From nobody Tue Feb 11 11:13:34 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: "True Lies" on Fox - brilliant, fair and balanced! References: <3e437c17.556701284@news.earthlink.net> <1p2r3vsq5ugboapqep1u2m245utgmeg7i5@4ax.com> Organization: ESC Date: 11 Feb 2003 11:13:33 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 18 rander3127@aol.com writes: > "True Lies" was perhaps one of the only "terrorist" movies that > had a grain of truth. Unlike so many other with their cartoon > villains with British accents. Yeah, I was trying to think one day of movies with Arab mastermind bad guys, and not coming up with any. (I'd forgotten about True Lies, because it was a pretty lame movie overall, and the bad guys must have been very forgettable.) On the other hand, I can rattle off dozens of movies where the bad guy is a white guy with a British accent. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Feb 12 08:13:42 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: E! Ranking References: <20030209225607.25538.00000169@mb-cb.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 12 Feb 2003 08:13:42 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 22 "Brent McKee" writes: > One presumes that PETA supports the war with Iraq because the > supposed Iraqi bio-weapons and nerve toxins were undoubtedly tested > on animals first. I doubt it. A quick search of peta.org didn't turn up a statement on the war, but I'll bet they're ambivalent at best. I did find this , the gist of which is, "Yeah, that video out of Afghanistan of the dog being gassed is bad, but America (and Israel, of course) are still 100 times worse than anyone else." Where extreme leftist groups are concerned, atrocities by other countries are just opportunities to bad-mouth the US some more. If they're right about some of the testing that's been done, I'd have to agree with them on stopping it though, and I'm a dedicated carnivore. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Feb 13 08:02:44 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: "True Lies" on Fox - brilliant, fair and balanced! Organization: ESC Date: 13 Feb 2003 08:02:42 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 29 rander3127@rogers.com writes: > I'd say something is different when you go from 15 years ago to now > and all the non-White villains (most of them) evaporate. Again, my > question is; Does Hollywood do this kind of casting because they are > afraid to cast Arabs or non-Whites as villains, or do they do it > because whites (villains or not) mean maximum possible box office > returns? I think it's both. Part political correctness, part wanting to have an interesting villain. Someone mentioned "True Lies," which I saw, but I'd completely forgotten the bad guys were Arabs because they made so little impression. Maybe we need to identify with Bad Guy to appreciate his evilness. We've seen so many Bad Guys with British or German accents that we're comfortable with that, and we recognize them easily. It's a more subtle version of the way the bad guy used to always wear a black cape and be accompanied by threatening music. And I'm not sure whether American audiences want to cheer against Arab extremists in a theater right now (I think most people would find that a little frivolous on the eve of war), but I am sure that Hollywood wouldn't be comfortable making such a movie. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Feb 14 09:07:16 2003 Newsgroups: alt.gossip.celebrities,rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Are you hot? More like, are you real? References: <0ofm4v015tcnpshhmakfb3l836s7jq30kt@4ax.com> Organization: ESC Date: 14 Feb 2003 09:07:11 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 13 "Sim Peter" writes: > Shows like that make me understand why the rest of the world hates > the US The most popular American show ever overseas was Baywatch. Suddenly they're going to turn their noses up at a show where women strut around showing their stuff? -- Aaron From nobody Fri Feb 14 09:41:43 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: I have never seen a "reality " show .......do i need professional help References: <20030212152311.29635.00000931@mb-mv.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 14 Feb 2003 09:41:41 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 madmktguru@aol.com (MadMktGuru) writes: > or some sort of major drug ingestion.. to get my head str8 ...? No, I've never seen one either. I don't like watching people cry or argue or be embarrassed, so that pretty much rules them all out for me. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Feb 14 09:45:32 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: *********Attention Chicks******* References: <7M%%9.168649$_s4.144997@rwcrnsc54> <4lk0a.5465$HN5.12508@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net> <0qE0a.16780$Ec4.12314@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net> <3e4be89f.31830060@news.prodigy.net> Organization: ESC Date: 14 Feb 2003 09:45:32 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 10 JoanofArc@Helpmybottomsonfire.com (Wavy G) writes: > I think it's cute when girls try to talk computers with won another. It gives me a special feeling. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Feb 15 08:30:44 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: The Right Wing -- a proposal References: <20030215072334.00893.00000493@mb-fp.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 15 Feb 2003 08:30:44 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 27 smkmirrors@aol.com (SmkMirrors) writes: > >>You want to see The Right Wing, watch the news. > >>Scott > Stay off the pipe Scott, the Left runs the big three outlets and > CNN. Some of these guys are *way* out there, aren't they? Even the media themselves don't try to claim they're right-wing or even centrist; they just claim their personal left-wing beliefs don't affect their reporting. Anyone who thinks "the news" is right-wing is seriously delusional, and probably shouldn't be allowed to own anything more dangerous than a spork. For some reason, whenever I see these "right-wing media" claims, I always think of the same line from a MST3K episode. You have to say it in a deep, slow, Darth Vader-y voice: "You pusses make me laugh." I don't know why, but that just comes to me every time. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Feb 15 08:33:26 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: The New Weapon Against Terrorism: Duct Tape? References: <73088f7e.0302131320.37d19113@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: 15 Feb 2003 08:33:26 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 13 busyba@yahoo.com (Bob) writes: > Duct tape is like The Force. > It has a light side and a dark side, and it holds the universe > together. "Duct tape? That stuff's a rip-off. I make my own tape." -- Joe, Newsradio -- Aaron From nobody Thu Feb 20 07:07:55 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Your favorite FOX show? Least favorite? References: <20030219221804.27866.00000969@mb-ml.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 20 Feb 2003 07:07:55 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 tvfan87656@aol.comnospam (James) writes: > What are your picks? Favorite -- Simpsons, of course. Least -- Everything else. I'm not nearly hip enough to watch most Fox shows. I've got a special ball of hate reserved for Boston Public. I can't even take the promos for that nasty piece of work. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Feb 20 07:12:09 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: "Joe Millionaire" numbers astronomical for FOX References: <3e539ca4.4292853744@news.cis.dfn.de> Organization: ESC Date: 20 Feb 2003 07:12:09 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 10 "Ian J. Ball" writes: > What's "Everwood" and "Girlfriends"?! Chopped liver?!! No, I've heard of chopped liver. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Feb 20 07:29:55 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: 2 TV Movies: Monte Walsh and The Hound of the Baskervilles (some spoilers) References: Organization: ESC Date: 20 Feb 2003 07:29:54 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 26 Grey Wolf writes: > I liked both shows for different reasons. The first [Monte Walsh] > was not the best western I've ever seen, but I felt it did a pretty > good job illustrating the end of the cowboys (due to the barbed wire > fence). I haven't seen it yet, but the book is the best Western I've ever read. The original movie with Lee Marvin was extremely disappointing; it veered completely away from the original story early on, and wasn't much of a movie in its own right. I'm hoping this one stays truer to Schaefer's great story. > I felt there was one bad CGI scene (the fence rider who committed > suicide by riding his horse off a cliff) and one silly superfluous > scene: where Monte leaped over the accountant and his companion on > their automobile that was stuck in some mud. Hmm, I definitely don't remember a suicide scene in the book, but the other scene sounds familiar. I haven't read it in over a year, so I could be forgetting something. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Feb 20 18:28:30 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,alt.tv.pol-incorrect Subject: Re: CNN Crossfire transcript: Janeane Garofalo References: <3e5531ba$1_4@corp.newsgroups.com> Organization: ESC Date: 20 Feb 2003 18:28:29 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 "Uniblab" writes: > I am so grateful to live in a country where we have someone of the > stature of Janeane Garafolo to advise us on foreign policy. She's got a right to her views, but I intentionally didn't read it. She's one of my favorite actresses, and I wouldn't want her off-screen views to spoil that for me. Likewise Gillian Anderson. It's really disappointing when an actor or actress is so good at playing smart, intriguing characters, and then he or she opens his or her mouth about current affairs, and proves to be dumb and conventional. