Shortland Street - Oscar is not dead
patricK fitzgeralD
would still be collecting SSt pay cheques in 1999.
The Listener program notes seem to confirm my theory for they say
"rachel wants answers from Oscar" and in another case "Oscar tries to
tell it how it is".
Oscar's name appears in the cast list
That devious bastard Oscar will be spreading his evil for some time
yet
patricK
Scott Higham
patricK fitzgeralD wrote:
Oh dear, it appears our beloved Patrick F is a Street fan.
Is this the same Patrick who was whining because sports events and the
Americas Cup would mean more 'brain dead TV' on our screens this year?
Scott.
patricK fitzgeralD
<scott....@national.org.nz> wrote:
>
>Oh dear, it appears our beloved Patrick F is a Street fan.
Anybody who does not like SSt deserves to be a baby nasty nat.
patricK
ta...@xtra.co.nz
I haven't been able to watch a single program long enough to learn to
like it. Never was much of a soap opera fan.
Geoff Rait
>Brian Harmer wrote:
>>
>> Yeah right on! Anyone who likes SSt is probably lapping up all
>> that fatuous Rod/Rachel crap that is filling the local headlines
>> right now.
>>
>Yeah, good on Rachel for dumping him rather than the other way
>around. At least she seems to have kept him on the lease for, what,
>nine years? ^^^^^
Freudian slip??
Geoff
--
Actually, I do have spots.
Ben Tichborne
> That devious bastard Oscar will be spreading his evil for some time
> yet
Perhaps he will be exposed as an ACT member or supporter.
Brian Harmer
Yeah right on! Anyone who likes SSt is probably lapping up all that
fatuous Rod/Rachel crap that is filling the local headlines right now.
--
Brian Harmer
http://www.vuw.ac.nz/~bharmer/
I may not be disgruntled but I am far from gruntled
P G Wodehouse
Enkidu
>
> Yeah right on! Anyone who likes SSt is probably lapping up all
> that fatuous Rod/Rachel crap that is filling the local headlines
> right now.
>
around. At least she seems to have kept him on the lease for, what,
nine years?
Cliff
Brian Harmer
wrote:
>In <3697D40A...@vuw.ac.nz>, Cliff.Pratt wrote:
>>nine years? ^^^^^
>
>Freudian slip??
In any case I see that the editor off the Sunday Star Times is living
by the old motto of never underestimating the stupidity of his/her
readership. Whole heaps of the front section devoted to these two
uninteresting people (Rod and Rachel, not Cliff and Geoff).
Brian Harmer
(Miche and Dave) wrote:
>In article <3697c708...@news.vuw.ac.nz>, brian....@vuw.ac.nz wrote:
>
>> Yeah right on! Anyone who likes SSt is probably lapping up all that
>> fatuous Rod/Rachel crap that is filling the local headlines right now.
>Not necessarily.
>(Miche, SS fan who doesn't give a shit about Rod and Rachel)
But Miche, what's the difference?
Both scripts are full of unreal people.
Miche and Dave
> Yeah right on! Anyone who likes SSt is probably lapping up all that
> fatuous Rod/Rachel crap that is filling the local headlines right now.
Not necessarily.
(Miche, SS fan who doesn't give a shit about Rod and Rachel)
--
DO NOT USE REPLY to send me email!
The address in my From: line is a spam trap.
My real email address is:
dhmec at albatross dot co dot nz
You say Chaos like it's a _bad_ thing!
patricK fitzgeralD
Harmer) wrote:
>
>Yeah right on! Anyone who likes SSt is probably lapping up all that
>fatuous Rod/Rachel crap that is filling the local headlines right now.
>
Doesn't follow at all Bryan.
SSt besided being light entertainment which we all can do with at
times also serves an educational fuction not as lofty as <vuw> but
useful nevertheless.
patricK
Geoff Rait
>On Sat, 09 Jan 1999 22:20:48 GMT, (Geoff Rait) wrote:
>>In <3697D40A...@vuw.ac.nz>, Cliff.Pratt wrote:
>>>Yeah, good on Rachel for dumping him rather than the other way
>>>around. At least she seems to have kept him on the lease for, what,
>>>nine years? ^^^^^
>>
>>Freudian slip??
>
>In any case I see that the editor off the Sunday Star Times is living
>by the old motto of never underestimating the stupidity of his/her
>readership. Whole heaps of the front section devoted to these two
>uninteresting people (Rod and Rachel, not Cliff and Geoff).
I'm going for the Weekly World News or Sunday Sport. Cliff?
Suzanne Doig
Harmer) wrote:
>Yeah right on! Anyone who likes SSt is probably lapping up all that
>fatuous Rod/Rachel crap that is filling the local headlines right now.
Sorry to disappoint you Brian - I quite like Shorters but I couldn't
give the proverbial flying ... about Rod and Rachel.
Suzanne
* - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * -
Suzanne Doig - remove obvious from reply-to address
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Academy/4038/index.html
Squirrel
Harmer) wrote:
>On Sat, 09 Jan 1999 19:48:27 GMT, ta...@xtra.co.nz wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 09 Jan 1999 01:07:48 GMT, patr...@netaccess.co.nz (patricK
>>fitzgeralD) wrote:
>
>>>On Sat, 09 Jan 1999 12:03:42 +1300, Scott Higham
>>><scott....@national.org.nz> wrote:
>
>>>>Oh dear, it appears our beloved Patrick F is a Street fan.
