What Did You Watch? 2016-05-25 (Wednesday)

[Obveeus]

On the first Wednesday of summer offering no good TV I watched:


BOUNCE: A 2000 movie starring Ben Affleck and Gwyneth Paltrow as two
people trying to survive the effects of a plane crash. I didn't much
care for this film because I didn't buy into the idea that the Affleck
character's actions could be forgiven. Natasha Henstridge, Jennifer
Grey, and Johnny Galecki appear in supporting roles and all could/should
have been used more.

What did you watch?

[shawn]

I watched WAYWARD PINES. I think we all get that light brown shirt
uniforms signify bad guys. We also get that people that follow Fincher
are insane. It also seems that are abby normals are suddenly getting a
lot smarter in their methods. Why it's taken them decades to suddenly
come up with a new approach remains to be seen. Also we get to see
them clear the deck so that all of the somewhat adults are gone except
for one and that one is the off her rocker teacher from last season.
So it's basically Lord of the Flies in the mountains with a very
dangerous external (for now) threat.

[shawn]

On Thu, 26 May 2016 07:51:04 -0400, shawn <nanof...@gNOTmail.com>
wrote:

Ugh.. hit send too soon.


I also watched ROYAL PAINS where Divya spends the show waddling around
and dispensing wise relationship advice while Hank fails at romance
again.

[anim8rfsk]

In article <ni6im8$div$1...@dont-email.me>, Obveeus <Obv...@aol.com>
wrote:

> On the first Wednesday of summer offering no good TV I watched:
>
>
> BOUNCE: A 2000 movie starring Ben Affleck and Gwyneth Paltrow as two
> people trying to survive the effects of a plane crash. I didn't much
> care for this film because I didn't buy into the idea that the Affleck
> character's actions could be forgiven.

Same notation for Paltrow in real life. :)

--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/

[anim8rfsk]

In article <lpodkbdfi4k3k8ghj...@4ax.com>,

Oh, I completely forgot about that.

[Arthur Lipscomb]

On 5/26/2016 4:51 AM, shawn wrote:
> On Thu, 26 May 2016 06:24:36 -0400, Obveeus <Obv...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> On the first Wednesday of summer offering no good TV I watched:
>>
>>
>> BOUNCE: A 2000 movie starring Ben Affleck and Gwyneth Paltrow as two
>> people trying to survive the effects of a plane crash. I didn't much
>> care for this film because I didn't buy into the idea that the Affleck
>> character's actions could be forgiven. Natasha Henstridge, Jennifer
>> Grey, and Johnny Galecki appear in supporting roles and all could/should
>> have been used more.
>>
>> What did you watch?
>
> I watched WAYWARD PINES.

I have this saved for later.


I watched:

Supernatural - "Alpha and Omega" - Lackluster season finale has the guys
coming up with yet a new plan to defeat Amara. And as always, it ends
on a cliffhanger. :-/


Arrow - "Lost in the Flood" and "Schism" - Final two episodes of the
season has team arrow trying to stop Darhk and his nuclear missiles. I
didn't follow everything thta happened, especially the events at Darhk's
ark.


Preacher - Pilot of new series about I'm not sure what. I need to read
the earlier threads to see if I can make any sense of it. However, I
guess it was OK.


Game of Thrones - "The Door" - Hold the door, this was a pretty good
episode. Unfortunately I couldn't see half of what happened, I guess
due to trying to watch the episode in the middle of the day with the
sunlight shining on my TV causing dark scenes to be almost totally
black. :-/

[Obveeus]

On 5/26/2016 9:35 AM, anim8rfsk wrote:
> In article <ni6im8$div$1...@dont-email.me>, Obveeus <Obv...@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On the first Wednesday of summer offering no good TV I watched:
>>
>>
>> BOUNCE: A 2000 movie starring Ben Affleck and Gwyneth Paltrow as two
>> people trying to survive the effects of a plane crash. I didn't much
>> care for this film because I didn't buy into the idea that the Affleck
>> character's actions could be forgiven.
>
> Same notation for Paltrow in real life. :)

I have a hard time keeping track of all the various 'reasons' people
have for hating on various celebrities.

I did an internet search on Gwyneth Paltrow controversies and got this:

http://www.hitfix.com/news/ranking-gwyneth-paltrow-controversies

Which one of these 10 seemingly irrelevant trifles has your undies in a
bunch...or was it something else?

[Arthur Lipscomb]

Obviously it's her so-called "cook book". I won't be fooled, I know
what those ingredients are really made out of. ;-)

[Obveeus]

Soylent Gwyn?

Side note: is it really a surprise that someone who looks like they are
starving to death would write a cookbook full of recipes that are low
calorie and/or nutritionally un-well rounded?

[EGK]

I read that Jill is supposed to be coming back this season so I figured you
were holding your cheers back till then.

[shawn]

I can't see why they would do that unless they are going to pretend
that Jill is Hank's one true love even though he hasn't mentioned her
since she left the show.

[EGK]

I don't even recall where I saw it now or if it was a done deal. . A
TVguide blurp maybe.

[anim8rfsk]

In article <t3qekbtarguqpckou...@4ax.com>,

yeah

ep one was so underwhelming I just didn't care

[anim8rfsk]

In article <v7gfkb1b52na3msqr...@4ax.com>,

They announced it as part of the info on the final season.

[Your Name]

In article <anim8rfsk-F64D6...@news.easynews.com>,

"Blurp" ... a cross between a burp and slurp?? ;-)

[anim8rfsk]

In article <ni75ea$ds6$1...@dont-email.me>, Obveeus <Obv...@aol.com>

I've disliked her since the first time I saw her, giving interviews for
A PERFECT MURDER and saying how disgusting it was to have to pretend to
be married to an old guy like Michael Douglas. We were rooting for him
to get away with killing her. :D

[Obveeus]

Well, he is nearly 30 years older than her so she has a point. I'm
guessing that his 'disgusting' vibe has more to do with the characters
he had played 'recently' before that role, though. FALLING DOWN, BASIC
INSTINCT, THE WAR OF THE ROSES, and WALL STREET...he plays a creepy guy
in all of them. Additionally, he is supposed to be about like David
Duchovny, a sex addict who pursues all the women he works with on his films.

[Jim G.]

shawn sent the following on 05/26/2016 at 06:51 AM:

> I watched WAYWARD PINES. I think we all get that light brown shirt
> uniforms signify bad guys. We also get that people that follow Fincher
> are insane. It also seems that are abby normals are suddenly getting a
> lot smarter in their methods. Why it's taken them decades to suddenly
> come up with a new approach remains to be seen. Also we get to see
> them clear the deck so that all of the somewhat adults are gone except
> for one and that one is the off her rocker teacher from last season.
> So it's basically Lord of the Flies in the mountains with a very
> dangerous external (for now) threat.

After a fair amount of deliberation, I decided that one-season-and-done
was the way to go for me. If ever a show struck me as one that didn't
have a plan beyond the expected first season, this would be the one.

--
Jim G. | A fan of the good and the bad, but not the mediocre
“Krystal thinks Vidal Sassoon is after her.” – Art Bell, ORPHAN BLACK

[Jim G.]

