
Dimensional Traveler
What, _EXACTLY_ did ABC change in this regard? I've heard this
accusation(?) several times but can't remember reading what these
changes are supposed to have been.
Anim8rFSK
Dimensional Traveler <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
I've never heard the specifics. Whatever it was, they didn't go far
enough, since it seemed pretty obvious the lizards were Obama at several
points, but especially with the 'universal health care' line.
Dimensional Traveler
promised, talked about, argued about and generally been somewhere in
politics for a couple of decades. It sure as hell didn't originate with
the current president.
Mark Nobles
> Merrick Baldelli <mbal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 08:59:00 -0700, Anim8rFSK <ANIM...@cox.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Wait, how did I get on the anti W13 watchlist?
> >
> > Beats me... I admit to hating it -- but I seem to recall you
> > liking it more than I did.
>
> Probably because it doesn't take it self seriously like Sancutary does.
> >
> > >I was talking about Sanctuary. W13, while you can see the strings, is
> > >watchable.
> > >Sanctuary is "take their names and break their crayons and never let them
> > >out of
> > >the fast food industry again" bad.
> >
> > Wow... Amazing... Then again we know you to be a masochist
> > when it comes to SyFried so we know you secretly enjoy the pain
> > sometimes.
>
> 'secretly'??
MANSQUITO!!
Anim8rFSK
Dimensional Traveler <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
True, but they played the hell out of that scene in the promos and such;
they really shoved our faces in it. Plus his reaction was like SNAKE
OIL SALESMAN not awed wonder like you'd expect.
dx...@albury.nospam.net.au
> "Mac Breck" <macthe...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:JbydnfmEZKOS5eXW...@supernews.com...
>> atlas bugged wrote:
>>> "JK Coney" <jkc...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>> news:hl19ud$bvc$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
<snip>
> SG-U *is* on probation, but we've seen that company has a proven track
> record. I'm still staying with it.
Here in Australia, SG-U got Monday 8:30-10:30p.m. on Free to Air, then
8:30-9:30p.m. the following Monday, then nothing!!
Hardly had a chance to establish itself!!
May have been because it was on a different FTA channel to SG and SG-A
Daniel