>
>>>Anybody who does not like SSt deserves to be a baby nasty nat.
>
>>I haven't been able to watch a single program long enough to learn to
>>like it. Never was much of a soap opera fan.
>
>Yeah right on! Anyone who likes SSt is probably lapping up all that
>fatuous Rod/Rachel crap that is filling the local headlines right now.
>
>
>--
>Brian Harmer
bzzz wrong, I live for SS and could not give a toss about R&R
Squirrel :)
Squirrel
(Miche and Dave) wrote:
>In article <3697c708...@news.vuw.ac.nz>, brian....@vuw.ac.nz wrote:
>
>> Yeah right on! Anyone who likes SSt is probably lapping up all that
>> fatuous Rod/Rachel crap that is filling the local headlines right now.
>
>Not necessarily.
>
>(Miche, SS fan who doesn't give a shit about Rod and Rachel)
>
>--
>DO NOT USE REPLY to send me email!
Sister!!!!!!!!!!!!
Squirrel ;)
ta...@xtra.co.nz
fitzgeralD) wrote:
>On Sun, 10 Jan 1999 10:17:48 +1300, brian....@vuw.ac.nz (Brian
>Harmer) wrote:
>>
>>Yeah right on! Anyone who likes SSt is probably lapping up all that
>>fatuous Rod/Rachel crap that is filling the local headlines right now.
>>
>
>Doesn't follow at all Bryan.
>
>SSt besided being light entertainment which we all can do with at
>times also serves an educational fuction not as lofty as <vuw> but
>useful nevertheless.
What educational function would that be?
John Cawston
Miche and Dave
> On Sun, 10 Jan 1999 11:49:40 +1200, miche_c...@my-dejanews.com
> (Miche and Dave) wrote:
>
> >In article <3697c708...@news.vuw.ac.nz>, brian....@vuw.ac.nz wrote:
> >
> >> Yeah right on! Anyone who likes SSt is probably lapping up all that
> >> fatuous Rod/Rachel crap that is filling the local headlines right now.
>
> >Not necessarily.
>
> >(Miche, SS fan who doesn't give a shit about Rod and Rachel)
>
> But Miche, what's the difference?
>
> Both scripts are full of unreal people.
I can accept SS as comedy. Unfortunately for Rod and Rachel there are two
innocent people (their children) involved in the farce.
Miche
--
DO NOT USE REPLY to send me email!
Megan Pledger
>
> In article <369add76...@news.vuw.ac.nz>, brian....@vuw.ac.nz wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 10 Jan 1999 11:49:40 +1200, miche_c...@my-dejanews.com
> > (Miche and Dave) wrote:
> > > brian....@vuw.ac.nz wrote:
> > >> Yeah right on! Anyone who likes SSt is probably lapping up all that
> > >> fatuous Rod/Rachel crap that is filling the local headlines right now.
> > >Not necessarily.
> > >(Miche, SS fan who doesn't give a shit about Rod and Rachel)
> >
> > But Miche, what's the difference?
> >
> > Both scripts are full of unreal people.
>
> I can accept SS as comedy. Unfortunately for Rod and Rachel there are two
> innocent people (their children) involved in the farce.
Who are you to say their marriage is a farce?
<sarcasm on>
Oh, I see, they're fameous and newsworthy. They couldn't possibly
understand or value love and marital happiness. They're just doing it to
be even more newsworthy.
<sarcasm off>
M.
Adam P. R. Taylor
> I haven't been able to watch a single program long enough to learn to
> like it. Never was much of a soap opera fan.
But Tarla, its not a soap, its a "drama"!
(And still total crap, too, but I digress.)
--
----------------------------------------------------
Adam P. R. Taylor
Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering
University of Canterbury
Private Bag 4800
Christchurch
NEW ZEALAND
Email: apt18@elec._DIE_SPAMMER_DIE_.canterbury.ac.nz
Miche and Dave
> Miche and Dave wrote:
> > I can accept SS as comedy. Unfortunately for Rod and Rachel there are two
> > innocent people (their children) involved in the farce.
>
> Who are you to say their marriage is a farce?
I didn't say their marriage was. Their divorce, played out in front of
the cameras, probably will be though.
> <sarcasm on>
> Oh, I see, they're fameous and newsworthy. They couldn't possibly
> understand or value love and marital happiness. They're just doing it to
> be even more newsworthy.
> <sarcasm off>
Bite me.
Lin Nah
wrote:
Isn't it a bit patronising to say that?
Lin
John Cawston
Err, um, you're Asian and wouldn't understand :)
JC
patricK fitzgeralD
>
>What educational function would that be?
On several occasions they have used the story to highlivht health
problems and what can be done about them.
Frequenty they used their scenery to publicise health campaigns
patricK
Sandy
Sheesh and pickle me tits, now we have people who believe Shortland
Street -- an EFFING TELEVISION SOAP -- is some kind of educational
programme that highlights health problems and publicises health
campaigns.
This is almost as bad as the loons who think the autocue readers on
the Ken and Barbie show are real, important people.
What was the old expression? God help New Zealand.
ta...@xtra.co.nz
<apt18_DIE_SPAMMER_.@elec.canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:
>ta...@xtra.co.nz wrote:
>
>> I haven't been able to watch a single program long enough to learn to
>> like it. Never was much of a soap opera fan.
>
>But Tarla, its not a soap, its a "drama"!
>
>(And still total crap, too, but I digress.)