Arthur Lipscomb sent the following on 05/26/2016 at 09:46 AM:

> Supernatural - "Alpha and Omega" - Lackluster season finale

Yep. That pretty much sums it up, with it all going slowly downhill
after the God reveal a few episodes back.

[anim8rfsk]

In article <niclf4$5gp$1...@dont-email.me>,

"Jim G." <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:

> shawn sent the following on 05/26/2016 at 06:51 AM:
> > I watched WAYWARD PINES. I think we all get that light brown shirt
> > uniforms signify bad guys. We also get that people that follow Fincher
> > are insane. It also seems that are abby normals are suddenly getting a
> > lot smarter in their methods. Why it's taken them decades to suddenly
> > come up with a new approach remains to be seen. Also we get to see
> > them clear the deck so that all of the somewhat adults are gone except
> > for one and that one is the off her rocker teacher from last season.
> > So it's basically Lord of the Flies in the mountains with a very
> > dangerous external (for now) threat.
>
> After a fair amount of deliberation, I decided that one-season-and-done
> was the way to go for me. If ever a show struck me as one that didn't
> have a plan beyond the expected first season, this would be the one.

UNDER THE DUMB?

THE LAST SHIT?

[Jim G.]

anim8rfsk sent the following on 05/28/2016 at 12:56 PM:

That one was *sold* to us as a miniseries, wasn't it? So I'd put it in a
different category entirely. With WP, I was kinda sorta expecting a
season per book at the outset, but it quickly became apparent that they
were burning through source material at a rapid rate.

> THE LAST SHIT?

They still had to get the cure to everyone, at least. And we knew that
there was at least one group out there that didn't want the cure getting
out.

[anim8rfsk]

In article <nicmeu$7n2$3...@dont-email.me>,

But they'd thrown away the book completely by the end of season one, so
they had no plan.

[Jim G.]

anim8rfsk sent the following on 05/28/2016 at 02:36 PM:

I didn't even know that there was a book for TLS. I guess my ignorance
was my bliss...which really isn't all that unusual, now that I think
about it.

[Dimensional Traveler]

There was a book from decades back but the TV series has absolutely
nothing in common with it except the name. For one thing, the end of
the world in the book was because of a nuclear war. So Anim is wrong,
they didn't throw the book completely away by the end of season one.
They couldn't because they were never following the book in the first
place! :)

--
Privacy IS Security

[anim8rfsk]

In article <nifi9k$a82$2...@dont-email.me>,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Ship_(novel)

The Nathan James eventually reaches the remote South Pacific and, with
the ship's nuclear fuel nearly gone, discovers a small, uncontaminated
island in French Polynesia. The ship's crew then establishes a community
on the island and they begin to try to conceive children in order to
start to restart humanity. Their hope is eventually to start humanity
over again in phases, expanding outward as the contamination from
various landmasses goes down, and other ships find the island. They
begin to have everyone with a military occupational specialty write out
all their knowledge for future generations. They work out a system to
allow genetic diversity with anonymous fatherhood, with the women always
in strict control. However, no pregnancies occur. They worry that the
radiation of the nuclear winter may have rendered everyone sterile.

Some time later, the Pushkin appears on the horizon. Its crew on the
verge of starvation but bearing an abundance of nuclear fuel. The Nathan
James is at last free to sail again, keeping the island as its home
base. They even believe the Soviet submariners, who may have been free
of contamination due to being submerged, can take their place in the
genetic pool.

But then a new disaster strikes; a group of the ship's sailors,
abhorring the remaining nuclear missiles aboard the ship, launches them
without Thomas' permission. One of the missiles accidentally detonates
while in flight, triggering a chain reaction among all of the other
missiles, destroying the Nathan James and contaminating the island.
Thomas, his remaining crew, and the Soviet crew immediately embark
aboard the Pushkin to escape, beginning a new search for another
sanctuary, eventually reaching the American research facility at McMurdo
Station in Antarctica, abandoned but containing years' worth of food and
supplies.

The Pushkin is modified during an escape to McMurdo Station by
jettisoning its nuclear missiles into the ocean so they can use the
freed space in the silos for a recreational area and a nursery. The
introduction of the Soviet crew into the American selective breeding
program has resulted in at least three pregnancies. The Pushkin has the
fuel and food from McMurdo to conduct long, thorough explorations of the
world. Now well-provisioned, the survivors prepare to rediscover the
world.

[anim8rfsk]

In article <nifmco$lu8$1...@dont-email.me>,

They used the name "Nathan James"

[BTR1701]

In article <anim8rfsk-29516...@news.easynews.com>,

?!?! Don't those things last for decades?

[anim8rfsk]

In article <atropos-17DF44...@news.giganews.com>,

I assume it depends on what you're doing?

Here's one:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia-class_cruiser

They have 'unlimited' range, but were coming in for 'nuclear refueling'
after 15 years, and never went out again.

Maybe it's not the miles, but the years?

[Dimensional Traveler]

I seem to recall hearing that it also turned out to not be as easy to
"refuel" and refurbish power plant as was originally believed.

--
Privacy IS Security

[anim8rfsk]

In article <niggve$4jp$1...@dont-email.me>,

Apparently it was going to cost twice as much per boat as conventional
boats, and nobody cared that it was probably more than twice as good.

[Jim G.]

Dimensional Traveler sent the following on 05/29/2016 at 04:19 PM:

Is this thing supposed to be based on (or derived from) that book?

> For one thing, the end of
> the world in the book was because of a nuclear war. So Anim is wrong,
> they didn't throw the book completely away by the end of season one.
> They couldn't because they were never following the book in the first
> place! :)

So my above question still stands. :)

[Jim G.]

anim8rfsk sent the following on 05/29/2016 at 07:29 PM:

I always just assumed that it was a half-life kind of thing. Which
reminds me of a college roomie who was Navy ROTC and a nuke engineering
major. I wonder if he's still in...

[Jim G.]

anim8rfsk sent the following on 05/30/2016 at 10:12 AM:

But it's noo-noo-noo-nooklear! That's bad! Evil! Something to be avoided
at all costs!

[anim8rfsk]

In article <nikkm0$a0m$2...@dont-email.me>,

Yes

>
> > For one thing, the end of
> > the world in the book was because of a nuclear war. So Anim is wrong,
> > they didn't throw the book completely away by the end of season one.
> > They couldn't because they were never following the book in the first
> > place! :)
>
> So my above question still stands. :)

--

[Micky DuPree]

A casting spoiler for later in the season for _Royal Pains_.

shawn <nanof...@gNOTmail.com> writes:

> On Thu, 26 May 2016 17:20:27 -0400, EGK <m...@privacy.net> wrote:

>>> In article <lpodkbdfi4k3k8ghj...@4ax.com>,
>>> shawn <nanof...@gNOTmail.com> wrote:

>>>> I also watched ROYAL PAINS where Divya spends the show waddling
>>>> around and dispensing wise relationship advice while Hank fails at
>>>> romance again.