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Feb 21 19:55:24 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Jim Lehrer violates Godwin's Law References: Organization: ESC Date: 21 Feb 2003 19:55:24 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 13 Poot Rootbeer writes: > Rumsfeld should be thankful that he got an opportunity to feign > outrage, getting him off the hook of actually answering the > question. That's okay, since it was more of a statement of opinion than a question anyway. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Feb 22 07:56:26 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Hasselhoff and Wife in Motorcycle Crash References: <3E5674B1.40107@austin.rr.com> <20030222005326.23560.00000057@mb-ck.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 22 Feb 2003 07:56:25 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 djaxmann@aol.combination (Andy Jakcsy) writes: > And no one outside of Germany cares. (But thanks for the article > anyways :) Well, if Germany cares, we'd damn well better care, to show our global sensitivity. Wouldn't want to be unilateralist in our non-caring. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Feb 22 08:24:33 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: 2 TV Movies: Monte Walsh and The Hound of the Baskervilles (some spoilers) Organization: ESC Date: 22 Feb 2003 08:24:33 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 35 Grey Wolf writes: > I'm glad I posted, I didn't realize that there had been a previous > Western, or even a book! I can't recommend it enough. It's by Jack Schaefer, the same author who wrote _Shane_. > The suicide was the old cowboy who'd fought in the war with General > so-and-so, and was reduced to riding fence - in other words, putting > up the fence. He was pretty much a sad character, riding fence > sounded like the worst job possible. My uncle rides fence out in Nebraska somewhere. Yes, on a horse. It doesn't sound exciting, but I'm sure it's no more boring than a factory job, and he gets lots of exercise and sun. The book didn't focus on fence much; it sounds like the movie uses fence as a metaphor for 'civilization.' The book naturally can go into more detail, and it does a great job of giving you the feeling of encroaching civilization in many aspects, such as automobiles, laws, statehood, corporate ranching companies, cowboys getting married and living in town, etc. I'm not bashing the movie; just praising the book. I realize you can't squeeze a whole novel into two hours of film, so they have to make changes. I'll definitely try to catch it soon. By the way, if you want a great Selleck western, see "Quigley Down Under." -- Aaron From nobody Sun Feb 23 13:16:13 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,alt.tv.simpsons Subject: Re: Desperately Need A Tape of Simpsons' "Actors Studio"! References: <3E58FF9D.7EE73719@deadspam.com> Organization: ESC Date: 23 Feb 2003 13:16:10 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 Jason Saslow writes: > Wait, how is that possible? The VCR records the signal directly from > the cable (or satellite) source. Your TV mutes from the speakers > out; it doesn't shut off the volume from the signal... My dish box has volume and mute controls. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Feb 24 16:08:59 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Grammys: What the hell? References: <20030224041645.16113.00000105@mb-mt.aol.com> <20030224080252.09678.00000254@mb-mu.aol.com> <_zq6a.1496$OD6.239104@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca> Organization: ESC Date: 24 Feb 2003 16:08:59 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 13 aniramca@yahoo.com (aniram) writes: > The "cold" tone of Canadian government approach to help war in Iraq > may be the reason that Avril did not win anything in the award! Yeah, because everyone at the Grammys last night was so pro-American and gung-ho for war, right? Sheesh. On the contrary, with that bunch, being from another country could only help you score points. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Feb 24 16:14:40 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Grammys: What the hell? References: <20030224041645.16113.00000105@mb-mt.aol.com> <20030224080252.09678.00000254@mb-mu.aol.com> <_zq6a.1496$OD6.239104@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca> Organization: ESC Date: 24 Feb 2003 16:14:39 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 aniramca@yahoo.com (aniram) writes: > The "cold" tone of Canadian government approach to help war in Iraq > may be the reason that Avril did not win anything in the award! Yeah, because everyone at the Grammys last night was so pro-American and gung-ho for war, right? Sheesh. On the contrary, with that bunch, being from another country could only help you score points. And I say that as someone who far prefers Lavigne's music to Norah Jones's sleep-inducers. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Feb 26 06:52:17 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: WTF is Kimmel thinking about ???? References: <20030226011654.10278.00000318@mb-md.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 26 Feb 2003 06:52:17 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 18 morehits4u@aol.comnojunk (Morehits4u) writes: > Don King is the guest host...........Kimmel starts talking about the > Tyson fight...and asks King the following ... > 1. " Do u think that fight was fixed ? " But he couldnt stop > there... he asks > " Don, did you ever have a fixed fight ? "" beyond all belief What's he supposed to do: throw his guest softballs? He's not doing network news here. I haven't seen the show, but knowing Kimmel's style, I'd expect him to try to get every guest worked up in some way. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Feb 27 12:27:58 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Tom Selleck returns, and more casting news References: <3e5dfc7d.4291942887@news.cis.dfn.de> <20030227073931.01899.00000186@mb-ce.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 27 Feb 2003 12:27:58 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 17 tvfan87656@aol.comnospam (James) writes: > >HOLLYWOOD (Variety) - Former "Magnum, P.I." star Tom Selleck will > >take another stab at prime-time television, starring in the NBC > >baseball comedy pilot "Touch 'Em All McCall." > I wonder if they ever watched Mr. Baseball. I tried to once. I like baseball and Selleck, but that was an awful, awful movie. It made me realize that a well-done movie is really an art form, when I thought about how the baseball in "Major League" was so compelling, and the baseball in "Mr. Baseball" was beyond boring. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Mar 1 08:40:35 2003 Newsgroups: alt.gossip.celebrities,rec.arts.movies.current-films,rec.arts.tv,alt.politics.bush Subject: Re: Has Israel Hijacked America? References: <16g06vks10dfclpiui7dchl4v1gcbulvf3@4ax.com> Organization: ESC Date: 01 Mar 2003 08:40:33 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 19 The Real Me writes: > I can't imagine being able to find someone willing to molest Hussein. > You must have missed this story about Miss Germany Universe trying to get a date with Saddam. Hmm, if I oppressed a nation, slaughtered millions, told the UN to bleep off for 12 years, and funded terrorists, you think I could get a date like that? What the heck is a 'Miss Germany Universe,' anyway? Isn't that an oxymoron? Maybe that's why the Germans aren't interested in war: they think the universe ends at their borders. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Mar 3 08:55:27 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Remember when CBS meant quality sitcoms? References: <28242-3E62D31D-250@storefull-2295.public.lawson.webtv.net> Organization: ESC Date: 03 Mar 2003 08:55:25 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 38 aalucard@webtv.net writes: > Remember when CBS had sitcoms of Mary Tyler Moore, Bob Newhart, > Alice, The Jeffersons, MASH, One Day At A Time and All In The > Family? I guess nostalgia makes everything better. Of all those shows, the only one I can stand in reruns is MASH, and there are several extra-preachy Aldariffic episodes of it that I won't watch. Some of those other sitcoms had their good moments, but most of them also tended to hit the viewer over the head with the Big F* Hammer of their political views too often. As for the Jeffersons -- I really wouldn't mention that in a post that accuses modern sitcoms of being stupid. > Actually I believe some of these were shared the same evenings, I > believe Alice and Jeffersons were on Sundays 9-10 - both far better > then today's hour of Greek Life and Becker. I can't argue with you there. But "better than the worst crap on TV" is hardly high praise. > I believe .Newhart, MASH and One Day At A Time all shared Monday > from 8:30-10. That 90 minutes alone kills today's Monday lineup. I dunno. MASH certainly beats anything on today, but I'll pass on the other two. As for today's lineup, I'll watch KoQ if it happens to be on, but won't go to any trouble to see it. The leads are funny, but the other characters (especially Arthur) are just too stupid. ELR is still pretty good; I've only recently started watching it, so I'm mostly seeing the older ones in syndication. The other two shows are useless. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Mar 6 07:07:49 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Bill Clinton joins "60 Minutes" References: <3e66d3db.17628706@news.cis.dfn.de> Organization: ESC Date: 06 Mar 2003 07:07:49 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 JXStern writes: > So Bubba should go on opposite Ann Coulter. Better make sure there's nothing on the set that can be used as a weapon. Ordinarily I'd watch Coulter read the phone book, but this wouldn't last 5 minutes without a scuffle. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Mar 6 07:16:36 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: "FOX News and Bill O'Reilly" References: <2db80c7b.0303051349.37597bbd@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: 06 Mar 2003 07:16:35 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 19 rv581@aol.com (rv581) writes: > From www.LastStory.com > > "FOX News and Bill O'Reilly" > > In the late 1980s and early 1990s, Rush Limbaugh lead the talk radio It's hard to take an article seriously when it makes a dumb grammar error in the very first line. It's one thing to do it in a Usenet post (I have), but when you're trying to run a news web site, and presumably selling advertising, do some proofreading, please. Sorry; just a pet peeve of mine. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Mar 7 06:37:41 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Why is NBC killing Scrubs? References: Organization: ESC Date: 07 Mar 2003 06:37:41 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 21 mike9986@postmark.net (Mike) writes: > NBC has just been treating Scrubs super-crappy as of late, and I > can't figure out why. Yes, it doesn't retain 100 percent of Friends' > lead-in audience, but it's still retaining a larger percentage than > a post-Friends show has in years. I don't get why they keep on > pre-empting it. I hope NBC renews the show, but at this point, I'm > not optimistic. Scrubs may be one of those shows that's just too smart for network executives. If they just plain don't like a show that's getting good ratings, they'll preempt it, do a minimum of promotion, move it around in the schedule, and show rerun episodes when new ones are scheduled, until the ratings drop enough to justify killing it. See Sports Night, News Radio, Duckman, and others. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Mar 7 10:18:53 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Bush Would Lose Election__again! References: <953559b0.0303062032.7399de1e@posting.google.com> <7S6V3C5A37687.0566435185@anonymous.poster> <01HW.BA8E0C76004FAC04F0182638@news.supernews.com> <6jbh6v4g0gim1f7rj7q3eodlibopfls56o@4ax.com> Organization: ESC Date: 07 Mar 2003 10:18:53 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 lab~rat writes: > Are you under the impression that there was a surprise question > lurking there somewhere? All Presidents know exactly what's going > to be thrown at them. Reporters play by the rules because > career-wise they'd fuck themselves if they didn't. Most of the questions weren't questions anyway; they were mini-editorials. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Mar 7 17:42:14 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Why is NBC killing Scrubs? References: <20030307164955.12814.00000052@mb-fu.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 07 Mar 2003 17:42:12 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 18 genxtv@aol.com (GENXTV) writes: > Actually, as NBC sees it, they're protecting "Scrubs" by pulling it > during sweeps so the increased competition doesn't hurt the show's > ratings average. I fully expect NBC to stick with "Scrubs." The > ratings are up and the retention rate has improved. Whether it's > pre-empted here or there really makes no difference because with > only 22 episodes, there are more than enough weeks in the season for > all the episodes to air. That's fine, as long as they promote the show when they do run new episodes, so people can find it. I hope you're right, since it's the first show to come along in a few years that I've really liked. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Mar 8 06:07:39 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Why is NBC killing Scrubs? Organization: ESC Date: 08 Mar 2003 06:07:38 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 28 mattack@vax.hanford.org (Matt Ackeret) writes: > But if you only promote it when there's new episodes, you'll never > get people to watch the reruns.. and the reruns are when the > network makes the money. True, it should be promoted regularly, not just for new episodes. But new eps should be *especially* promoted, since NBC's treatment of the show so far makes it difficult to catch them. > Though you could just get a PVR, or simply videotape the same > timeslot each week regardless.. Then you can just catch it whenever > it's on. Yes, I'd love to get a PVR. But if the only Scrubs viewers are PVR owners, I doubt it'll get the ratings to stay on the air for long. I actually wouldn't mind seeing Scrubs moved to a different night, and then left alone. It doesn't really fit with Friends and W&G. They're sappy romances with jokes; Scrubs is a quirky comedy with occasional romance. The people I know who are big Friends fans would just be confused and perplexed by Scrubs. Unfortunately, I don't know of anything on NBC that Scrubs *does* fit with. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Mar 8 06:18:31 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Why is NBC killing Scrubs? Organization: ESC Date: 08 Mar 2003 06:18:31 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 38 mattack@vax.hanford.org (Matt Ackeret) writes: > Hey, I'm a big fan of Scrubs, but "smart" it is not! Many of the > jokes are fairly lowbrow. But you have to be paying attention to get them, and many are subtle. > >ratings, they'll preempt it, do a minimum of promotion, move it > >around in the schedule, and show rerun episodes when new ones are > >scheduled, until the ratings drop enough to justify killing it. > "Do not mistake for conspiracy and intrigue what can best be > explained by stupidity and incompetence." Not conspiracy, just the natural decisions arising from a personal dislike of the show. > I'm a huge Newsradio fan too, but weren't its ratings WAY down at > the end of the last year? (I actually think they did a remarkable > job without Phil Hartman, but it still wasn't the same, and I > suspect many others thought so strongly enough to stop watching.) It also got almost zero promotion. It's hard to say whether the show could (or should) have survived without Hartman, but without any promotion, it sure wasn't going to pull in any new viewers to replace the ones who left after Hartman's death. I suspect that everyone involved in the show -- producers, actors, writers -- felt somewhat half-hearted about continuing the show after Phil's murder. For the writers and actors, that resulted in some lackluster episodes and strange story arcs; for the network it resulted in a lack of promotion. Combine those two factors, and the show was doomed. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Mar 8 06:23:12 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Why is NBC killing Scrubs? Organization: ESC Date: 08 Mar 2003 06:23:12 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 "Anthony Cerrato" writes: > > See Sports Night, News Radio, Duckman, and others. > You can also add Andy Richter's show to this list too, AFAIC. And Mystery Science Theater 3000, at least on Sci-Fi. In three years on Sci-Fi, I never saw a single promo for MST3K, until the final episode. They'd run Sliders promos during every commercial break (I've got the MST3K tapes to prove it), but they couldn't be bothered to market a show that they were spending 4 hours/week of airtime on. -- Aaron From nobody Sun Mar 9 17:14:31 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Rant: This week's TV Guide crossword puzzle... References: <20030309132528.24247.00000062@mb-cs.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 09 Mar 2003 17:14:31 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 level42galaga@aol.comNONONO (Phil from Chicago) writes: > easy tiger let's not kill ourselves over the TV GUIDE crossword > puzzle. I defy DEFY you to do the New York Times crossword puzzle:) American crosswords are for pussies. Real men only do British (cryptic) crosswords. -- Aaron From nobody Sun Mar 16 07:21:12 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Dixie Chicks traitor: "Don't take my money!" References: Organization: ESC Date: 16 Mar 2003 07:21:12 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 40 rander3127@rogers.com writes: > I guess the reality of a few million fans not > buying their albums slapped this ditz out of > her delusion?? > NEW YORK (CNN) -- Dixie Chicks lead singer Natalie Maines was > singing a new tune late Friday, this time in the form of an apology > to President Bush for saying she was ashamed that he was from Texas. So either A) Natalie Maines will discard her beliefs when they start cutting into her pocketbook, or B) she didn't believe what she said in the first place, and was just reciting it to please the crowd at that time and place. Which is better? > "As a concerned American citizen, I apologize to President Bush > because my remark was disrespectful. I feel that whoever holds that > office should be treated with the utmost respect," Maines said in > her latest statement. I've gotta give her credit, though: at least this is an actual apology, rather than the Clinton/Lott non-apology apologies we've become accustomed to, which usually boil down to, "I'm sorry all you hillbillies misunderstood me," or just, "I'm sorry someone heard that." > In a concert in London, England, this week, Maines told the crowd: What amazes me is that celebrities can't seem to learn that what they say overseas gets back home. They spend an afternoon hanging out in some dictator's palace or performing in front of a bunch of US-flag burners, and suddenly they're chiming in with opinions they'd never utter back home where their paychecks are signed. It's like they think that the rest of the world is so far out in the sticks that word will never get back to us. -- Aaron From nobody Sun Mar 16 07:50:57 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: McCain urges cable a la carte References: <3e72b639.25638223@news.cis.dfn.de> Organization: ESC Date: 16 Mar 2003 07:50:56 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 46 estasiak@att.net (Ed Stasiak) writes: > Of the 70+ channels I get, I only actually