Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Season Six? When? take 2...

0 views
Skip to first unread message

padmavyuha

unread,
Sep 24, 2001, 5:01:23 PM9/24/01
to
Okay, so I worte (no, wrote) that before reading a whole load of
messages here which go la-di-da wait until next spring, for godses sakes...
/reeally/ next spring? It's going to be a long and fanciful winter...
- Padmavyuha
--
************************
padma...@yoxi.net plain text mostly, please...
http://www.yoxi.net some poems in here...

Mattia Valente

unread,
Sep 26, 2001, 12:05:42 PM9/26/01
to
padmavyuha wrote:
>
> Okay, so I worte (no, wrote) that before reading a whole load of
> messages here which go la-di-da wait until next spring, for godses sakes...
> /reeally/ next spring? It's going to be a long and fanciful winter...

Yes, it really is. Why is this surprising? The show hasn't aired in the
US yet, and I severley doubt it'll hit Video before someone (in this
case, Sky) has started airing it.

Mattia
--
"My beagle went swimming today and now he's typing on my keyboard with
his ample nose. Oh, and he's the bestest handsomeest beagle EVER."
--Tim Minear, Salon.com, May 2001

padmavyuha

unread,
Sep 26, 2001, 1:34:56 PM9/26/01
to
Mattia Valente wrote:
>
> padmavyuha wrote:
> >
> > Okay, so I worte (no, wrote) that before reading a whole load of
> > messages here which go la-di-da wait until next spring, for godses sakes...
> > /reeally/ next spring? It's going to be a long and fanciful winter...
>
> Yes, it really is. Why is this surprising? The show hasn't aired in the
> US yet, and I severley doubt it'll hit Video before someone (in this
> case, Sky) has started airing it.

Fair do's - but 'surprising' because I didn't know it hadn't started
airing in the US yet... I suppose the shift to a new network slows
things down a little, and I've been watching all the series on video,
because I don't have broadcast tv access (saw a couple of episodes when
visiting my mother, and was hooked), so my finger was off the pulse as
to what was being shown when - I just bought 'em from amazon as they
came out, and had a few major vidbinges - 8 hours and a few bags of
nachos went the way of soap bubbles on more than one occasion.

Miriam Rocke

unread,
Oct 2, 2001, 4:26:58 PM10/2/01
to
padmavyuha <padma...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> Mattia Valente wrote:
>>
>> padmavyuha wrote:
>> >
>> > Okay, so I worte (no, wrote) that before reading a whole load of
>> > messages here which go la-di-da wait until next spring, for godses sakes...
>> > /reeally/ next spring? It's going to be a long and fanciful winter...
>>
>> Yes, it really is. Why is this surprising? The show hasn't aired in the
>> US yet, and I severley doubt it'll hit Video before someone (in this
>> case, Sky) has started airing it.
>
> Fair do's - but 'surprising' because I didn't know it hadn't started
> airing in the US yet... I suppose the shift to a new network slows
> things down a little

Not as much as you might think. Buffy is only a week behind Angel
[which is on the original networks]; some shows start new seasons even
later than that. I know of one series that isn't starting until
November. With a few channel-based exceptions (Sci Fi Channel,
Showtime, HBO?), fall -- September or October -- is the usual time for
starting shows, starting seasons. So not starting until today isn't
all that surprising, if you're aware of US tv patterns.

Mir
--
Miriam Rocke "Just so we're clear, you guys
mrr...@ucdavis.edu know you're nuts, right?"
http://handel.cipic.ucdavis.edu/~mrrocke/ --BtVS, "Gingerbread"

Mattia Valente

unread,
Oct 2, 2001, 5:35:13 PM10/2/01
to
Miriam Rocke wrote:
>
> padmavyuha <padma...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> > Mattia Valente wrote:
> >>
> >> padmavyuha wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Okay, so I worte (no, wrote) that before reading a whole load of
> >> > messages here which go la-di-da wait until next spring, for godses sakes...
> >> > /reeally/ next spring? It's going to be a long and fanciful winter...
> >>
> >> Yes, it really is. Why is this surprising? The show hasn't aired in the
> >> US yet, and I severley doubt it'll hit Video before someone (in this
> >> case, Sky) has started airing it.
> >
> > Fair do's - but 'surprising' because I didn't know it hadn't started
> > airing in the US yet... I suppose the shift to a new network slows
> > things down a little
>
> Not as much as you might think.

Not at all, really. Perhaps one week, when compared to last year, but I
don't think even that...

> Buffy is only a week behind Angel
> [which is on the original networks]; some shows start new seasons even
> later than that.

Yep. And after tonight (about what, 3.5 hours to go before the
premiere?) they'll be 'in synch', with Angel showing it's ep 3 on monday
next, and Buffy doing likewise (since the premiere is a double ep,
production numbers 6ABB01 and 6ABB02..)

> I know of one series that isn't starting until
> November. With a few channel-based exceptions (Sci Fi Channel,
> Showtime, HBO?), fall -- September or October -- is the usual time for
> starting shows, starting seasons. So not starting until today isn't
> all that surprising, if you're aware of US tv patterns.

Indeed. Plus, the whole WTC disaster pushed back a number of season
premieres.

0 new messages