They seem to be trying to headshrink Hank's failures at settling down,
but I haven't seen where they've portrayed him as being a bad suitor or
boyfriend, nor that he's been somehow sabotaging his relationships. His
only recurring problem is that he considers himself always on call as a
doctor, and he rushes away from his lady friends (and other friends) at
the drop of a hat to minister to patients. But there's no way to
reasonably say the sick and injured should just be left hanging, so I
don't see Hank as somehow using work as an excuse to keep his dates at
arm's length. (It maybe argues that HankMed is understaffed, but that's
another issue.)

>> I read that Jill is supposed to be coming back this season so I
>> figured you were holding your cheers back till then.

I wish I hadn't read that, but oh well.

> I can't see why they would do that unless they are going to pretend
> that Jill is Hank's one true love even though he hasn't mentioned her
> since she left the show.

I suspect that's where they'll be going then. I assume the real-world
issue had to do with the actress. Inside the story, it would be easy to
say that Hank has kept his disappointment in other people leaving to
himself ever since his father left his family a long time ago, and it
resurfaces only when the people who disappoint him seem poised to do it
again. Since Jill hasn't been back only to leave again, Hank's done his
best to put her behind him and move on.

-Micky

[Micky DuPree]

Spoilers for _Arrow_ May 18 & 25.



Arthur Lipscomb <art...@alum.calberkeley.org> writes:

> Arrow - "Lost in the Flood" and "Schism" - Final two episodes of the
> season has team arrow trying to stop Darhk and his nuclear missiles.
> I didn't follow everything thta happened, especially the events at
> Darhk's ark.

I found it absurd that the outcome of nuclear holocaust was supposed to
be decided by fisticuffs.

That reminds me: I liked their approach to bomb "defusing" on _Gotham_.
I don't care if it's not feasible. It amused me.


> Preacher - Pilot of new series about I'm not sure what. I need to
> read the earlier threads to see if I can make any sense of it.
> However, I guess it was OK.

I suspect it will gel more once the nominal good guys start fighting the
demonstrable bad guy.


> Game of Thrones - "The Door" - Hold the door, this was a pretty good
> episode. Unfortunately I couldn't see half of what happened, I guess
> due to trying to watch the episode in the middle of the day with the
> sunlight shining on my TV causing dark scenes to be almost totally
> black. :-/

Definitely one of their better ones, though I wouldn't have said it was
their absolute best like a lot of people seem to be doing. I do like
that the pace of the series seems to have picked up now that it's not
tied to the books anymore. Good thing, since they've got a lot to
address before the final curtain.

-Micky

[anim8rfsk]

In article <nimia0$ol2$1...@pcls7.std.com>,

I see no way that we're not headed for a bad ending.

[shawn]

On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 11:52:32 +0000 (UTC),
MDu...@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:

>A casting spoiler for later in the season for _Royal Pains_.
>
>
>
>shawn <nanof...@gNOTmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Thu, 26 May 2016 17:20:27 -0400, EGK <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>>>> In article <lpodkbdfi4k3k8ghj...@4ax.com>,
>>>> shawn <nanof...@gNOTmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> I also watched ROYAL PAINS where Divya spends the show waddling
>>>>> around and dispensing wise relationship advice while Hank fails at
>>>>> romance again.
>
>They seem to be trying to headshrink Hank's failures at settling down,
>but I haven't seen where they've portrayed him as being a bad suitor or
>boyfriend, nor that he's been somehow sabotaging his relationships. His
>only recurring problem is that he considers himself always on call as a
>doctor, and he rushes away from his lady friends (and other friends) at
>the drop of a hat to minister to patients. But there's no way to
>reasonably say the sick and injured should just be left hanging, so I
>don't see Hank as somehow using work as an excuse to keep his dates at
>arm's length. (It maybe argues that HankMed is understaffed, but that's
>another issue.)
>

The biggest problem that Hank seems to have is his choice of potential
mates. Though in reality that isn't that uncommon a problem. People
often need to work through a lot of potentials to find the right one.
Though wasn't he doing well with the blind woman? I can't recall what
happened with that relationship.

>>> I read that Jill is supposed to be coming back this season so I
>>> figured you were holding your cheers back till then.
>
>I wish I hadn't read that, but oh well.

I am still hoping that isn't the case. It may prove fruitless but it
gives me a reason to keep living. ;)

[anim8rfsk]

In article <qkttkbl959orhpgrk...@4ax.com>,

Didn't he cure her and she went off to see the world or something?

[Jim G.]

anim8rfsk sent the following on 05/31/2016 at 01:58 PM:

> In article <nikkm0$a0m$2...@dont-email.me>,
> "Jim G." <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Dimensional Traveler sent the following on 05/29/2016 at 04:19 PM:
>>> On 5/29/2016 1:09 PM, Jim G. wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I didn't even know that there was a book for TLS. I guess my ignorance
>>>> was my bliss...which really isn't all that unusual, now that I think
>>>> about it.
>>>>
>>> There was a book from decades back but the TV series has absolutely
>>> nothing in common with it except the name.
>>
>> Is this thing supposed to be based on (or derived from) that book?
>
> Yes

I can sorta see buying the title of a recent hot book and then making a
show/movie that bears little resemblance to it, but why do something
like that with something decades old that seems to be obscure in the
first place?

[anim8rfsk]

In article <nin4vs$mek$3...@dont-email.me>,

"Jim G." <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:

> anim8rfsk sent the following on 05/31/2016 at 01:58 PM:
> > In article <nikkm0$a0m$2...@dont-email.me>,
> > "Jim G." <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> Dimensional Traveler sent the following on 05/29/2016 at 04:19 PM:
> >>> On 5/29/2016 1:09 PM, Jim G. wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I didn't even know that there was a book for TLS. I guess my ignorance
> >>>> was my bliss...which really isn't all that unusual, now that I think
> >>>> about it.
> >>>>
> >>> There was a book from decades back but the TV series has absolutely
> >>> nothing in common with it except the name.
> >>
> >> Is this thing supposed to be based on (or derived from) that book?
> >
> > Yes
>
> I can sorta see buying the title of a recent hot book and then making a
> show/movie that bears little resemblance to it, but why do something
> like that with something decades old that seems to be obscure in the
> first place?

Because writers are stupid

[Jim G.]

anim8rfsk sent the following on 06/01/2016 at 12:45 PM:

True, but they're the grunts. Someone higher up is giving them their
marching orders. But then again, stupid usually does reach all the way
to the top in most Hollywood outfits.

[anim8rfsk]

In article <nin7mb$1qi$3...@dont-email.me>,

"Jim G." <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:

> anim8rfsk sent the following on 06/01/2016 at 12:45 PM:
> > In article <nin4vs$mek$3...@dont-email.me>,
> > "Jim G." <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> anim8rfsk sent the following on 05/31/2016 at 01:58 PM:
> >>> In article <nikkm0$a0m$2...@dont-email.me>,
> >>> "Jim G." <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Dimensional Traveler sent the following on 05/29/2016 at 04:19 PM:
> >>>>> On 5/29/2016 1:09 PM, Jim G. wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I didn't even know that there was a book for TLS. I guess my ignorance
> >>>>>> was my bliss...which really isn't all that unusual, now that I think
> >>>>>> about it.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> There was a book from decades back but the TV series has absolutely
> >>>>> nothing in common with it except the name.
> >>>>
> >>>> Is this thing supposed to be based on (or derived from) that book?
> >>>
> >>> Yes
> >>
> >> I can sorta see buying the title of a recent hot book and then making a
> >> show/movie that bears little resemblance to it, but why do something
> >> like that with something decades old that seems to be obscure in the
> >> first place?
> >
> > Because writers are stupid
>
> True, but they're the grunts. Someone higher up is giving them their
> marching orders. But then again, stupid usually does reach all the way
> to the top in most Hollywood outfits.

