"Chuck vs. the Podcast" Fedak edition
Ardent Aardvark
As I’ve oft mentioned, listening to Podcasts is to me what hot wax treatment is to others. Wait, no… I can refine that. It’s like having each hair pulled out individually, one every ten seconds. Usually, not far into any podcast my hand will involuntarily jerk towards the mouse so I can fast-forward past something that makes me want to yell a rude “epithet of alacrity” at the podcaster. You can probably imagine that this creates a somewhat diminished experience for me.
So it shouldn’t surprise you that I did not leap to view the latest Chuck vs. the Podcast. However, I do remain curious, despite my podaphobia.
Has anyone else watched this? Did Fedak say anything of note? I’m not expecting a detailed blow by blow, just some general idea if it’s worth enduring for someone with my condition. ;) Because if it’s just the same evasive song and dance we’ve heard previously, I think I’ll skip.
Thanks in advance.
Bill Sweatland
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chuck vs. the GoogleGroup" group.
To post to this group, send email to Chuck...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to Chuckversus...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Chuckversus?hl=en.
Ardent Aardvark
That is funny. :)
It might also amuse you to know that I considered feeding the podcast audio to Dragon Naturally Speaking (voice recognition software), but upon reading more about transcription on their site it was a bust (DNS only does well when decoding a single speaker’s voice; their solution is for you to record everything said during an interview in your own voice, which kind of defeats the purpose).
Sigh.
After my diatribe on podcasts, many of you will be flummoxed to hear me advocate watching the Paley Media Center panels that are being live-streamed this month. You can hunt for them on the web or if you’re a Twitter user just follow the Paley Center for notifications. I watched the Community and Once Upon A Time panels, and they were both excellent with only infrequent moments of wince-inducement. Here’s a link to the upcoming schedule:
No, I can’t explain how I can tolerate these and still shake uncontrollably at the prospect of listening to a podcast.
Jimmy.j.vs.chuck
Sent from my iPad
jimmy_j
LOL !! Did they really say that ? Then from my vantage point they
certainly had their fun, especially with deconstructing Sarah Walker.
Silly me, here I thought it was about telling your story with
honesty, consistency, integrity and in an enjoyable way that connected
with the majority of your audience.
On Mar 4, 9:43 pm, "Jimmy.j.vs.chuck" <jimmy.j.vs.ch...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I listened to a part of it and it just happened to be about 5.13. Fedak said that a closure epilogue and flashing forward was fine for other shows but not for Chuck. Also, the ending we were given was way cooler than an epilogue. Mmmm, ok.
>
> That doesn't surprise me and I expected this type of ending since Schwartz and Fedak did say at a con that it is more fun to write what the majority of viewers don't want.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Mar 4, 2012, at 20:05, Bill Sweatland <b...@groupscs.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > This is actually funny. I was waiting for someone else to listen for exactly the same reason. My expectations are minimal. I will be disappointed if certain questions weren’t asked. I received somewhat of a personal commitment that they would be. But even if asked, if Fedak doesn’t want to answer, it’s asking to much for this group to press him.
>
> > What I fear is that it's simply a reinforcement on how brilliant and visionary the finale was.
>
> > From: Ardent Aardvark <aardvark7...@embarqmail.com>
> > To: chuck...@googlegroups.com
> > Sent: Sunday, March 4, 2012 7:58 PM
> > Subject: [Chuck vs. the GoogleGroup] "Chuck vs. the Podcast" Fedak edition
>
> > As I’ve oft mentioned, listening to Podcasts is to me what hot wax treatment is to others. Wait, no… I can refine that. It’s like having each hair pulled out individually, one every ten seconds. Usually, not far into any podcast my hand will involuntarily jerk towards the mouse so I can fast-forward past something that makes me want to yell a rude “epithet of alacrity” at the podcaster. You can probably imagine that this creates a somewhat diminished experience for me.
>
> > So it shouldn’t surprise you that I did not leap to view the latest Chuck vs. the Podcast. However, I do remain curious, despite my podaphobia.
>
> > Has anyone else watched this? Did Fedak say anything of note? I’m not expecting a detailed blow by blow, just some general idea if it’s worth enduring for someone with my condition. ;) Because if it’s just the same evasive song and dance we’ve heard previously, I think I’ll skip.
>
> > Thanks in advance.
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chuck vs. the GoogleGroup" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to Chuck...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to Chuckversus...@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/Chuckversus?hl=en.
Richard Chamberland
Sent from Rich's iPhone
dude029
Fedak , RC.
On Mar 5, 9:00 am, Richard Chamberland <rchamberlan...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Sent from Rich's iPhone
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > This is actually funny. I was waiting for someone else to listen for exactly the same reason. My expectations are minimal. I will be disappointed if certain questions weren’t asked. I received somewhat of a personal commitment that they would be. But even if asked, if Fedak doesn’t want to answer, it’s asking to much for this group to press him.