All soaps are called "dramas." That doesn't make them Shakespeare.
Simon Bennett & Helen Searancke
> But Tarla, its not a soap, its a "drama"!
>
> (And still total crap, too, but I digress.)
I'm wounded beyond measure.But vigorously defend anyone's right to
express their opinions.
Simon B
Kerry
Well I have to say we were very disappointed in the damp squib of a
cliffhanger here.....
Kerry
Simon Bennett & Helen Searancke
>
> All soaps are called "dramas." That doesn't make them Shakespeare.
And they don't try to be - the medium and serial form are completely
different.
Interestingly enough, Shakespeare's plays were a big part of the popular
culture of his day.
Simon B
Simon Bennett & Helen Searancke
> Well I have to say we were very disappointed in the damp squib of a
> cliffhanger here.....
Which cliffhanger? Do you mean tonight's episode?
Simon B
Squirrel
If she does then I have to agree, in fact it was so damp I cant even
remember what it was :(
Squirrel
Megan Pledger
> mple...@ihug.co.nz wrote:
> > Miche and Dave wrote:
> > > I can accept SS as comedy. Unfortunately for Rod and Rachel there are two
> > > innocent people (their children) involved in the farce.
> >
> > Who are you to say their marriage is a farce?
>
> I didn't say their marriage was. Their divorce, played out in front of
> the cameras, probably will be though.
>
> > <sarcasm on>
> > Oh, I see, they're fameous and newsworthy. They couldn't possibly
> > understand or value love and marital happiness. They're just doing it to
> > be even more newsworthy.
> > <sarcasm off>
>
> Bite me.
>
M.
Miche and Dave
kerryd.remo...@ihug.co.nz wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jan 1999 20:05:14 +1200, Simon Bennett & Helen Searancke
> <helen...@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> >Adam P. R. Taylor wrote:
> >
> >
> >> But Tarla, its not a soap, its a "drama"!
> >>
> >> (And still total crap, too, but I digress.)
> >
> >
> >I'm wounded beyond measure.But vigorously defend anyone's right to
> >express their opinions.
>
> Well I have to say we were very disappointed in the damp squib of a
> cliffhanger here.....
Yeah. What Kerry said. Then again I guess it was too good to be true.
Bastard. :)
Squirrel
<mple...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>M.
What did Mike Tyson (and Megan) say to Van Gogh?? You gonna eat
that???
Squirrel
Squirrel
>On Mon, 11 Jan 1999 20:13:09 +1200 in nz.general Simon Bennett & Helen
>Searancke wrote: in <3699B2...@xtra.co.nz>:
>
>>Kerry wrote:
>>
>>> Well I have to say we were very disappointed in the damp squib of a
>>> cliffhanger here.....
>>
>>
>>Which cliffhanger? Do you mean tonight's episode?
>>
>
>The final of last year was good but I must say the 1st one back in
>1999 didn't really grab me. Nothing resolved, just padded out a bit.
>
>We want Oscar to die and to die soon!
>
>I would like a slightly different plot than the Clinic has financial
>troubles. This is around the tenth time it has been tried, even
>though I'll admit the method, through embezzlement, is new.
>
>The who whacked Oscar in the head question is good, and could be fun
>over the next few weeks. I would say you wouldn't want to drag it out
>more than a month though.
Bet you now we know what a willy waggler he is, it will show that
someone we dont know clocked him one for more dosgy deals or the odd
rape, I agree, kill him no!!!
>
>And as a general note, I think we need some stronger females - too
>many of them are pathetic. There is no hope for Waverly and Minnie.
>Ellen is getting pretty sad again and even the glorious Rachel is
>looking weak and relying on Dad. Oh yeah and Caroline pining away for
>Lionel. Where are the strong women - the Marge, the strong Jenny, the
>feisty Rachel, the robonurse Carrie, the former female Director whose
>name I've forgotten, the cunning Tiffany, the murderous Carla, the
>fabulous Carmen, the reslient Lulu.
Well I would offer, but you know they dont want fat lesbians on the
show, but I would even buy a reincarnation or resurrection to get
Carmen back on the screen :(((
Judging by the "bite me" saga developing between Megan and Miche,
maybe they should audition for the hard woman roles ;)))
>
Squirrel
Kerry
(Miche and Dave) wrote:
>In article <3699a133...@news.ihug.co.nz>,
>kerryd.remo...@ihug.co.nz wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 11 Jan 1999 20:05:14 +1200, Simon Bennett & Helen Searancke
>> >I'm wounded beyond measure.But vigorously defend anyone's right to
>> >express their opinions.
>>
>> Well I have to say we were very disappointed in the damp squib of a
>> cliffhanger here.....
>
>Yeah. What Kerry said. Then again I guess it was too good to be true.
>
Also clumsy and disappointing continuity releasing all those episode
teasers to the Listener that removed all suspense about Oscars death.
Megan Pledger
> Also clumsy and disappointing continuity releasing all those episode
> teasers to the Listener that removed all suspense about Oscars death.
After having seen the "overview" on Sunday I reckon it's going to be
Lionel's fiancee (MacKenzie?) that did it.
She'll be pissed off with Oscar for framing her. And it'll be ironic
that Lionel apologises for believeing she was capable of fraud and it
turns out she's even worse than a fraudster.
Minnie's boyfriend ran off because he found the body, knew he'd be the
fall guy and get sent back to prision.
M.