Yeah, but a producer buys the property, and hands it to a writer, who
comes up with their own version without opening the book.

At Fox we had half a dozen writers sitting around saying "A Spider-Man.
A Spider-Man ... what do you think he'd be like? A man that was a
spider, or a spider that was a man?"

[Dimensional Traveler]

The easiest way to deal with writers that out of touch is to not turn
over the rock they live under.

--
Privacy IS Security

[Fabulous]

In article <ni6im8$div$1...@dont-email.me>, Obv...@aol.com wrote:

>What did you watch?

While the man who feeds me was doing yardwork, I watched:

Something on the TV he left on to keep me occupied.

Squirrels in the yard!

A couple birds in the tree!

Lizards on the windowsill!


--
Never mind the current violence, Pres Obama and the mainstream media
are still outraged over the fabricated Tea Party spitting incident.

[Ubiquitous]

In article <niclf4$5gp$1...@dont-email.me>, jimg...@geemail.com.invalid wrote:
>shawn sent the following on 05/26/2016 at 06:51 AM:

>> I watched WAYWARD PINES. I think we all get that light brown shirt
>> uniforms signify bad guys. We also get that people that follow Fincher
>> are insane. It also seems that are abby normals are suddenly getting a
>> lot smarter in their methods. Why it's taken them decades to suddenly
>> come up with a new approach remains to be seen. Also we get to see
>> them clear the deck so that all of the somewhat adults are gone except
>> for one and that one is the off her rocker teacher from last season.
>> So it's basically Lord of the Flies in the mountains with a very
>> dangerous external (for now) threat.
>
>After a fair amount of deliberation, I decided that one-season-and-done
>was the way to go for me. If ever a show struck me as one that didn't
>have a plan beyond the expected first season, this would be the one.

*cough* *cough* LOST *cough*

Wasn't Wayward Pines intended to be a one season show?

--
A PROUD MOMENT IN FEMINISM:
Hillary is the first woman in history who might ride her husband's
coattails all the way to the presidency.

[Ubiquitous]

jimg...@geemail.com.invalid wrote:
>anim8rfsk sent the following on 05/28/2016 at 12:56 PM:

>> "Jim G." <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:

>>> After a fair amount of deliberation, I decided that one-season-
>>> and-done was the way to go for me. If ever a show struck me as
>>> one that didn't have a plan beyond the expected first season,

>>> this [Wayward Pines] would be the one.

>>
>> UNDER THE DUMB?
>
>That one was *sold* to us as a miniseries, wasn't it? So I'd put it in a
>different category entirely. With WP, I was kinda sorta expecting a
>season per book at the outset, but it quickly became apparent that they
>were burning through source material at a rapid rate.

Burning through? I thought they diverged from the bok rather quickly.

[anim8rfsk]

In article <20160608-1...@news.eternal-september.org>,

Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote:

> jimg...@geemail.com.invalid wrote:
> >anim8rfsk sent the following on 05/28/2016 at 12:56 PM:
> >> "Jim G." <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> >>> After a fair amount of deliberation, I decided that one-season-
> >>> and-done was the way to go for me. If ever a show struck me as
> >>> one that didn't have a plan beyond the expected first season,
> >>> this [Wayward Pines] would be the one.
> >>
> >> UNDER THE DUMB?
> >
> >That one was *sold* to us as a miniseries, wasn't it? So I'd put it in a
> >different category entirely. With WP, I was kinda sorta expecting a
> >season per book at the outset, but it quickly became apparent that they
> >were burning through source material at a rapid rate.
>
> Burning through? I thought they diverged from the bok rather quickly.
>

Yeah, like in the pilot.

[Jim G.]

Ubiquitous sent the following on 06/08/2016 at 04:43 AM:

> In article <niclf4$5gp$1...@dont-email.me>, jimg...@geemail.com.invalid wrote:
>> shawn sent the following on 05/26/2016 at 06:51 AM:
>
>>> I watched WAYWARD PINES. I think we all get that light brown shirt
>>> uniforms signify bad guys. We also get that people that follow Fincher
>>> are insane. It also seems that are abby normals are suddenly getting a
>>> lot smarter in their methods. Why it's taken them decades to suddenly
>>> come up with a new approach remains to be seen. Also we get to see
>>> them clear the deck so that all of the somewhat adults are gone except
>>> for one and that one is the off her rocker teacher from last season.
>>> So it's basically Lord of the Flies in the mountains with a very
>>> dangerous external (for now) threat.
>>
>> After a fair amount of deliberation, I decided that one-season-and-done
>> was the way to go for me. If ever a show struck me as one that didn't
>> have a plan beyond the expected first season, this would be the one.
>
> *cough* *cough* LOST *cough*

They had a pretty good plan, actually...except for that final season.

> Wasn't Wayward Pines intended to be a one season show?

I sure thought so.

[Jim G.]

Ubiquitous sent the following on 06/08/2016 at 04:45 AM:

> jimg...@geemail.com.invalid wrote:
>> anim8rfsk sent the following on 05/28/2016 at 12:56 PM:
>>> "Jim G." <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>> After a fair amount of deliberation, I decided that one-season-
>>>> and-done was the way to go for me. If ever a show struck me as
>>>> one that didn't have a plan beyond the expected first season,
>>>> this [Wayward Pines] would be the one.
>>>
>>> UNDER THE DUMB?
>>
>> That one was *sold* to us as a miniseries, wasn't it? So I'd put it in a
>> different category entirely. With WP, I was kinda sorta expecting a
>> season per book at the outset, but it quickly became apparent that they
>> were burning through source material at a rapid rate.
>
> Burning through? I thought they diverged from the bok rather quickly.

IIRC, both BTR and suzzeq indicated that the first WP book more or less
made it through much of the first season before things began to get ugly.

[Your Name]

In article <20160608-1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote:

> jimg...@geemail.com.invalid wrote:
> >anim8rfsk sent the following on 05/28/2016 at 12:56 PM:
> >> "Jim G." <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> >>> After a fair amount of deliberation, I decided that one-season-
> >>> and-done was the way to go for me. If ever a show struck me as
> >>> one that didn't have a plan beyond the expected first season,
> >>> this [Wayward Pines] would be the one.
> >>
> >> UNDER THE DUMB?
> >
> >That one was *sold* to us as a miniseries, wasn't it? So I'd put it in a
> >different category entirely. With WP, I was kinda sorta expecting a
> >season per book at the outset, but it quickly became apparent that they
> >were burning through source material at a rapid rate.
>

> Burning through? I thought they diverged from the *bok* rather quickly.