watch about 10. If the a > la carte rate was say $1 per channel I'd even be willing to spring > for a premium channel or two to make up the difference, in addition > to signing up for several more regular channels that are unavailable > to me now. But it wouldn't be $1/channel; that's the problem. It's basic Econ 101. If the cable company is getting $40/customer now, it'll still need to average $40/customer no matter what pricing scheme is in effect. That's how much they need to stay profitable and in business. They can't send 10 channels to your home any cheaper than 40. In fact, the total cost might go up a little, to pay for the more complicated billing system. In a choose-your-channels system, I'd expect to see the popular channels like ESPN, TNT, and Nick cost quite a bit more than that. After all, if the average customer only wants 10 channels, they'll have to charge $4 for each channel to keep making the same income. The only way you'll pay less is if you take a smaller selection of less popular channels than the average customer takes. Also, right now the channels that no-one would pay for, like the shopping channels, help subsidize the others. Switch to a system where those channels don't exist, and all the others will be more expensive. If all that sounds like I'm against more customer choice in channel selection, I'm definitely not. I'm all for it; I just don't think we should expect it to lower our bills. > How much control would the government (local, state, fed) have over > the rates that could be charged if this system was implemented thou? > The cable companies _are_ granted a monopoly by the cities. I can't imagine why McCain and the feds should have anything to do with cable TV at all. By its nature it's a local commodity. Municipal governments should control who has the right-of-way to run cable down the street (nothing says it has to be a monopoly); beyond that, the market should take care of the details. -- Aaron From nobody Sun Mar 16 09:48:34 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: american tourists in europe being spat on!!! References: <8e79088a.0303151759.55fdb277@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: 16 Mar 2003 09:48:33 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 rmr4now@aol.com (rathburne) writes: > Just got back from two weeks in Europe. Zero problems, zero > spitting, lots of American stuff all over the place (just like there > is lots of European stuff all over the USA). That's not surprising. Anti-American (and anti-war and anti-military) sentiment always gets blown out of proportion. That's not surprising, since most of the people reporting on it agree with it. Besides, "American gets spat upon" is a catchier headline than "American has a nice time in Paris." -- Aaron From nobody Sun Mar 16 14:24:21 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: McCain urges cable a la carte Organization: ESC Date: 16 Mar 2003 14:24:21 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 53 Roy Knable writes: > This is where satellite has the advantage. They can already mix and > match channels easily. They just don't want to allow a la carte yet. > They don't need to average $40 per customer. I don't know where you > got this figure from. I pulled it out of thin air, just to use as an example. The exact number doesn't matter. The point is that if the cable companies are getting $X per customer now, they'll need to get at least $X per customer after going to a la carte programming. So if you like McCain's idea because it'll increase your choices, that makes sense. But it won't make cable cheaper in general -- probably just the opposite. I'd love to be able to get a la carte programming on the dish. It'd be great to be able to try a channel out for a month, and then drop it if I didn't like it, without paying a 'downgrade' fee like they have now. I could subscribe to certain sports channels just during certain seasons, and things like that. > What about basic cable customers at $14 or so? With a la carte, the > channels that nobody watches would just eventually cease to > exist. The cable and satellite companies should only have to pay > each channel a set amount for each person who subscribes to it. If > you have a crappy channel that nobody likes, the way TNN and Sci-Fi > are moving toward, you should go out of business. That's how the > free market is supposed to work. Good point. That can already happen, since customer demand should drive the cable company's willingness to pay for channels, but a la carte programming would make the supply/demand relationship stronger. > And, no, billing wouldn't be any more expensive. This is the 21st > century. We have a little something called computers. And lots and lots of customer service people to explain the bills, take orders and complaints, etc. Raise the complexity of the system, and you raise the cost. How much, who knows? > With luck, in 20 or 30 years, this will be moot. Forget a la carte. > It'll be all video on demand. Anything you want whenever you want it. > Too bad it's not available today. Let's hope it doesn't take nearly that long. Five years ago I thought we'd have common on-demand programming over the net by now. Yet here I sit still connected via modem. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Mar 17 08:57:02 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Anti-war on C-Span References: <20030315204442.25689.00000115@mb-dh.aol.com> <20030315232838.24025.00000065@mb-fa.aol.com> <574b34e6.0303161211.46b6a576@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: 17 Mar 2003 08:57:00 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 62 hunthurst@earthlink.net (KazamaSmokers) writes: > How about this - I'm against the war because: > A) Saddam is arguably less of a threat to us than NKorea or Iran. So you're in favor of attacking North Korea instead? Now that we've allowed/helped them to get nukes, there's really no acceptable military option in Korea short of a tactical nuclear strike. Anything else would sacrifice Seoul, not to mention most of our 30,000 troops on the border. So we're reduced to pursuing diplomatic/economic solutions there, which can surely be handled simultaneously with any military endeavors in Iraq. (At least until the day North Korea breaks the nuclear taboo by bombing Japan or sneaking a suitcase nuke into an American city, at which time all bets are off.) It's been amazing to watch all the 'peace at any cost' folks in the press go ultra-hawkish on North Korea all of a sudden. Imagine what would happen if Bush called a press conference today and said, "I was reading the New York Times this weekend, and they convinced me that North Korea is a much bigger threat than Iraq. So as of this morning, all our troops in the Middle East are pulling out and heading for Korea." Picture the back-pedaling! You'd be able to take all the "we're ignoring the real threat in North Korea" articles and simply swap the word 'Iraq' with the phrase 'North Korea', and reprint them for the next few weeks. > B) Saudi Arabia likely had more to do with 9-11 than Iraq, even our > own CIA says so. Yes, and I'm disgusted with the special treatment that they're *still* getting from our government, and especially our State Department. The hustling of prominent Saudi families out of the country so they couldn't be questioned about their ties to terrorists, the willingness to overlook the ambassador's wife's funding of terrorists, and our capitulation to every demand they make of our troops -- I just don't get it. It's all very nice that the Bushes and Powells have this 'special relationship' with the Saudi rulers, but that shouldn't override all other policy considerations. > C) Saddam is a vicious evil bastard, true. So why don't we go Old > School on this one and assassinate him and replace him with a puppet. > It may take a little longer but it's a hell of a lot cheaper and less > destabilizing. I don't think that's nearly as easy in real life as it is in the movies. And Jimmy Carter, patron saint of the US media, surely wouldn't approve. > D) I'd reeeeallly wish those boneheads in Washington would turn > their attention to the FUCKING ECONOMY!!! Waiter? A little consumer > confidence at Table 3? A successful conclusion in Iraq will do more for the economy than any amount of tax-code or stimulus nonsense those jokers could do in D.C. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Mar 18 07:00:14 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Broad generalization based on observation about rallies References: <20030317204052.21460.00000179@mb-ba.aol.com> <20030318030820.19825.00000068@mb-ce.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 18 Mar 2003 07:00:14 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 19 mpoconnor7@aol.comnojunk (Mpoconnor7) writes: > The same thing happened during the Vietnam war. The youngsters > protested, while the middle aged and above supported it. Not quite. Poll numbers from the time show that younger people overall supported the Vietnam War in greater numbers than their elders. . The reason it seems otherwise is because there's a very vocal minority of young people (college students, mostly) who have lots of time on their hands to go protesting. Also, it's just plain fun. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Mar 18 07:09:39 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Dumb-ass on TV tonight... References: <3e9b63e8.66695454@enews.newsguy.com> <20030317193812.21282.00000177@mb-ba.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 18 Mar 2003 07:09:39 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 kbuck40088@aol.comnospam (KBuck40088) writes: > Funny thing about the French. Just heard on the news that the French > say that they wholly believe that the rebuilding of Iraq (which will > make $$$) should be a UN endeavor and that the French want to be a > part of that. Talk about awaiting the spoils of war... Sad thing is, knowing our State Dept., we'll probably go along with them. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Mar 18 07:15:23 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Dumb-ass on TV tonight... References: <3e7617dc.348002297@news.telusplanet.net> <3E768F14.58F082D@cflynt.com> Organization: ESC Date: 18 Mar 2003 07:15:23 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 33 Carol Flynt writes: > I'm a Clinton supporter, and I do not like President Bush > or agree with his policies. By the way, here's a quote from Clinton that should surprise his supporters, given his slams against Bush lately: "[I]f we leave Iraq with chemical and biological weapons, after 12 years of defiance, there is a considerable risk that one day these weapons will fall into the wrong hands and put many more lives at risk than will be lost in overthrowing Saddam... In the post-cold war world, America and Britain have been in tough positions before: in 1998, when others wanted to lift sanctions on Iraq and we said no; in 1999 when we went into Kosovo to stop ethnic cleansing. In each case, there were voices of dissent. But the British-American partnership and the progress of the world were preserved. Now in another difficult spot, Blair will have to do what he believes to be right. I trust him to do that and hope the British people will too." Amazing. The guy still hates his successor so much that he can't give him the same credit. Does anyone think that Blair would be taking this principled stand -- against his own party, even -- if Bush weren't leading the way? Oh well, at least he's getting on board, even if he can't do it honestly. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Mar 18 07:33:00 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Anti-war on C-Span Organization: ESC Date: 18 Mar 2003 07:33:00 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 30 archang@sfu.ca (Andrew Ryan Chang) writes: > So the lesson of 2003 is "get nukes ASAP"? Personally, I am not > sanguine about this pro-proliferation scheme. That's been the lesson for decades, whether it's a pleasant one or not. Nukes are the great equalizer. No military in the world can compete with ours, but a couple of nukes can provide the leverage to make that mostly a moot point. The difference between North Korea (and most countries) and Iraq is that NK *wants* us to know about their nukes. (Heck, they might even be claiming to be further along than they really are.) That shows that they aren't planning a surprise attack; their reason for wanting nukes is for diplomatic leverage. For the first time in 50 years, there's a good chance (if we're smart) that we'll pull our troops out of the DMZ and let South Korea take care of itself. The real danger with NK isn't that they'll be attacking us directly soon, but that they've shown a willingness to sell weapons and materials to anyone and everyone, and they expect to have dirty-bomb materials by this summer. So we may have to eliminate those facilities soon, through military action or diplomatic/economic pressures. However it works out, though, having our troops there as sitting ducks only hurts our position. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Mar 19 14:12:42 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: NBC pulls "Let's Make A Deal" References: <3e786095.4291957139@news.cis.dfn.de> Organization: ESC Date: 19 Mar 2003 14:12:42 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 molind@koyote.com (Linda) writes: > I knew this show was in trouble the first night of airing when the > the first 3 female contestants pulled prizes from underneath > 3 hunky men's skirts. My thoughts exactly. First of all, they stole that bit from that 'Toothbrush' game-show on Comedy Central, so it showed a serious lack of originality. Secondly, it was crude enough to drive off probably half the viewers who were old enough to be nostalgic about the orginal 'Deal.' -- Aaron From nobody Wed Mar 19 15:01:45 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: WHO WILL THE WORLD ROOT FOR? References: Organization: ESC Date: 19 Mar 2003 15:01:45 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 31 hunka@mail.com (bloodyank) writes: > it aint gonna be the american soldier thats fer sure!! > yeehaa!!! > yanks on the loose agin!!! The list of countries that are supporting the U.S. in this war effort, with troops, materials, weapons experts, bases, and/or other aid, includes: Britian, Australia, Albania, Denmark, Latvia, Poland, Spain, Ukraine, the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia, Germany, Bahrain, Croatia, Hungary, Italy, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Colombia, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Iceland, Japan, Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, the Philippines, Turkey, and Uzbekistan. Even the French are showing signs that they'd like to get involved after all, so as not to miss out on the spoils of war afterwards. Unilateral, my ass. And that should be 'WHOM,' by the way. And what happened, did you use up all your capital letters in the subject? Save a few for the body of your post next time. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Mar 22 19:42:14 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: poll of sorts: How much anti-war is really anti-Bush? References: <20030321182652.24617.00000341@mb-md.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 22 Mar 2003 19:42:13 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 42 kbuck40088@aol.comnospam (KBuck40088) writes: > Do you think that the anti-war is wholly against the war, regardless > of who was in office, or is it just anti-Republican sentiments using > the war as a platform? Curious to hear your opinions. It's not anti-Republican so much as anti-GWB. After all, the last time a Republican president went to war in Iraq we heard very little out of the peace movement except for the real die-hards who are actually consistent enough to protest against all US military action. When we began Desert Storm, support for the war polled only about 45%, but the other 55% apparently didn't care much. If you actually see footage of these protests (most of the TV coverage I've seen of them doesn't show the protesters, it just shows reporters telling me what they think), the theme of Bush-hatred comes through clearly in the chants and posters that are mostly personal attacks on GWB. You see very little concern for Iraq or even the U.N. It's all about our 'unelected' president. There's a chunk -- maybe 20% or so -- of the population out there that is still very angry about the 2000 election (heck, if Tom Daschle can't get over it, why should they?) and this war is really striking a nerve with them. Bush's confidence, his open declarations that Right and Wrong exist, and especially his religious conviction, only serve to fuel their rage. And if you've watched footage of the protests, you'll also realize that some of these people are simply insane. Like the guy I saw who babbled for minutes about extra-terrestrials and cosmic consequences or something. I couldn't really follow it. It's important, though, to notice another anti-war group: far-right, anti-Semitic, head-in-the-sand isolationists. These nasty pieces of work probably aren't represented much at the protests, but they write lots of articles and try to pass themselves off as the true conservatives and patriots. They aren't. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Mar 24 18:11:20 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Michael Moore asks "What am I doing?" (Feel the love forHollywood celebrities) References: <3E7F40C2.E0CE7C05@vikingphoenix.com> <3E7F5499.D5F21751@vikingphoenix.com> Organization: ESC Date: 24 Mar 2003 18:11:20 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 18 gazelle@yin.interaccess.com (Kenny McCormack) writes: > I think I am going to put together a server that will dispense this > liberal claptrap on demand. It doesn't take much to assemble a > post. > Key phrases would include: "bush bad", "bush dump", oil, blood, ... > The usual BS... Someone beat you to it; it writes the New York Times. Two advanced humanoid models, the Nader-34XJ and the Daschle Avenger, are also in limited production, but are still afflicted with bugs that cause them to go off on incoherent rants that destroy all credibility. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Mar 24 18:20:17 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: SEND MICHAEL MOORE TO IRAQ AS AMBASSADOR References: <7bd2d189.0303240004.562f4793@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: 24 Mar 2003 18:20:17 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 11 Bush Busta writes: > D) Laughing your butt off as these right wing loser fume about > Michael's latest Shock and Awe attack on the Bushie heartland. If he wanted to cause Shock and Awe he should have torn off his shirt. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Mar 26 15:51:46 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: OT: French's Mustard all about patriotism References: <3e810765.4292798670@news.cis.dfn.de> <9f4515ba.0303261033.67290dbc@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: 26 Mar 2003 15:51:45 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 "nonsensname" <520065863424-0001@t-online.de> writes: > I almost burst with laughing when I saw a report on Bush and it was > said he had freedom toast, formally known as french toast, as > dinner. Come on, different opinions and all, but this is childish. Yes it is. Which makes it the perfect response to the French. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Mar 27 07:03:17 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,rec.arts.movies.current-films,alt.gossip.celebrities Subject: Re: Michael Moore pisses off the entire globe References: <4nvfa.854$Dd4.276252@news.alltel.net> <833d8f82.0303240828.707a2221@posting.google.com> <4fdu7vovmsvdf1mob3r2g0elm5jh26gkb4@4ax.com> <3E7F5A9E.7060608@olypen.com> <3E7F5E8C.A22EE6F4@attglobal.net> <3E827A43.386FBEC@ix.netcom.com> <3E827A35.11D51AC5@ns.sympatico.ca> Organization: ESC Date: 27 Mar 2003 07:03:16 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 RogerM writes: > The Poles weren't exactly innocent babes, themselves. And it's not > that Bush is a dictator, it's that he is a war-monger bent on > empire-building. Be sure and me know when to sew that 51st star on my flag. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Mar 27 07:42:42 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: OT: French's Mustard all about patriotism Organization: ESC Date: 27 Mar 2003 07:42:40 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 Carol Flynt writes: > So we can all be children, together? Why not? We're not talking about anything that actually matters here. I'm not suggesting that Colin Powell should tell French surrender jokes at the U.N. If some guy who runs a deli wants to burn off some war-time tension by selling Freedom Toast, who cares? -- Aaron From nobody Thu Mar 27 08:01:26 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: poignant moment on CBS References: <20030326213833.04775.00000803@mb-cu.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 27 Mar 2003 08:01:24 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 30 kbuck40088@aol.comnospam (KBuck40088) writes: > Regardless of where you stand on the war this moment on CBS tonight > was touching: > A US marine stood in an Iraqi town as water was given out. Children > ran about, adults rushed for the supply. The marine, watching, had > tears streaming down his cheek. "Now I know why I'm here," he said. Yep. Hopefully everyone who's asked, "Why aren't the Iraqis glad to see us," saw this story. People who haven't had clean water for a couple weeks (because their own government cut it off) just *might* have more important things to worry about than putting on pro-US demonstrations for the cameras. I saw genuine thanks and happiness on those faces, especially the kids. In another part of that same story, the reporter talked about how one Iraqi talked to him, but was afraid to go on camera, because, "there are still detectives everywhere." They can't be blamed for keeping their enthusiasm under wraps, when they know there are Saddamites taking down a list of names hoping for another post-war purge. These people have been through Hell under Saddam's regime, and we let them down once 12 years ago. They'd have to be crazy not to be cautious in their optimism. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Mar 27 08:26:42 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Michael Moore and the Dixie Chicks References: <29a4cd4f.0303251020.34180c37@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: 27 Mar 2003 08:26:42 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 21 Orac writes: > Actually, I wonder how the other nominees who were standing with him > in "solidarity" felt after his tirade. I suspect they didn't know > quite what they were in for when they agreed to go up there with > him. They might not have realized he'd be so obnoxious about it, or that he'd focus on personal attacks against Bush rather than the war. Of course, if they thought that, they must not have ever see Moore in action before. He did exactly what I expected him to. [Task for today: Find a way to use the word "ficticion" in conversation as often as possible. Put it in the vernacular right next to "strategery."] -- Aaron From nobody Thu Mar 27 14:40:05 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Michael Moore and the Dixie Chicks Organization: ESC Date: 27 Mar 2003 14:40:05 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 Terwilliger writes: > Who said "fictition"? Moore did, in his Oscar rant. He used the words 'fiction' and 'fictitious' several times each, and one time they spat out together as 'fictition.' "I do not think that means what you think it means." -- Aaron From nobody Thu Mar 27 18:32:25 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Satellite TV help (in NY especially) References: <3e837326.4294390691@news.cis.dfn.de> Organization: ESC Date: 27 Mar 2003 18:32:25 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 66 dimlan17@yahoo.com (David) writes: > The Dish network doesn't mention YES so I take it they don't offer > it? They didn't last time I checked. > And DirecTV offers YES as part of the sports package but it only lists > the price as part of the "total choice premier" package, which comes > out to a whopping $86 a month. So is it impossible to get the sports > package as part of "total choice" or YES as one of the regional sports > networks? I don't know about DirecTV. With Dish, the Fox sports channels and MSG are part of the $5/month sports add-on. > And is the "one in-market regional sports network" that comes with > the other packages apply to NY City or do we get both MSG and FSNY > since they're both FOX Sports stations? I doubt it, but you could call and ask them. I live 2 hours from St. Louis and 6 hours from Chicago, so naturally I get stuck with FS-Chicago instead of FS-Midwest in St. Louis as my free 'in-market' sports network, and have to pay the $5/month to get the others. > And can someone explain the sports package blackout rules in a clear > way? No. This cannot be done. > Will all the out-of-market games get blacked out and it'll basically > be all "Best Damn Sports Show" all the time? More or less. Again, the blackout system cannot be understood or predicted, but basically, anything outside your area that you'd actually like to see will be blacked out. You'll be able to watch TBDSSP on 30 different channels at once, though. > I got some technical non-sports related questions as well. Will the > dish effect my ability to use the vcr? The dish receiver tunes in one channel, and outputs it on 3 or 4. So you'll have to change channels on the dish box, and leave your VCR set to the same channel all the time. That means you can't tape two shows on different channels while you're away, unless you have a VCR that's capable of changing channels on the dish box. (I believe some VCRs, as well as some Tivo-type boxes, can do that.) You also can't watch one channel while taping another, because only one channel comes out of the dish box at a time. > Does the weather really have a big effect on the reception? Most storms take out the reception for a couple of minutes, right when the front edge of the storm passes through the signal. Then reception comes back once the edge has moved on. Severe weather, with lots of lightning or hail, can prevent reception until they pass. > And will it have any effect on my other television which is only > connected to an antenna? No. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Mar 28 15:45:17 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Scenes from Baghdad... References: <20030321161920.04775.00000521@mb-cu.aol.com> <210320031650367711%nospam@nospam.com> Organization: ESC Date: 28 Mar 2003 15:45:16 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 92 Crowfoot writes: > Our military has blindly ignored Iraq's history of strong > nationalism (they were the Assyrians, remember them? They were > feared and powerful warriors of the Ancient World: "The Assyrians > came down like a wolf on the fold, their cohorts all gleaming in > purple and gold.") and a tribal structure that Saddam Hussein knows > how to use to unite even those who oppose him to fight off an > invader -- *any* invader, and this time, in our self- righteous > arrogance, it's us -- without even taking the trouble to take into > account the nature of the society and history of our chosen enemy. What makes you think those things haven't been taken into account? Because Dan Rather and Peter Jennings didn't consider them? Because a general says he's surprised by something that happened? All the right-wing sources I read (you know, the ones who are running the Bush puppet empire) have been running articles for the last year about how we'd better understand the Iraqi people. About how their high rate of cousin marriage (40%) means they have very strong family and tribal loyalties. About how Saddam's long reign of terror has taught them to think of him as practically immortal, so they won't really be able to believe he's gone and start dancing in the streets until they've got serious proof. About the mob-style mentality that Saddam has fostered down through the ranks of his forces (his favorite movie is supposed to be The Godfather), which makes it risky for any of his commanders to break ranks, for fear of being shot by his comrades. I have a feeling that Rumsfeld, Rice, and Co. know about all these things. They certainly haven't been promoting the 'cakewalk' idea; they've been beating the 'patience' drum since Sept. 12, 2001. If all the TV talking heads decided this war should only take a week, that's not the Administration's fault. In fact, the only prominent figure I've seen claim the war should go quickly was Bill Clinton, who said we didn't need to be in a hurry to start, because it'd be over with in a flash. He's an idiot, but we already knew that. > There will be plenty of horror to go round when it's done, and > precious little honor or triumph-of-the-good. If people are not > dancing in the streets, maybe it's because they have a more > realistic view of what's going on than you're going to get on CNN > or Fox. Absolutely. These people have taken a lot of crap for a lot of years. It's pretty hard for us to imagine living our lives in a country where the leader (who's been there all your life) can have you hauled off and tortured or killed any time he likes (and maybe has done that to a relative or two of yours), where his informants could be living next door, and where his face stares down at you from huge billboards every day. As long as any of that apparatus is still in place, or even looks like it might re-emerge, we should expect them to be subdued at best. Besides, the question of whether we're doing the Right Thing shouldn't depend on how many accolades we get. > If you want some real news, watch BBC world report on PBS if you can > get it, and Amy Goodman's program "Democracy Now" and WorldLink on > Satellite TV, and, sometimes, Charlie Rose. What we're getting from > our own corporate-owned media is propaganda, the flip side to the > propaganda for the other side from Al Jazeera. Precious little > truth at either pole. The BBC almost makes Al Jazeera look fair-minded these days. They're about as anti-Coalition as you can get without actually being a French UN diplomat. I've been reasonably impressed by the US media so far, with the caveat that radio is better than TV, print is better than radio, and blogs are better than print, but those things are always true. But CBS and NBC (my only local networks) have been pretty decent. Sure, they ask stupid, impatient questions and they still don't like Bush very much, but they've been willing to show US soldiers being brave and doing good things, like the water delivery into Umm Kasr on 60 Minutes Wednesday night. That was a refreshing piece to counter all the hand-wringing and talk about quagmires. For me, the best part of that piece was that we got to actually *see the people*. I don't think we can be reminded too often that these people aren't just statistics for a future history book; they're regular human beings just like us. That just made me prouder than ever of our military people, that they're waging this war with greater consideration for civilian lives than any force in history, and they're even risking their own lives more than necessary to do it. Well, I think I've reached maximum maudlin-ness, so I'll end there. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Mar 28 16:18:36 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,us.military.army Subject: Re: Baghdad battle going to be a bloodbath References: <3E7F237D.625F@worldcom.com> Organization: ESC Date: 28 Mar 2003 16:18:34 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 40 Crowfoot writes: > Armchair generals, but also REAL generals. Gen. William Wallce, > field commander, yesterday: "We didn't expect them to fight like > this. They aren't acting like the enemy in our wargames." I have to wonder if he was trying to make a joke, and has an overly dry sense of humor. In print, that's the way it comes across to me. I don't know what question he was responding to, but if it went something like this: Reporter: You aren't advancing as fast as you were yesterday. What's taking so long? I expected to be home in time to catch the Girls Gone Wild pay-per-view special. Maybe the General should have said, "They just refuse to stand still in the open while we shoot at them." That would have been obviously sarcastic. It could also be some of that "respect the enemy" attitude, too. Like when one sports team is trouncing another team at halftime, but they still spout cliches like, "It's not over yet; they're a strong team and are giving it everything they've got out there." I can read it that way too. Anyway, just some speculation. > No wonder we're in trouble. In trouble? We've advanced farther, faster, with fewer casualties than any other force in history. In the meantime, we're already bringing in aid to the civilian population where it's secure to do so. We may have taken out some of Saddam's top men in the first minutes of action. Strategically, I'm not sure how this war could be going much better. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Mar 29 05:29:43 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Scenes from Baghdad... References: <20030321161920.04775.00000521@mb-cu.aol.com> <210320031650367711%nospam@nospam.com> Organization: ESC Date: 29 Mar 2003 05:29:43 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 15 Crowfoot writes: > Our military has blindly ignored Iraq's history of strong > nationalism (they were the Assyrians, remember them? Not long after you mentioned Assyrians, I came across this great story from a modern-day Assyrian who went to Iraq against the war, and didn't find what he expected. It's long, but very worth reading. -- Aaron From nobody Sun Mar 30 05:36:37 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: You gotta love the French References: <4d441572.0303290859.7606ffb3@posting.google.com> <20030329125707.27720.00000108@mb-fp.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 30 Mar 2003 05:36:35 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 "Sagebrush" writes: > It is endlessly silly to criticize the French. All of Europe and > most of Asia, Africa, North and South America (including Mexico and > Canada) and needless to say the Middle East are opposed to this > stupid war. "All of Europe"? Nonsense. Last time I checked (before the action started), twenty-one countries in Europe were backing the coalition, five were completely neutral, and five were against. I suspect those number have gotten even more lopsided in favor now. -- Aaron From nobody Sun Mar 30 07:56:02 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: You gotta love the French Organization: ESC Date: 30 Mar 2003 07:56:02 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 22 jstone9352@aol.com (JSTONE9352) writes: > >All of Europe"? Nonsense. Last time I checked (before the action > >started), twenty-one countries in Europe were backing the coalition, > >five were completely neutral, and five were against. I suspect those > >number have gotten even more lopsided in favor now. > Backing mostly in a verbal sense but no important contribution of > money or troops to the cause. They would rather go on record in > favor so as to stay on the good side of the US in future business > relationships etc. Even risking the disapproval of the mighty French? Wow. The point is, no matter how you slice it, the assertion that "all of Europe is against the war" is a lie, and reasonable people shouldn't repeat it. That's all. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Apr 1 15:55:36 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Martin Sheen to reconsider? - Human shields reconsider References: <86bb1cef.0303292026.23949503@posting.google.com> <3E88564A.1CFB71C7@cflynt.com> <3E89DBE6.532EA0B5@cflynt.com> Organization: ESC Date: 01 Apr 2003 15:55:36 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 24 Carol Flynt writes: > No. And I supported the action against Afghanistan. > But it was a response, not a first strike. > The war with Iraq is of a different order. The > first war of choice. So the questions of how > one arrived at this choice are, imo, valid. Yes, I hope to have grandchildren some day, so I can gather them around and tell them about the great Serbian assault on the shores of New Jersey that drew us into the war in Yugoslavia. Not to mention the time JFK ordered the Bay of Pigs attack after Cuba launched those nukes at Miami. But seriously, folks, Bill Whittle has a tremendous piece on preemption and history at . It's long, but very worth reading. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Apr 1 16:09:09 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Will Fox news be "fair and balanced" in covering Geraldo debacle? References: <20030331175351.20222.00000262@mb-fu.aol.com> <3e88f510.526045002@news.telusplanet.net> <3E8902EC.8010205@netscape.nettles> <4f9c406e.0304011225.72e9db07@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: 01 Apr 2003 16:09:09 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 20 yrret@sbcglobal.net (Terryo) writes: > Yeah, but which is which? Let's see.... I guess the traitor would > be the one who revealed troop positions. So that would be > Geraldo....... I can't stand Geraldo, but I'd leave it up to the troops that he's traveling with. If they think he endangered them in any way, they should be allowed to bury him up to his neck in the sand and leave him there. Somehow, though, I think most soldiers would rank the guy who travels with the troops but gets overzealous in his desire to report what's happening over the guy who hangs out in the enemy capital and provides the despots there with political cover and support. Just a guess. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Apr 3 15:57:04 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Liberal garbage ruined the 2000 elections... References: <6c966a9b.0304021805.34632ca5@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: 03 Apr 2003 15:57:04 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 13 Joe Ottoson writes: > > Education in this country was doing just fine, until the Govt got > > involved that is... > When was this? 1740? 1850. Literacy rates have been dropping ever since. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Apr 3 16:49:31 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Family Matters pilot question References: <1d28bb1.0303290755.4adcd13c@posting.google.com> <20030403124059.00177.00000011@mb-cu.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 03 Apr 2003 16:49:31 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 15 et472@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Michael Black) writes: > What I can't remember is how much reference to the other show was > made, and how much of this is just background material that we read > about before the show began. Obviously, the same actress kept the > same Harriett name when she went to Family Matters. But I don't > recall any mention of her job in Family Matters. Her job was mentioned at least once, when she lost it. Might have been in the pilot; I'm not sure. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Apr 3 17:10:51 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Thumbs-up in Iraq References: <20030403131604.08514.00000515@mb-fq.