Kerry
<mple...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>Kerry wrote:
>> Also clumsy and disappointing continuity releasing all those episode
>> teasers to the Listener that removed all suspense about Oscars death.
>
>After having seen the "overview" on Sunday I reckon it's going to be
>Lionel's fiancee (MacKenzie?) that did it.
Me too. The sort of wrote her out at the end of the year, this is the
final curtain.
>
>She'll be pissed off with Oscar for framing her. And it'll be ironic
>that Lionel apologises for believeing she was capable of fraud and it
>turns out she's even worse than a fraudster.
>
>Minnie's boyfriend ran off because he found the body, knew he'd be the
>fall guy and get sent back to prision.
I can't believe I know this stuff......
Comes from living with 4 people who do I guess :-)
Miche and Dave
> And as a general note, I think we need some stronger females - too
> many of them are pathetic. There is no hope for Waverly and Minnie.
> Ellen is getting pretty sad again and even the glorious Rachel is
> looking weak and relying on Dad. Oh yeah and Caroline pining away for
> Lionel. Where are the strong women - the Marge, the strong Jenny, the
> feisty Rachel, the robonurse Carrie, the former female Director whose
> name I've forgotten, the cunning Tiffany, the murderous Carla, the
> fabulous Carmen, the reslient Lulu.
Well the amazing Moira is in Fiji or somewhere. (Thanks for the postcard
by the way Simon! :)
Miche and Dave
tri...@netsource.co.nz (Squirrel) wrote:
> Judging by the "bite me" saga developing between Megan and Miche,
> maybe they should audition for the hard woman roles ;)))
Sorry mate, I'm too busy. What with the weegirl and two jobs and hubby's
a student... Besides commuting to and from Auckland would be a bitch. :)
Miche and Dave
> After having seen the "overview" on Sunday I reckon it's going to be
> Lionel's fiancee (MacKenzie?) that did it.
>
> She'll be pissed off with Oscar for framing her. And it'll be ironic
> that Lionel apologises for believeing she was capable of fraud and it
> turns out she's even worse than a fraudster.
>
> Minnie's boyfriend ran off because he found the body, knew he'd be the
> fall guy and get sent back to prision.
Ya know, I think you're right. This all sounds pretty plausible.
Oh and I apologise for the 'bite me' comment - I've just had my words
misrepresented once too often lately.
Hoppy
Simon Bennett & Helen Searancke wrote in message
<3699B2...@xtra.co.nz>...
>Kerry wrote:
>
>> Well I have to say we were very disappointed in the damp squib of
>> a cliffhanger here.....
>
I agree. In fact the squib was more liquified than damp. I'll give SS one
more shot this season so long as they don't carry on trying to deliver
pseudo-education by paralleling the story lines with current NZ events. If
I want to see a medical reality series I'll watch RPA. Likewise I'll hang
out with Janice if I want political debate.
--
Hoppy
Miche and Dave
> I agree. In fact the squib was more liquified than damp. I'll give SS one
> more shot this season so long as they don't carry on trying to deliver
> pseudo-education by paralleling the story lines with current NZ events. If
> I want to see a medical reality series I'll watch RPA. Likewise I'll hang
> out with Janice if I want political debate.
Fat chance you'll get any, from what I've seen of her posts.
Squirrel
(Miche and Dave) wrote:
>In article <3699cab9....@nntp.netsource.co.nz>,
>tri...@netsource.co.nz (Squirrel) wrote:
>
>> Judging by the "bite me" saga developing between Megan and Miche,
>> maybe they should audition for the hard woman roles ;)))
>
>Sorry mate, I'm too busy. What with the weegirl and two jobs and hubby's
>a student... Besides commuting to and from Auckland would be a bitch. :)
>
>Miche
>
dayam :))
Squirrel
Squirrel
<mple...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>Kerry wrote:
>> Also clumsy and disappointing continuity releasing all those episode
>> teasers to the Listener that removed all suspense about Oscars death.
>
>After having seen the "overview" on Sunday I reckon it's going to be
>Lionel's fiancee (MacKenzie?) that did it.
>
>She'll be pissed off with Oscar for framing her. And it'll be ironic
>that Lionel apologises for believeing she was capable of fraud and it
>turns out she's even worse than a fraudster.
no way, not Mack, she was too screwed up to organise the death
>
>Minnie's boyfriend ran off because he found the body, knew he'd be the
>fall guy and get sent back to prision.
>
>M.
no, minnie found the body not Fergus :)
Squirrel
patricK fitzgeralD
<mple...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>Kerry wrote:
>> Also clumsy and disappointing continuity releasing all those episode
>> teasers to the Listener that removed all suspense about Oscars death.
>
>After having seen the "overview" on Sunday I reckon it's going to be
>Lionel's fiancee (MacKenzie?) that did it.
THe one I think did it is Oscar's new girl friend, what the hell was
her name??
patricK
patricK fitzgeralD
all the free market, new right, people.
These people practice and admire his managment style of opressing
the real workers who do the work.
patricKs
ta...@xtra.co.nz
<helen...@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>Adam P. R. Taylor wrote:
>
>
>> But Tarla, its not a soap, its a "drama"!
>>
>> (And still total crap, too, but I digress.)
>
>
>I'm wounded beyond measure.But vigorously defend anyone's right to
>express their opinions.
Why are you wounded?
ta...@xtra.co.nz
David Mamet is a big part of American popular culture, but he doesn't
write soap operas. He writes dramas. Just because you call something a
drama, doesn't mean that it actually IS one.