That's what they get for using the South African version. ;-)

[suzeeq]

Jim G. wrote:
> Ubiquitous sent the following on 06/08/2016 at 04:45 AM:
>> jimg...@geemail.com.invalid wrote:
>>> anim8rfsk sent the following on 05/28/2016 at 12:56 PM:
>>>> "Jim G." <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> After a fair amount of deliberation, I decided that one-season-
>>>>> and-done was the way to go for me. If ever a show struck me as
>>>>> one that didn't have a plan beyond the expected first season,
>>>>> this [Wayward Pines] would be the one.
>>>> UNDER THE DUMB?
>>> That one was *sold* to us as a miniseries, wasn't it? So I'd put it in a
>>> different category entirely. With WP, I was kinda sorta expecting a
>>> season per book at the outset, but it quickly became apparent that they
>>> were burning through source material at a rapid rate.
>> Burning through? I thought they diverged from the bok rather quickly.
>
> IIRC, both BTR and suzzeq indicated that the first WP book more or less
> made it through much of the first season before things began to get ugly.

Actually they borrowed a bit from the 2 sequels as well to make the
entire first season. This is going way beyond what the 3 books covered.

[Jim G.]

suzeeq sent the following on 06/08/2016 at 10:57 PM:

That sounds familiar. I just don't recall you guys saying that the show
got significantly away from the book's narrative early on.

> This is going way beyond what the 3 books covered.

Which is all the more reason to skip season two, IMO. There were enough
issues last year, even with a road map. Left to their own devices, I
just don't have a ton of faith in the writers here.

[Ubiquitous]

jimg...@geemail.com.invalid wrote:
>Ubiquitous sent the following on 06/08/2016 at 04:43 AM:

>> jimg...@geemail.com.invalid wrote:
>>> shawn sent the following on 05/26/2016 at 06:51 AM:

>>>> I watched WAYWARD PINES. I think we all get that light brown shirt
>>>> uniforms signify bad guys. We also get that people that follow Fincher
>>>> are insane. It also seems that are abby normals are suddenly getting a
>>>> lot smarter in their methods. Why it's taken them decades to suddenly
>>>> come up with a new approach remains to be seen. Also we get to see
>>>> them clear the deck so that all of the somewhat adults are gone except
>>>> for one and that one is the off her rocker teacher from last season.
>>>> So it's basically Lord of the Flies in the mountains with a very
>>>> dangerous external (for now) threat.
>>>
>>> After a fair amount of deliberation, I decided that one-season-and-done
>>> was the way to go for me. If ever a show struck me as one that didn't
>>> have a plan beyond the expected first season, this would be the one.
>>
>> *cough* *cough* LOST *cough*
>
>They had a pretty good plan, actually...except for that final season.

No they didn't. It became clear by the middle of the third season they were
just pulling stuff out of their arses and delaying having to reveal answers.

[suzeeq]

Jim G. wrote:
> suzeeq sent the following on 06/08/2016 at 10:57 PM:
>> Jim G. wrote:
>>> Ubiquitous sent the following on 06/08/2016 at 04:45 AM:
>>>> jimg...@geemail.com.invalid wrote:
>>>>> anim8rfsk sent the following on 05/28/2016 at 12:56 PM:
>>>>>> "Jim G." <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>> After a fair amount of deliberation, I decided that one-season-
>>>>>>> and-done was the way to go for me. If ever a show struck me as
>>>>>>> one that didn't have a plan beyond the expected first season,
>>>>>>> this [Wayward Pines] would be the one.
>>>>>> UNDER THE DUMB?
>>>>> That one was *sold* to us as a miniseries, wasn't it? So I'd put it in a
>>>>> different category entirely. With WP, I was kinda sorta expecting a
>>>>> season per book at the outset, but it quickly became apparent that they
>>>>> were burning through source material at a rapid rate.
>>>> Burning through? I thought they diverged from the bok rather quickly.
>>> IIRC, both BTR and suzzeq indicated that the first WP book more or less
>>> made it through much of the first season before things began to get ugly.>
>> Actually they borrowed a bit from the 2 sequels as well to make the
>> entire first season.
>
> That sounds familiar. I just don't recall you guys saying that the show
> got significantly away from the book's narrative early on.

Yeah they stuck fairly close to the books until the last episode.

>

>> This is going way beyond what the 3 books covered.
>
> Which is all the more reason to skip season two, IMO. There were enough
> issues last year, even with a road map. Left to their own devices, I
> just don't have a ton of faith in the writers here.

I wasn't able to get the channel well last week without fiddling with
the antenna and sitting in the right place, so I skipped it, thinking
I'd get it online the next day. Then you all said it was awful so I
decided I didn't need to keep watching.
>

[Jim G.]

Ubiquitous sent the following on 06/09/2016 at 07:36 AM:

For my money, they held it all together rather well until that final
waste of a season. What bothered me beforehand is that Darlton seemed to
get off on encouraging the show's fans to pursue all kinds of tangential
things beyond the show itself, and *all* of that ended up being entirely
irrelevant.

[Jim G.]

suzeeq sent the following on 06/09/2016 at 08:37 AM:

> Jim G. wrote:
>> suzeeq sent the following on 06/08/2016 at 10:57 PM:
>>> Jim G. wrote:
>>>> Ubiquitous sent the following on 06/08/2016 at 04:45 AM:
>>>>> jimg...@geemail.com.invalid wrote:
>>>>>> anim8rfsk sent the following on 05/28/2016 at 12:56 PM:
>>>>>>> "Jim G." <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>> After a fair amount of deliberation, I decided that one-season-
>>>>>>>> and-done was the way to go for me. If ever a show struck me as
>>>>>>>> one that didn't have a plan beyond the expected first season,
>>>>>>>> this [Wayward Pines] would be the one.
>>>>>>> UNDER THE DUMB?
>>>>>> That one was *sold* to us as a miniseries, wasn't it? So I'd put it in a
>>>>>> different category entirely. With WP, I was kinda sorta expecting a
>>>>>> season per book at the outset, but it quickly became apparent that they
>>>>>> were burning through source material at a rapid rate.
>>>>> Burning through? I thought they diverged from the bok rather quickly.
>>>> IIRC, both BTR and suzzeq indicated that the first WP book more or less
>>>> made it through much of the first season before things began to get ugly.>
>>> Actually they borrowed a bit from the 2 sequels as well to make the
>>> entire first season.
>>
>> That sounds familiar. I just don't recall you guys saying that the show
>> got significantly away from the book's narrative early on.
>
> Yeah they stuck fairly close to the books until the last episode.

Thanks. It's good to know that my mind hasn't abandoned me *entirely*
yet. :)

>>> This is going way beyond what the 3 books covered.
>>
>> Which is all the more reason to skip season two, IMO. There were enough
>> issues last year, even with a road map. Left to their own devices, I
>> just don't have a ton of faith in the writers here.
>
> I wasn't able to get the channel well last week without fiddling with
> the antenna and sitting in the right place, so I skipped it, thinking
> I'd get it online the next day. Then you all said it was awful so I
> decided I didn't need to keep watching.

I'm not in that naysaying group since I'm not watching season two. Truth
be told, I am sitting on the first two episodes and my initial
conviction (to not watch) is vacillating, but that's as far as it's gone
so far.