>
> > What I fear is that it's simply a reinforcement on how brilliant and visionary the finale was.
>
> > To: chuck...@googlegroups.com
> > Sent: Sunday, March 4, 2012 7:58 PM
> > Subject: [Chuck vs. the GoogleGroup] "Chuck vs. the Podcast" Fedak edition
>
> > As I’ve oft mentioned, listening to Podcasts is to me what hot wax treatment is to others. Wait, no… I can refine that. It’s like having each hair pulled out individually, one every ten seconds. Usually, not far into any podcast my hand will involuntarily jerk towards the mouse so I can fast-forward past something that makes me want to yell a rude “epithet of alacrity” at the podcaster. You can probably imagine that this creates a somewhat diminished experience for me.
>
> > So it shouldn’t surprise you that I did not leap to view the latest Chuck vs. the Podcast. However, I do remain curious, despite my podaphobia.
>
> > Has anyone else watched this? Did Fedak say anything of note? I’m not expecting a detailed blow by blow, just some general idea if it’s worth enduring for someone with my condition. ;) Because if it’s just the same evasive song and dance we’ve heard previously, I think I’ll skip.
>
> > Thanks in advance.
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chuck vs. the GoogleGroup" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to Chuck...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to Chuckversus...@googlegroups.com.
anon4utu anon4utu
dude029
waned or not. As time moves on I certainly don't care for seeing
anymore Chuck, because I've come to view it from what Fedak really
showed as opposed to what we imagined or wanted. I'm one of the
biggest detractors of S3 because to me that was when the show derailed
to a path of dishonest storytelling but maybe not. After Chuck and
Sarah became a couple, we rejoiced in the beauty and joy of
Honeymooners but save for Role Models we probably never got that type
of joyful interaction between Chuck and Sarah again did we ? Many of
us thought that was the logical course to take the story but it didn't
happen. It's the spy life after all and instead of light-hearted
capers with witty banter between our heroes, we got the return of
Fedak's favorite character and the true indicator of how he really
feels about Sarah Walker. What I see when Fedak gives me the latitude
to imagine my own ending ( despite his claims of happily ever after in
subsequent interviews) is a relationship that will constantly be
reset. Chuck once again has that thing in his head that has been the
stimulus of his highest highs and his lowest lows. He has that thing
that will never allow him to separate from the spy world. He is a hero
after all. He has the woman that he loves and although he doesn't
know her real name and she also possesses memories that are singular
to her alone, there are enough positives present to provide hope that
she may regain her memories if not all together, enough to " feel it "
again. Yvonne was right. It's tragic. Chuck and Sarah have done some
great things but they've also paid a huge personal price for the
choices they've made in the world they live in. You don't have to be
dishonest about happily ever after because that's not what you
depicted. Were Chuck and Sarah ever totally in sync? There was
always something wasn't there ? They were almost there at the end.
They were on the same page professionally and personally. It looked
like the love letter would be fulfilled...but you yanked it away.
That's where much of the dissatisfaction emanated, but looking back,
that's what you always did. Your story came full circle and at the
conclusion of it all that's left is the same as Pandora's box. Hope.
That's all you had to say Fedak. You did it your way. Fans be damned.
anon4utu anon4utu
1. Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln; how did you enjoy the play?
2. Raylan: Winona, don't you understand, I'm being framed for a murder I didn't commit.
Winona: As opposed to the murder you did commit?
Raylan: Are you being funny?
Bill Sweatland
I didn’t listen to the podcast. I most likely never will. But I did read the comments. Clearly it was a discussion dominated by how lovely the Emperor’s new clothes were and how wonderful a job the tailor did.
I really didn’t expect anything different. Fedak wasn’t going to admit any miscalculation and the interviewers weren’t going to press him, even a little bit. So I consider the whole thing a waste of time.
I console myself with the fact that Fedak’s career as a show runner is long over. Schwartz will move on, but Fedak has had his chance. By any business rationale, the show under his leadership was a total disaster. Yes, they got some buzz, some good press. But business executives are judged on bottom line. And by all accounts WB lost their ass. They reportedly gave away the show to NBC below cost for the last couple of seasons hoping to make it up in syndication. Unfortunately for them, the ratings sunk so low that they couldn’t even sell a syndication deal.
I don’t see any studio executive being eager to have Chris Fedak do for him what he did for WB any time soon.
So, IMO, talk of a movie is rather silly. Who would fund the minimum of $50,000,000 or so for a feature movie for a show that was rated so low they couldn’t even syndicate it?
The only hope to continue the story, IMO, is Zac’s idea of experimenting with some new PPV distribution channel. I could see someone investing the money to create some content around a novel new web based distribution approach. But even that’s a long shot.