Miche and Dave
tri...@netsource.co.nz (Squirrel) wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jan 1999 22:33:43 +1200, Megan Pledger
> <mple...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>
> >Kerry wrote:
> >> Also clumsy and disappointing continuity releasing all those episode
> >> teasers to the Listener that removed all suspense about Oscars death.
> >
> >After having seen the "overview" on Sunday I reckon it's going to be
> >Lionel's fiancee (MacKenzie?) that did it.
> >
> >She'll be pissed off with Oscar for framing her. And it'll be ironic
> >that Lionel apologises for believeing she was capable of fraud and it
> >turns out she's even worse than a fraudster.
>
> no way, not Mack, she was too screwed up to organise the death
Nope. She's a calculating character, our Mackenzie. I'm sure she'd have
found reserves of ruthlessness somewhere.
> >Minnie's boyfriend ran off because he found the body, knew he'd be the
> >fall guy and get sent back to prision.
> >
> >M.
>
> no, minnie found the body not Fergus :)
Minnie found the body. That doesn't mean she was _first_ to have found
the body.
Miche (who bets Simon's just loving all this!)
Brett Hunt
Squirrel wrote in message <3699d958....@nntp.netsource.co.nz>...
>On Mon, 11 Jan 1999 22:33:43 +1200, Megan Pledger
><mple...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>
>>Kerry wrote:
>>> Also clumsy and disappointing continuity releasing all those episode
>>> teasers to the Listener that removed all suspense about Oscars death.
>>
>>After having seen the "overview" on Sunday I reckon it's going to be
>>Lionel's fiancee (MacKenzie?) that did it.
>>
>>She'll be pissed off with Oscar for framing her. And it'll be ironic
>>that Lionel apologises for believeing she was capable of fraud and it
>>turns out she's even worse than a fraudster.
>
>no way, not Mack, she was too screwed up to organise the death
I thought the same as your suggestion in another post, Oscar is a dodgy
character and someone else did him over (gambling problem and bad debts?)
>
>>
>>Minnie's boyfriend ran off because he found the body, knew he'd be the
>>fall guy and get sent back to prision.
>>
>>M.
>
>no, minnie found the body not Fergus :)
>
Fergus will have had nothing to do with it, too obvious.
Brett Hunt
Brian Harmer
>On Mon, 11 Jan 1999 20:05:14 +1200, Simon Bennett & Helen Searancke
><helen...@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
>>Adam P. R. Taylor wrote:
>>> But Tarla, its not a soap, its a "drama"!
>>> (And still total crap, too, but I digress.)
>>I'm wounded beyond measure.But vigorously defend anyone's right to
>>express their opinions.
>Why are you wounded?
He/they? are the producer/author? of the aforementioned soap.
--
Brian Harmer
http://www.vuw.ac.nz/~bharmer/
I may not be disgruntled but I am far from gruntled
P G Wodehouse
Amy Gale
> Fergus will have had nothing to do with it, too obvious.
Yup I agree.
I reckon that Oscar poisoned himself with a cunningly [*] judged amount of
poison, passed out, hit his head, will come to and accuse Minnie thus
removing all her credibility.
And if that's not what happened, then it should be.
Amy
[*] Yet badly, cos he overdid it I think.
Kerry
wrote:
>"Brett Hunt" <bdh...@ihug.co.nz> writes:
>
>> Fergus will have had nothing to do with it, too obvious.
>
>Yup I agree.
>
>I reckon that Oscar poisoned himself with a cunningly [*] judged amount of
>poison, passed out, hit his head, will come to and accuse Minnie thus
>removing all her credibility.
Well if he did that doesn't explain the pupils unequal, sluggish and
slow to respond to light.
K
waiting for them to muck it up...
Amy Gale
Neither poisoning nor head injury will cause that? What else is there?
Amy
(actually my pupils are unequal all the time, but that's beside the point)
Brian Harmer
wrote:
>(actually my pupils are unequal all the time, but that's beside the point)
Yeah, but you have more pupils than Shelob don't you?
Kerry
wrote:
>ker...@remove.this.bit.ihug.co.nz (Kerry) writes:
>
>>
>> On 12 Jan 1999 10:14:18 +1300, Amy Gale <Amy....@mcs.vuw.ac.nz>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I reckon that Oscar poisoned himself with a cunningly [*] judged amount of
>> >poison, passed out, hit his head, will come to and accuse Minnie thus
>> >removing all her credibility.
>>
>> Well if he did that doesn't explain the pupils unequal, sluggish and
>> slow to respond to light.
>
>Neither poisoning nor head injury will cause that? What else is there?
Yeah head injury will, but I don't believe he could inflict that sort
of headinjury on himself
Anyway we have been discussing it here and it is obvious,.... it must
be Darryl's evil triplet returned.
Or maybe Tiffany's wicked sister
Kerry
wrote:
>Amy
>(actually my pupils are unequal all the time, but that's beside the point)
>
You and David Bowie!
cool
Squirrel
(Kerry) wrote:
>On 12 Jan 1999 10:14:18 +1300, Amy Gale <Amy....@mcs.vuw.ac.nz>
>wrote:
>
>>"Brett Hunt" <bdh...@ihug.co.nz> writes:
>>
>>> Fergus will have had nothing to do with it, too obvious.
>>
>>Yup I agree.
>>
>>I reckon that Oscar poisoned himself with a cunningly [*] judged amount of
>>poison, passed out, hit his head, will come to and accuse Minnie thus
>>removing all her credibility.