[Ian J. Ball]

I mostly agree with you, except for the disastrous season #2 (with the
idiotic "Tailies") which was every bit as bad as the final season, and
actually drove me away from the show until halfway through season 3.


--
Ian J. Ball

[EGK]

One big problem with the final season is it basically made too much of what
went before it, irrelevant. I think that's why it pissed so many people
off. They were expecting answers to things from earlier seasons that the
writers had no intentions of every answering.

[suzeeq]

If I run out of other things to watch, maybe I'll give it a try.

[Ubiquitous]

I disagree but no longer remember what made it obvious.

>>I mostly agree with you, except for the disastrous season #2 (with the
>>idiotic "Tailies") which was every bit as bad as the final season, and
>>actually drove me away from the show until halfway through season 3.
>
>One big problem with the final season is it basically made too much of what
>went before it, irrelevant. I think that's why it pissed so many people
>off. They were expecting answers to things from earlier seasons that the
>writers had no intentions of every answering.

Heh. Remember when they swore up and down that the Lostaways weren't dead and
in Purgatory? Remember when they claimed the explaination would basedf on
science (asd opposed to science fiction)?

[Your Name]

In article <njbnrp$pi5$1...@dont-email.me>, Ubiquitous

Yep. Once you got past the first season's "front section" characters
and the second season's "rear section" characters, the show completely
lost the plot and turned into ridiculous non-sensical rubbish.
Constantly jumping all over the time line also made it a nightmarish
mess to try and watch. Most people quickly gave on on it as just yet
more over-hyped crap made by (or at least hiding behind the name of)
the talentless idiot JJ Abrams.

[Dimensional Traveler]

And there would be no time travel?


--
Running the rec.arts.TV Channels Watched Survey for Summer 2016

[anim8rfsk]

In article <njd6ik$q5r$2...@dont-email.me>,

And that it was NOT an giant invisible robot T-Rex?

[Ubiquitous]

In article <njd6ik$q5r$2...@dont-email.me>, dtr...@sonic.net wrote:
>On 6/9/2016 7:03 PM, Ubiquitous wrote:

>> be based on science (asd opposed to science fiction)?

>>
>And there would be no time travel?

Ha! I totally forgot about that!

[Your Name]

In article <apudnbzFSdpyFcfK...@giganews.com>, Ubiquitous

> >> be based on science (as opposed to science fiction)?

> >
> >And there would be no time travel?
>
> Ha! I totally forgot about that!

They also claimed it was great entertainment, a unique show, etc., etc.
... none of which turned out to be true either. Just more of the same
badly made, confused mess that is JJ Abrams' signature.

[Jim G.]

re: an obscure older show called LOST

Ian J. Ball sent the following on 06/09/2016 at 04:19 PM:

Don't be hating on Rose and Bernard, Mr. Hatey McHaterson.

[Jim G.]

re: WAYWARD PINES

suzeeq sent the following on 06/09/2016 at 07:32 PM:

> Jim G. wrote:
>> suzeeq sent the following on 06/09/2016 at 08:37 AM:
>>> Jim G. wrote:
>>>> That sounds familiar. I just don't recall you guys saying that the show
>>>> got significantly away from the book's narrative early on.
>>> Yeah they stuck fairly close to the books until the last episode.
>>
>> Thanks. It's good to know that my mind hasn't abandoned me *entirely*
>> yet. :)
>>

>>>> Which is all the more reason to skip season two, IMO. There were enough
>>>> issues last year, even with a road map. Left to their own devices, I
>>>> just don't have a ton of faith in the writers here.
>>> I wasn't able to get the channel well last week without fiddling with
>>> the antenna and sitting in the right place, so I skipped it, thinking
>>> I'd get it online the next day. Then you all said it was awful so I
>>> decided I didn't need to keep watching.
>>
>> I'm not in that naysaying group since I'm not watching season two. Truth
>> be told, I am sitting on the first two episodes and my initial
>> conviction (to not watch) is vacillating, but that's as far as it's gone
>> so far.
>>
> If I run out of other things to watch, maybe I'll give it a try.

Summer's a good time for that sort of approach since there's not an
abundance of decent options to begin with.

[Jim G.]

re: that LOST show again

Dimensional Traveler sent the following on 06/09/2016 at 08:53 PM:

I hate feeling compelled to defend these guys, but, to be fair, they
said that there had been no time travel up to that point. I don't recall
how they phrased it, but they didn't rule out time travel in the future.

OTOH, the purgatory thing is dead-on. The fans figured that one out in a
hurry, so the writers made adjustments while trying to deny what was
going on.

[anim8rfsk]

In article <njfslg$67n$2...@dont-email.me>,

"Jim G." <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:

> re: an obscure older show called LOST
>
> Ian J. Ball sent the following on 06/09/2016 at 04:19 PM:
> > On 2016-06-09 20:44:32 +0000, Jim G. said:
> >
> >> Ubiquitous sent the following on 06/09/2016 at 07:36 AM:
> >>> jimg...@geemail.com.invalid wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> They had a pretty good plan, actually...except for that final season.
> >>>
> >>> No they didn't. It became clear by the middle of the third season they
> >>> were
> >>> just pulling stuff out of their arses and delaying having to reveal
> >>> answers.
> >>
> >> For my money, they held it all together rather well until that final
> >> waste of a season. What bothered me beforehand is that Darlton seemed
> >> to get off on encouraging the show's fans to pursue all kinds of
> >> tangential things beyond the show itself, and *all* of that ended up
> >> being entirely irrelevant.
> >
> > I mostly agree with you, except for the disastrous season #2 (with the
> > idiotic "Tailies") which was every bit as bad as the final season, and
> > actually drove me away from the show until halfway through season 3.
>
> Don't be hating on Rose and Bernard, Mr. Hatey McHaterson.

Nikki and Paulo were the high point!

[suzeeq]

Oh but library improved their tv on video collection. I've caught up
with Midsomer Murders, am watching season 8 of Murdoch, and finished 2
seasons of Miss Fisher's mysteries. They also have an interesting one
called Pie in the Sky. A police detective wants to retire to run a
restaurant, but his incompetent Asst Chief Constable has something on
him and refuses his retirement to call him in to make him look good, so
there's both detecting and food. The pie in the title is the detective's
excellent steak and kidney pie, plus variations. The local characters
are somewhat stereotyped, and the detective's wife is a junk food junkie
who would rather rip open a bag of crisps and a coke than appreciate his
good cooking. So it's quite amusing.