I’m not even sure that I’m rooting for it. Frankly, if Chris Fedak is going to be the creator of any new content, I’d just as soon it fade away. I don’t trust him. Not only that, he is simply horrible at what he does, even as a writer. His episodes are fairly consistently at the bottom of my list. 3D? First Class? Pink Slip?
Would I pay $5.99 to see another episode of that? Probably not.
From: chuck...@googlegroups.com [mailto:chuck...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of anon4utu anon4utu
Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2012
9:47 PM
To: chuck...@googlegroups.com
dude029
It just affirms what the reality of the show really is and that we
were damn lucky to get 37 more episodes after season 3 and the serious
and pathetic ratings decline in S4/5. For so many of us there was
always the hope that the show would consistently live up to it's vast
promise. Everything was there, including one of the all time great
casts with enormous chemistry, a mythology that was inclusive of
various genres, but alas, you are correct sir, the guy steering the
ship had a totally different vision for which the many Chuck
apologists enabled. As these guys showed at Comic-Con 2010, they
aren't going to answer critical questions from anyone and when they do
answer, the apologists never call bs but instead slurp their "genius"
even more. So the prospect of no more Chuck can slowly sink in and
quite honestly. It's probably for the best. I hope Fedak's tenure can
one day be viewed as one of the great f#*k up's of a show in
television history, considering what he had.
> Behalf Of anon4utu anon4utu
> Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2012 9:47 PM
> To: chuck...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Chuck vs. the GoogleGroup] Re: "Chuck vs. the Podcast" Fedak
> edition
>
> Two things come to mind.
>
> 1. Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln; how did you enjoy the play?
>
> 2. Raylan: Winona, don't you understand, I'm being framed for a murder I
> didn't commit.
>
> Winona: As opposed to the murder you did commit?
>
> Raylan: Are you being funny?
>
> > > hair pulled out individually, one every ten seconds. Usually, not far
> into
> > > any podcast my hand will involuntarily jerk towards the mouse so I can
> > > fast-forward past something that makes me want to yell a rude "epithet
> of
> > > alacrity" at the podcaster. You can probably imagine that this creates a
> > > somewhat diminished experience for me.
>
> > > > > So it shouldn't surprise you that I did not leap to view the latest
> > > Chuck vs. the Podcast. However, I do remain curious, despite my
> podaphobia.
>
> > > > > Has anyone else watched this? Did Fedak say anything of note? I'm
> not
> > > expecting a detailed blow by blow, just some general idea if it's worth
> > > enduring for someone with my condition. ;) Because if it's just the
> same
> > > evasive song and dance we've heard previously, I think I'll skip.
>
> > > > > Thanks in advance.
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > > Groups "Chuck vs. the GoogleGroup" group.
> > > > > To post to this group, send email to Chuck...@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > Chuckversus...@googlegroups.com
>
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > > Groups "Chuck vs. the GoogleGroup" group.
> > > > > To post to this group, send email to Chuck...@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > Chuckversus...@googlegroups.com
>
> > > > > For more options, visit this group athttp://
> > > groups.google.com/group/Chuckversus?hl=en.
>
> > > --
> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups
> > > "Chuck vs. the GoogleGroup" group.
> > > To post to this group, send email to Chuck...@googlegroups.com.
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > Chuckversus...@googlegroups.com
>
> > > For more options, visit this group at
> > >http://groups.google.com/group/Chuckversus?hl=en.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Chuck vs. the GoogleGroup" group.
> To post to this group, send email to Chuck...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> Chuckversus...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/Chuckversus?hl=en.
Ardent Aardvark
I have to agree with all of this, except your absolutist view on Fedak’s prospects. Sure, another stint as a show runner seems unlikely, but it’s not inconceivable that with someone like Schwartz “co-signing the loan”, Fedak could end up an EP on another show. You can spin any single failure as a win, and it’s made easier by NBC’s flailing during Chuck’s run. Chuck ran five seasons while many other shows were “one and done”.
Since Fedak’s sensibilities tend more towards juvenile humor and facile relationships, I think he’d have a lot more luck doing cartoons for the under-twelve set. They’re really more suited to his approach to story—kids are way more forgiving of constant retconns in the interests of making something happen in the moment. And they love Gravitrons.
I didn’t bother with the podcast either, and I’m sure I never will.
For me, Chuck, the show, is done. The only way I’d want it back is without Fedak, and I can’t think of any way that would happen. I doubt Fedak will have much success in his other endeavors, so if someone else revives the IP and attracts funding for a movie or web series I’m sure he’d be ready to leap onboard. And I don’t have faith that the new production team would see his inclusion as the lethal toxin that it is.
Bill Sweatland
Yeah, I guess the kids are also more impressed with blowing stuff up.
I’m not sure how impressive a five year run is when the studio had to sell it at a loss. I’m not even sure how deep Schwartz’s pockets are. None of his shows are pulling impressive numbers.