>
>Well if he did that doesn't explain the pupils unequal, sluggish and
>slow to respond to light.
>
>K
>waiting for them to muck it up...
>
I thought that meant they all watch far too much ER and Chicago hope
and were trying to sound good ;)
Squirrel
Squirrel
wrote:
>ker...@remove.this.bit.ihug.co.nz (Kerry) writes:
>
>>
>> On 12 Jan 1999 10:14:18 +1300, Amy Gale <Amy....@mcs.vuw.ac.nz>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I reckon that Oscar poisoned himself with a cunningly [*] judged amount of
>> >poison, passed out, hit his head, will come to and accuse Minnie thus
>> >removing all her credibility.
>>
>> Well if he did that doesn't explain the pupils unequal, sluggish and
>> slow to respond to light.
>
>Neither poisoning nor head injury will cause that? What else is there?
>
>Amy
>(actually my pupils are unequal all the time, but that's beside the point)
>
beside the pinpont is that??
Squirrel ;)
Squirrel
(Kerry) wrote:
>On 12 Jan 1999 14:32:34 +1300, Amy Gale <Amy....@mcs.vuw.ac.nz>
>wrote:
>
>>Amy
>>(actually my pupils are unequal all the time, but that's beside the point)
>>
>
>You and David Bowie!
>
>cool
>
Really?? I knew he had two different colors, must have a closer look
:)
Squirrel
Squirrel
fitzgeralD) wrote:
>On Mon, 11 Jan 1999 22:33:43 +1200, Megan Pledger
><mple...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>
>>Kerry wrote:
>>> Also clumsy and disappointing continuity releasing all those episode
>>> teasers to the Listener that removed all suspense about Oscars death.
>>
>>After having seen the "overview" on Sunday I reckon it's going to be
>>Lionel's fiancee (MacKenzie?) that did it.
>
>
>THe one I think did it is Oscar's new girl friend, what the hell was
>her name??
>
>patricK
who cares :) It was waverly, when she fainted in the coffee shop
Oscar (who is in fact her long lost separated siamese twin) fainted
also, and cracked his nut on the way down, now neither of them remeber
being related, when only a week before the show returned they were
going to let their workmates know their little secret.
Squirrel
Amy Gale
> Yeah head injury will, but I don't believe he could inflict that sort
> of headinjury on himself
Not even by a really, really unlucky fall?
Now I'm really bummed. I thought my solution covered all available
evidence and neatly allowed some further "plot".
Amy
Wendy Floyd
obnoxious husband? Carla? She done it!
Wendy
Enkidu
>
> the fabulous Carmen,
>
YESSSSSSSS! Bring Carmen or her clone, identical twin sister. Sheesh,
if DOOL can have a time traveller thread, why can't SS?
Cliff
Enkidu
>
> I'll give SS one more shot this season so long as they don't
> carry on trying to deliver pseudo-education by paralleling
> the story lines with current NZ events.
>
shooting, and any correspondance with real events is often
serendipitous.
Cliff
Brett Hunt
Amy Gale wrote in message ...
>(actually my pupils are unequal all the time, but that's beside the point)
Mine as well, that's what happens when you become a teacher.
Brett Hunt
Simon Bennett & Helen Searancke
SS is written about 14 weeks prior to screening. Any concurrence with
real topical events is entirely a fluke.
Simon B
Simon Bennett & Helen Searancke
> > no, minnie found the body not Fergus :)
>
> Minnie found the body. That doesn't mean she was _first_ to have found
> the body.
>
> Miche (who bets Simon's just loving all this!)
Ohhhh Yesssss
Simon B
Simon Bennett & Helen Searancke
> >
> >Interestingly enough, Shakespeare's plays were a big part of the popular
> >culture of his day.
>
> David Mamet is a big part of American popular culture, but he doesn't
> write soap operas. He writes dramas. Just because you call something a
> drama, doesn't mean that it actually IS one.
I'd be very interested to hear your definition of drama or dramatic
form.
Simon B
Kerry
wrote:
>On Tue, 12 Jan 1999 02:32:30 GMT, ker...@remove.this.bit.ihug.co.nz
>(Kerry) wrote:
>>>Amy
>>>(actually my pupils are unequal all the time, but that's beside the point)
>>>
>>
>>You and David Bowie!
>>
>>cool
>>
>Really?? I knew he had two different colors, must have a closer look
>:)
Yes he has a permanently dilated left pupil
K
Squirrel
Why??
Sq
Squirrel
wrote:
I agree, bring back Carmen, bring back Carmen!
(just dont brink the drip back too)
Squirrel
Simon Bennett & Helen Searancke
>
> I agree, bring back Carmen, bring back Carmen!
>
> (just dont brink the drip back too)
>
> Squirrel
Which drip should I not brink back? Carmen is dead. We saw it happen.
She was wonderful and will live on in our memories. Let's look to the
future...
Simon B
Squirrel
Look I have already worked out how Alex can return to the series,
surely Carmen could be accomodated somehow, dont tell me Shortbread
Street (as called by Scottish g/f) is incapable of entertaining life
after death stories, I mean at worst she could come back in another
body, but then from this angle thatw ould defeat the purpose somewhat
:)
Squirrel
PS so many people want her back, why did you kill off such a popular
character??