[Dimensional Traveler]

On 6/10/2016 7:22 PM, Jim G. wrote:
> re: an obscure older show called LOST
>
> Ian J. Ball sent the following on 06/09/2016 at 04:19 PM:
>> On 2016-06-09 20:44:32 +0000, Jim G. said:
>>
>>> Ubiquitous sent the following on 06/09/2016 at 07:36 AM:
>>>> jimg...@geemail.com.invalid wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> They had a pretty good plan, actually...except for that final season.
>>>>
>>>> No they didn't. It became clear by the middle of the third season
>>>> they were
>>>> just pulling stuff out of their arses and delaying having to reveal
>>>> answers.
>>>
>>> For my money, they held it all together rather well until that final
>>> waste of a season. What bothered me beforehand is that Darlton seemed
>>> to get off on encouraging the show's fans to pursue all kinds of
>>> tangential things beyond the show itself, and *all* of that ended up
>>> being entirely irrelevant.
>>
>> I mostly agree with you, except for the disastrous season #2 (with the
>> idiotic "Tailies") which was every bit as bad as the final season, and
>> actually drove me away from the show until halfway through season 3.
>
> Don't be hating on Rose and Bernard, Mr. Hatey McHaterson.
>

The problem with 'Lost' was the writers didn't know what they were
writing or what they _wanted_ to write! It started as a show about "the
relationships" a group who had never met or seen each other before
getting on a plane. By the end every single one of them was related,
married, divorced or had been best friends since childhood. They just
didn't know it when they got on the plane. Dafuq?

Basically the writers got bored with the characters (or forgot who the
characters were, guess which way Anim bets) so they kept changing them
every few episodes. There was never any continuity with the PEOPLE, let
alone the fricking plot.

Then they top it all off at the end by LITERALLY PULLING THE PLUG ON THE
WHOLE FREAKING ISLAND!

(And on a complete non-sequitur, my spell checker wants to change
"fricking" to "fracking". O_O )

[anim8rfsk]

In article <njg3lu$m39$1...@dont-email.me>,

Ooo, ooo, I know, I know!

[Your Name]

In article <njg31k$jkd$1...@news.albasani.net>, suzeeq <su...@imbris.com>
wrote:

>
> Oh but library improved their tv on video collection. I've caught up
> with Midsomer Murders, am watching season 8 of Murdoch, and finished 2
> seasons of Miss Fisher's mysteries.

Midsomer Murders and the Australian Miss Fisher are both good shows.

I've never watched Murdoch, mainly because I didn't see it on Sky's
schedule until it was already into about season three or four, so
missed too much of it.

> They also have an interesting one called Pie in the Sky. A police
> detective wants to retire to run a restaurant, but his incompetent
> Asst Chief Constable has something on him and refuses his retirement
> to call him in to make him look good, so there's both detecting and
> food. The pie in the title is the detective's excellent steak and
> kidney pie, plus variations. The local characters are somewhat
> stereotyped, and the detective's wife is a junk food junkie who would
> rather rip open a bag of crisps and a coke than appreciate his good
> cooking. So it's quite amusing.

Pie in the Sky was a good show, but is pretty old now and ended in the
UK many years ago. Richard Griffiths, the chef actor (who was also in
Harry Potter as the mean uncle) died just over three years ago. :-(
The waitress (Samantha Janus, now Samantha Womack) is currently in the
UK evening soap opera Eastenders.

[Your Name]

In article <njg3lu$m39$1...@dont-email.me>, Dimensional Traveler
<dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
>

> (And on a complete non-sequitur, my spell checker wants to change
> "fricking" to "fracking". O_O )

Obviously your spell checker has been watching too much Battlestar
Galactica (but you can only guess which version).

[BTR1701]

In article <njg3lu$m39$1...@dont-email.me>,
Dimensional Traveler <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:

> (And on a complete non-sequitur, my spell checker wants to change
> "fricking" to "fracking". O_O )

My phone has at long last realized it was fighting a pointless,
Sisyphean battle and has stopped trying to autocorrect "fucking" to
"ducking".

[suzeeq]

Or want to take part in a discussion about oil drilling.

[Dimensional Traveler]

So we should be discussing the oil industry in the BG universe?

[Obveeus]

On 6/11/2016 1:06 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
> On 6/11/2016 7:20 AM, suzeeq wrote:
>> Your Name wrote:
>>> In article <njg3lu$m39$1...@dont-email.me>, Dimensional Traveler
>>> <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
>>>> (And on a complete non-sequitur, my spell checker wants to change
>>>> "fricking" to "fracking". O_O )
>>>
>>> Obviously your spell checker has been watching too much Battlestar
>>> Galactica (but you can only guess which version).
>>
>> Or want to take part in a discussion about oil drilling.
>
> So we should be discussing the oil industry in the BG universe?

Fracking endangers fresh water supplies and fresh water supplies are
extremely rare in the BSG universe. It is a fracking miracle to find
water. I've never really understood the concept of water being a rare
commodity in space, though. Sure, in *space* there is nothing, so of
course their won't be water, either. However, when they come upon solar
systems it seems rather hard to believe that they couldn't find sources
of 'H' and sources of 'O' that would allow for the fairly easy
production of water in cases where it wasn't found naturally in its H2O
form.

[suzeeq]

Dimensional Traveler wrote:
> On 6/11/2016 7:20 AM, suzeeq wrote:
>> Your Name wrote:
>>> In article <njg3lu$m39$1...@dont-email.me>, Dimensional Traveler
>>> <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
>>>> (And on a complete non-sequitur, my spell checker wants to change
>>>> "fricking" to "fracking". O_O )
>>> Obviously your spell checker has been watching too much Battlestar
>>> Galactica (but you can only guess which version).
>> Or want to take part in a discussion about oil drilling.
>
> So we should be discussing the oil industry in the BG universe?
>

Acording to your spellchecker we should...

[Your Name]

In article <njhh2j$2k8$1...@dont-email.me>, Obveeus <Obv...@aol.com>
wrote:

Water itself is fairly hard to find. Even in our own solar system,
Earth is the only planet with easily accessible water (albeit most
being salty). The few other planets / moons with water have it buried
and / or frozen.

There was another post recently about the V series and why the aliens
wanted Earth's water ... which is the same reason: flowing water is
easier to get than having to mine and / or chop out frozen chunks.

[Your Name]

In article <njhge3$t5a$1...@dont-email.me>, Dimensional Traveler

<dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
> On 6/11/2016 7:20 AM, suzeeq wrote:
> > Your Name wrote:
> >> In article <njg3lu$m39$1...@dont-email.me>, Dimensional Traveler
> >> <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> (And on a complete non-sequitur, my spell checker wants to change
> >>> "fricking" to "fracking". O_O )
> >>
> >> Obviously your spell checker has been watching too much Battlestar
> >> Galactica (but you can only guess which version).
> >
> > Or want to take part in a discussion about oil drilling.
>
> So we should be discussing the oil industry in the BG universe?

The Cylons need to get oil from somewhere to stop their joints from
ceasing up. ;-)

[Dimensional Traveler]

If you have the energy budget to do interstellar flight, liquefying ice
is trivial to the point of being a non-issue.

[A Friend]

In article <njioc6$3t0$3...@dont-email.me>, Dimensional Traveler

Sure. They wouldn't come here for water. There's plenty of places in
the solar system to get it, places where no one's going to shoot back.
What they'd want from us is protein and chlorophyll.

As for how rare water might be, they're just now figuring out via New
Horizons that Pluto might have a subsurface ocean of water. Not ice,
water. On Pluto, for God's sake. Pluto turns out to be geologically
active. It's even got a blue sky. That's what we get for
disrespecting Pluto.

[Your Name]

In article <njioc6$3t0$3...@dont-email.me>, Dimensional Traveler

Maybe, but dealing with bulky ice or liquid water in zero or low
gravity is cumbersome and dangerous (see the accident in an episode of
The Expanse). It's much easier to simply suck liquid water up from a
hospitable planet, especially when you've got the technology to keep
the local population under control (or in the case of V, think you
can).