Simon Bennett & Helen Searancke
> Look I have already worked out how Alex can return to the series,
> surely Carmen could be accomodated somehow, dont tell me Shortbread
> Street (as called by Scottish g/f) is incapable of entertaining life
> after death stories, I mean at worst she could come back in another
> body, but then from this angle thatw ould defeat the purpose somewhat
> :)
>
> Squirrel
>
> PS so many people want her back, why did you kill off such a popular
> character??
I didn't kill her off - it was before my time. The actor wanted to
leave. People can't be forced to stay on the show.
Simon B
Tony Williams
> Which drip should I not brink back? Carmen is dead. We saw it happen.
> She was wonderful and will live on in our memories. Let's look to the
> future...
Why don't you write a few episodes of someone coming
into SS with a laptop, and logging on to nz.general
every night. Include some actual-type snippets of
people and posts....... Make us famous for a few days.
--
Tony Williams.
Miche and Dave
(patricK fitzgeralD) wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jan 1999 22:33:43 +1200, Megan Pledger
> <mple...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>
> >Kerry wrote:
> >> Also clumsy and disappointing continuity releasing all those episode
> >> teasers to the Listener that removed all suspense about Oscars death.
> >
> >After having seen the "overview" on Sunday I reckon it's going to be
> >Lionel's fiancee (MacKenzie?) that did it.
>
>
> THe one I think did it is Oscar's new girl friend, what the hell was
> her name??
Felicity. Nah, I don't think so. It's gotta be someone we know.
Miche
--
DO NOT USE REPLY to send me email!
The address in my From: line is a spam trap.
My real email address is:
dhmec at albatross dot co dot nz
You say Chaos like it's a _bad_ thing!
Miche and Dave
> On Mon, 11 Jan 1999 20:05:14 +1200, Simon Bennett & Helen Searancke
> <helen...@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> >Adam P. R. Taylor wrote:
> >
> >
> >> But Tarla, its not a soap, its a "drama"!
> >>
> >> (And still total crap, too, but I digress.)
> >
> >
> >I'm wounded beyond measure.But vigorously defend anyone's right to
> >express their opinions.
>
> Why are you wounded?
Cause he's the producer. (And I'm 95% sure he's taking the piss.)
Miche and Dave
kerryd.remo...@ihug.co.nz wrote:
> On 12 Jan 1999 10:14:18 +1300, Amy Gale <Amy....@mcs.vuw.ac.nz>
> wrote:
>
> >"Brett Hunt" <bdh...@ihug.co.nz> writes:
> >
> >> Fergus will have had nothing to do with it, too obvious.
> >
> >Yup I agree.
> >
> >I reckon that Oscar poisoned himself with a cunningly [*] judged amount of
> >poison, passed out, hit his head, will come to and accuse Minnie thus
> >removing all her credibility.
>
> Well if he did that doesn't explain the pupils unequal, sluggish and
> slow to respond to light.
Maybe he was poisoned _and_ had a blow to the head...
Miche and Dave
<Amy....@mcs.vuw.ac.nz> wrote:
> (actually my pupils are unequal all the time, but that's beside the point)
Hey, cool! I've got a co-worker with the same thing (is it a bug or a
feature? :).
Miche and Dave
tri...@netsource.co.nz (Squirrel) wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jan 1999 02:32:30 GMT, ker...@remove.this.bit.ihug.co.nz
> (Kerry) wrote:
>
> >On 12 Jan 1999 14:32:34 +1300, Amy Gale <Amy....@mcs.vuw.ac.nz>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>Amy
> >>(actually my pupils are unequal all the time, but that's beside the point)
> >>
> >
> >You and David Bowie!
> >
> >cool
> >
> Really?? I knew he had two different colors, must have a closer look
> :)
Yep, the left pupil is fixed permanently. He was hit in the head in a
schoolyard fight as a child, which damaged his left eye.
Miche and Dave
wrote:
> Wasn't there a relative of Minnies who went to jail for murdering an
> obnoxious husband? Carla? She done it!
From jail? Must have long arms. :)
Miche and Dave
tri...@netsource.co.nz (Squirrel) wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jan 1999 18:51:08 +1300, Enkidu <Cliff...@vuw.ac.nz>
> wrote:
>
> >DPF wrote:
> >>
> >> the fabulous Carmen,
> >>
> >YESSSSSSSS! Bring Carmen or her clone, identical twin sister. Sheesh,
> >if DOOL can have a time traveller thread, why can't SS?
> >
> >Cliff
>
> I agree, bring back Carmen, bring back Carmen!
>
> (just dont brink the drip back too)
Or the kid.
Miche and Dave
> Squirrel wrote:
>
> >
> > I agree, bring back Carmen, bring back Carmen!
> >
> > (just dont brink the drip back too)
> >
> > Squirrel
>
>
> Which drip should I not brink back?
Guy. Please no... We'll be good!
Squirrel
Whoa, sense of humour transplant required stat :))
Squirrel
Kerry
wrote:
An accident as a young person apparently. Got into a fight and took a
punch to the eye. The pupil was effectively paralysed, so has a
dilated pupil and eye can look a different colour to his blue right
eye
Tony Williams
Simon Bennett & Helen Searancke <helen...@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> I didn't kill her off - it was before my time. The actor wanted to
> leave. People can't be forced to stay on the show.
Yes, but isn't it true that "killing the part off" is
also a producer's way of making sure that the actor
can *never* return? Did that happen in this case?
--
Tony Williams.