[anim8rfsk]

In article <120620160135306089%no...@noway.com>,

obLarryNiven

> What they'd want from us is protein and chlorophyll.
>
> As for how rare water might be, they're just now figuring out via New
> Horizons that Pluto might have a subsurface ocean of water. Not ice,
> water. On Pluto, for God's sake. Pluto turns out to be geologically
> active. It's even got a blue sky. That's what we get for
> disrespecting Pluto.

[A Friend]

In article <anim8rfsk-8C74A...@news.easynews.com>,

anim8rfsk <anim...@cox.net> wrote:

> In article <120620160135306089%no...@noway.com>,
> A Friend <no...@noway.com> wrote:

> > Sure. They wouldn't come here for water. There's plenty of places in
> > the solar system to get it, places where no one's going to shoot back.
>
> obLarryNiven

I have to plead ignorance here. I know who Larry Niven is, but what is
"ob"?

[anim8rfsk]

In article <120620160752451411%no...@noway.com>,

A Friend <no...@noway.com> wrote:

> In article <anim8rfsk-8C74A...@news.easynews.com>,
> anim8rfsk <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > In article <120620160135306089%no...@noway.com>,
> > A Friend <no...@noway.com> wrote:
>
> > > Sure. They wouldn't come here for water. There's plenty of places in
> > > the solar system to get it, places where no one's going to shoot back.
> >
> > obLarryNiven
>
>
> I have to plead ignorance here. I know who Larry Niven is, but what is
> "ob"?

Sorry

Obligatory Larry Niven Reference

He wrote a treatment on V trying to justify the assumptions, including
the bit about water being able to harvest more easily in the outer
system where "it comes prepackaged and nobody's shooting at you" :)

[David Johnston]

They weren't coming for the water though. They were refueling their
ships on Earth of course, but then they were on Earth. But they wanted
the planet and the people on the planet.

[A Friend]

In article <anim8rfsk-FF94E...@news.easynews.com>,

anim8rfsk <anim...@cox.net> wrote:

> In article <120620160752451411%no...@noway.com>,
> A Friend <no...@noway.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <anim8rfsk-8C74A...@news.easynews.com>,
> > anim8rfsk <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <120620160135306089%no...@noway.com>,
> > > A Friend <no...@noway.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > Sure. They wouldn't come here for water. There's plenty of places in
> > > > the solar system to get it, places where no one's going to shoot back.
> > >
> > > obLarryNiven
> >
> >
> > I have to plead ignorance here. I know who Larry Niven is, but what is
> > "ob"?
>
> Sorry
>
> Obligatory Larry Niven Reference
>
> He wrote a treatment on V trying to justify the assumptions, including
> the bit about water being able to harvest more easily in the outer
> system where "it comes prepackaged and nobody's shooting at you" :)

Thanks. Either great minds think alike, or I stole from him without
meaning to.

I saw the bit upthread about transporting liquid water being easier
than hauling ice. Not so. Water is better packaged as ice. You'd
have to build something big to contain all that water, and why would
you bother? You're going to have to process the ice anyway after
you've brought it to where it's supposed to be.

[A Friend]

In article <njjqaq$col$1...@dont-email.me>, David Johnston

They wanted resources. Why is it that these aliens never want to do a
deal? We'd sell our resources to them.

They ate rats and mice, for God's sake. We couldn't sell them rats and
mice from our rat and mouse farms?

[anim8rfsk]

In article <120620161041560017%no...@noway.com>,

And the power required to lift water out of a gravity well ...

[Dimensional Traveler]

Ya, the whole "water is rare" meme is seriously out of date. Two-thirds
of it is the most common element in the universe, the other third is the
third most common element and they LIKE to combine. You can probably
ram-scoop water out of most nebula. We're pretty sure there are lots of
individual comets/asteroids/what-have-yous that each contain volumes of
water comparable to at least one of the Great Lakes if not all of them
combined. Water ain't a problem.

[Jim G.]

anim8rfsk sent the following on 06/10/2016 at 10:04 PM:

I just threw up a little bit in my mouth. Okay, more than a little bit.

[Jim G.]

suzeeq sent the following on 06/10/2016 at 11:11 PM:

A local library is often a great resource when it comes to backlogs of
worthwhile shows!

> I've caught up
> with Midsomer Murders, am watching season 8 of Murdoch, and finished 2
> seasons of Miss Fisher's mysteries.

I hope to see the Fisher mysteries at some point.

[suzeeq]

I checked this morning and they have a couple seasons of Dr Blake
mysteries, Brokenwood, and George Gently as well as a few others. Acorn
media must have been running a special on their catalog.

[anim8rfsk]

In article <njki6f$52k$2...@dont-email.me>,

NO FISH!!!!!

[anim8rfsk]

In article <njkhq7$29t$5...@dont-email.me>,

I notice you didn't disagree.

[Jim G.]

suzeeq sent the following on 06/12/2016 at 04:12 PM:

> Jim G. wrote:
>> suzeeq sent the following on 06/10/2016 at 11:11 PM:
>>> Jim G. wrote:
>>>> re: WAYWARD PINES
>>>>

>>>> Summer's a good time for that sort of approach since there's not an
>>>> abundance of decent options to begin with.
>>> Oh but library improved their tv on video collection.
>>
>> A local library is often a great resource when it comes to backlogs of
>> worthwhile shows!
>>
>>> I've caught up
>>> with Midsomer Murders, am watching season 8 of Murdoch, and finished 2
>>> seasons of Miss Fisher's mysteries.
>>
>> I hope to see the Fisher mysteries at some point.
>
> I checked this morning and they have a couple seasons of Dr Blake
> mysteries, Brokenwood, and George Gently as well as a few others. Acorn
> media must have been running a special on their catalog.

Libraries seem to like the foreign stuff.

[suzeeq]

Jim G. wrote:
> suzeeq sent the following on 06/12/2016 at 04:12 PM:
>> Jim G. wrote:
>>> suzeeq sent the following on 06/10/2016 at 11:11 PM:
>>>> Jim G. wrote:
>>>>> re: WAYWARD PINES
>>>>>
>>>>> Summer's a good time for that sort of approach since there's not an
>>>>> abundance of decent options to begin with.
>>>> Oh but library improved their tv on video collection.
>>> A local library is often a great resource when it comes to backlogs of
>>> worthwhile shows!
>>>
>>>> I've caught up
>>>> with Midsomer Murders, am watching season 8 of Murdoch, and finished 2
>>>> seasons of Miss Fisher's mysteries.
>>> I hope to see the Fisher mysteries at some point.
>> I checked this morning and they have a couple seasons of Dr Blake
>> mysteries, Brokenwood, and George Gently as well as a few others. Acorn
>> media must have been running a special on their catalog.
>
> Libraries seem to like the foreign stuff.
>

Yes, ours had mostly UK tv shows though not many and only the early
years with US movies and a few foreign films until about a year ago.
They added some other US tv, I was able to finish Haven, and the later
seasons of UK tv, and the Australian and Canadian shows.