Squirrel
(Kerry) wrote:
>On Tue, 12 Jan 1999 07:10:12 GMT, tri...@netsource.co.nz (Squirrel)
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 12 Jan 1999 06:25:08 GMT, ker...@remove.this.bit.ihug.co.nz
>>(Kerry) wrote:
>>
>
>>>Yes he has a permanently dilated left pupil
>>>
>>>K
>>>
>>
>An accident as a young person apparently. Got into a fight and took a
>punch to the eye. The pupil was effectively paralysed, so has a
>dilated pupil and eye can look a different colour to his blue right
>eye
>
>
V>>Why??ow would thi affect his vision if at all???
quirrel>
>
Kerry
wrote:
I imagine it must do, but with one normal eye, probably minimally.
One good eye can mask problems with the other.
K
ta...@xtra.co.nz
If I give you MY definition, you won't go running off about how it
doesn't match your dictionary now will you?
A drama is a play which is meant to portray real life events in a
manner which allows the characters to stir the emotions and
imaginations of the viewer. It is not supposed to be histrionic or
exaggerated. If it is, then it is melodrama, not drama. Soap operas
are melodramas at best.
Hoppy
>On Tue, 12 Jan 1999 19:16:59 +1200 in nz.general Simon Bennett
>& Helen Searancke wrote: in <369AF6...@xtra.co.nz>:
>>SS is written about 14 weeks prior to screening. Any concurrence
>>with real topical events is entirely a fluke.
>>
>Which is impressive considering there have been a few. Fake
>student loan marriages for one.
Thank you David. I can't recall specifics, but I'm sure some of the real SS
fans could. Or.....maybe the pollies are getting their ideas from SS ;-)
--
Hoppy
Amy Gale
>
> In article <vtp3e5h...@rialto.mcs.vuw.ac.nz>, Amy Gale
> <Amy....@mcs.vuw.ac.nz> wrote:
>
> > (actually my pupils are unequal all the time, but that's beside the point)
>
> Hey, cool! I've got a co-worker with the same thing (is it a bug or a
> feature? :).
I think it's totally a feature. Unfortunately the difference seems to
be diminishing - a couple of years ago the difference was probably by
a factor of 1.5 or so, now you can barely tell. Booo. I'm getting
all symmetrical in my old age.
On the other hand, fast food workers have stopped giving me knowing
looks and asking if I have the munchies.
Amy
Kent Smith
Enkidu wrote in message <369AE391...@vuw.ac.nz>...
>Hoppy wrote:
>>
>> I'll give SS one more shot this season so long as they don't
>> carry on trying to deliver pseudo-education by paralleling
>> the story lines with current NZ events.
>>
>I believe SS actually runs a couple of weeks behind the actual
>shooting, and any correspondance with real events is often
>serendipitous.
Anyone notice the mini Titanic sub-plot slipped in there. Had everything
except the ice-burg.
: )
-KENT
Kent Smith
Oscar?'
As this is obviously false, can they get done for false advertising? Surely
knowing that Oscar was killed will make someone watch who may not regularly
tune in. Therefore they tuned in under false pretences.
They may as well have said 'Who brought tactical nuclear weapons into the
clinic and detonated them?'
-KENT
Kent Smith
Miche and Dave wrote in message ...
>In article <369a9f7...@news.ihug.co.nz>,
>kerryd.remo...@ihug.co.nz wrote:
>
>> On 12 Jan 1999 10:14:18 +1300, Amy Gale <Amy....@mcs.vuw.ac.nz>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >"Brett Hunt" <bdh...@ihug.co.nz> writes:
>> >
>> >> Fergus will have had nothing to do with it, too obvious.
>> >
>> >Yup I agree.
>> >
>> >I reckon that Oscar poisoned himself with a cunningly [*] judged amount
of
>> >poison, passed out, hit his head, will come to and accuse Minnie thus
>> >removing all her credibility.
>>
>> Well if he did that doesn't explain the pupils unequal, sluggish and
>> slow to respond to light.
>
>Maybe he was poisoned _and_ had a blow to the head...
>
>Miche
>
How about: James was bribing Oscar which was why he embezzeled the cash?
The clinic ran low on cash so James popped back and did him in.
McKenzie could have also done this. Surely Lionel and her can't get
married?
Why doesn't the clinic have business insurance?
-KENT
Adam P. R. Taylor
>
> culture of his day.
Surely you are not suggesting that Shortland Street
is going to be a definitive work of the English Language
in a couple of hundred years time!?!?!?!
--
----------------------------------------------------
Adam P. R. Taylor
Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering
University of Canterbury
Private Bag 4800
Christchurch
NEW ZEALAND
Email: apt18@elec._DIE_SPAMMER_DIE_.canterbury.ac.nz
patricK fitzgeralD
<apt18_DIE_SPAMMER_.@elec.canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:
>
>
>Surely you are not suggesting that Shortland Street
>is going to be a definitive work of the English Language
>in a couple of hundred years time!?!?!?!
I can't see why not. It is cerainly less boring that Shakespeare's
plays.
patricK
ta...@xtra.co.nz
<apt18_DIE_SPAMMER_.@elec.canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:
>Simon Bennett & Helen Searancke wrote:
>>
>> Interestingly enough, Shakespeare's plays were a big part of the popular
>> culture of his day.
>
>Surely you are not suggesting that Shortland Street
>is going to be a definitive work of the English Language
>in a couple of hundred years time!?!?!?!
Not unless *I* start writing the damned thing.