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 03 Apr 2003 17:10:49 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 31 stancnp@aol.com (Stancnp) writes: > I see quite a few images on the news of Iraqis giving American > soldiers the thumbs-up sign, including CBS Evening News last > night. But I've heard only one TV source (Good Morning America) > suggest that in Iraq it is an obscene gesture. > Also found this recent Slate article: > http://slate.msn.com/id/2080812/ > Has any other network discussed this? I don't watch much TV news, but it was certainly discussed in print and in the blogosphere. Two things I've read: When it's used as an obscene gesture, it's done with an upward thrusting motion. Locals have said that they remembered this cultural difference from the first war with Iraq, so it stuck in their minds as a way to communicate with US troops. Kinda like the way a really "white" character on a TV show, when finding himself surrounded by black people, will say something embarrassing like "Wassup?" to try to fit in. Besides, surely they get reruns of Happy Days over there. Don't tell me they're watching *nothing* but Baywatch and proclamations from Saddam. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Apr 3 17:25:30 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Massive Shakeup in U.S. TV News! References: <3E8C6D9F.9090606@netscape.net> Organization: ESC Date: 03 Apr 2003 17:25:30 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 Bill Fischer writes: > Hey. What really happened to Geraldo? Is he out or is he still in? He's still in. He was hiking his way south, when he conquered a small village near the southern border by shaming all the men there with the power of his superior mustache. He took all their wives (and some of the handsomer young men) for his personal harem, and is living happily ever after, having changed his name (again) to Gezzaldo Al-Rivera. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Apr 4 07:11:54 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Family Matters pilot question Organization: ESC Date: 04 Apr 2003 07:11:53 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 18 level42galaga@aol.comNONONO (Phil from Chicago) writes: > it wasn't in the pilot but it was either in the first or second > seasons. While I liked the show up the episode which was loosely > based on "back to the future" I thought the final season was > terrible and the actress who previously played Harriette was outsted > and the actress who played Gina's mom on "Martin" (I can't remember > her name) played Hariette I think for the last 3 or 4 episodes > including the poorly written finale I never saw the last few seasons. I stopped watching when the Stefan character became a regular, and most of the plot-lines went from funny-goofy to just stupid-goofy. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Apr 4 17:03:32 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Simpsons had a horse? References: <20030404001257.25931.00000276@mb-fg.aol.com> <20030404140007.23165.00000015@mb-cv.aol.com> <3E8DF66D.5C74964D@ns.sympatico.ca> Organization: ESC Date: 04 Apr 2003 17:03:32 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 RogerM writes: > GetRichQuick712 wrote: > > Yea, i know how much everyone out there hates us AOLers, but i > > think it's doing just fine for me > Not everyone hates you. Yes we do. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Apr 4 17:47:30 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Best and worst commercials now References: <5c3cdaf6.0304040855.45faea9c@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: 04 Apr 2003 17:47:30 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 kenny@panix.com (Kenneth Crudup) writes: > My two "bests": the one beer commercial where the guy is trying to > attach a note to the girl's door with the outstretched duct tape > while holding a knife in his hand, [snip] That is a good one. My favorite has to be the Dairy Council one, with the family that comes down Christmas morning to find a room packed full of stuff, and the curly-haired little girl who says, "I didn't give him cookies; I gave him cheeeeeeze." Her grin cracks me up every time. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Apr 5 04:13:55 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Star Search and World's Greatest Kid References: <20030405025034.28525.00000268@mb-ft.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 05 Apr 2003 04:13:55 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 15 rhfan88888@aol.comhatespam (Peter J.) writes: > As cheesy awful as Star Search, at least it's fun. I watched a few > minutes of NBC's version last week and this week and it's so > cheapjack, dull, and uncomfortable. I wonder if they threw this idea > together in 3 or 4 minutes. More like 3-4 seconds. How long does it take to say, "Let's do exactly what CBS is doing, except all with little kids to push the cuteness factor to the limit"? -- Aaron From nobody Sat Apr 5 14:51:49 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: The coolest commercial of all time? References: <20030404072003.05767.00000110@mb-fz.aol.com> <3E8DB77C.8FED74AA@cox.net> <3E8EF4B0.FFC71D1@erols.com> Organization: ESC Date: 05 Apr 2003 14:51:49 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 17 Sandy McDermin writes: > Yes, it was an ad for monster.com, and one of my favorite > commercials too -- mostly because it not only did its primary job > but it was sort of a societal statement. A lot of funny ads came out of the Internet boom, when so many online startup companies had money to burn and plenty of attitude. Some of the sock-puppet ones for Pets.com were great. I also loved the series of Ameritrade ads with the obnoxious red-haired kid, especially the one where the older broker's daughter says, "I want to have his babies." -- Aaron From nobody Sat Apr 5 15:08:08 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Jessica Lynch, freed "POW" References: <20030405144118.16265.00000215@mb-ck.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 05 Apr 2003 15:08:08 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 15 wishy13764@aol.com (Wishy13764) writes: > When will we see the tv movie of her escape? and the talk show > visits. God Bless her, but she made it..others are not. If one is > going tomake a movie, then it should be about that soldier that > threw the grenade in the tent and killed 2 of his 'buddies'. Radical Muslims kill people every day. This is the first rescue of a US POW in something like 40+ years. I'd say the latter is just a *slightly* bigger story. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Apr 7 16:52:42 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: SEND THE BUSH GIRLS TO IRAQ..... References: <3E91C847.2209FD0F@rochester.rr.com> <3E91CC0E.FEC8A9CD@rochester.rr.com> Organization: ESC Date: 07 Apr 2003 16:52:41 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 15 Bush Busta writes: > Another Ditto-monkey lie. > > Columnist Molly Ivins reported Haha! I don't know whether the story about Rush is true, but I sure wouldn't use Ivins as a source of facts about Republicans. Ivins doesn't report; she opines. That's like quoting the Iraqi Information Minister for information about the war effort. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Apr 8 07:35:09 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: SEND THE BUSH GIRLS TO IRAQ..... References: <3E91C847.2209FD0F@rochester.rr.com> <3E91CC0E.FEC8A9CD@rochester.rr.com> <3E91CB22.FDE235C2@psu.edu> <3E920086.D1C8D363@rochester.rr.com> <8i649vg37s97tl9gb8t2o69m4jiuiucc4e@4ax.com> <3E923BF3.420516A@rochester.rr.com> Organization: ESC Date: 08 Apr 2003 07:35:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 22 Michael Rogers writes: > Look, it doesn't take much for a "urban myth" to develop that is > accepted by left and right alike. Yep. Especially when the myth fits into people's expectations, like the one about Ashcroft ordering the statue covered up. Seems to me that if this happened on Rush's TV show, someone out there should have a video clip of it. After all, FAIR long ago made it their mission to chronicle every single word Rush speaks, in order to catch every falsehood and misstatement. I can't believe that they wouldn't have run down a copy of this when it happened, in which case it would be appearing on many anti-Rush web sites. So I guess I'm willing to believe it, but I'll need to see it first. Multiple references to a Molly Ivins quote don't cut it for me. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Apr 8 18:13:23 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: SEND THE BUSH GIRLS TO IRAQ..... Organization: ESC Date: 08 Apr 2003 18:13:21 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 75 Arthur Lipscomb writes: > > Yep. Especially when the myth fits into people's expectations, > > like the one about Ashcroft ordering the statue covered up. > I read plenty about this in the papers. For example: > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1788845.stm > > Do you have a source that confirms this was only a myth? No, I wasn't there, but I can offer my own anecdotal evidence, from stories like this one: . The Breast was pretty quiet during the eight years of Janet Reno. As one peeved administration official puts it, "No cameraman was ever at Reno's feet, trying to get a shot of her with that thing." But Minnie Lou's outstanding feature stormed back with Ashcroft. When President Bush visited the Justice Department to rededicate the building to Robert Kennedy, his advance men insisted on a nice blue backdrop: "TV blue," infinitely preferable to the usual dingy background of the Great Hall. Everyone thought the backdrop worked nicely -- made for "good visuals," as they say. This was Deaverism, pure and simple. Ashcroft's people intended to keep using it. An advance woman on his team had the bright idea of buying the backdrop: It would be cheaper than renting it repeatedly. So she did -- without Ashcroft's knowledge, without his permission, without his caring, everyone in the department insists. But ABC put out the story that Ashcroft, the old prude, had wanted the Breast covered up, so much did it offend his churchly sensibilities. New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd, ever clever, wrote that Ashcroft had forced a "blue burka" on Minnie Lou. Comedians had a field day (and are still having it). The Washington Post has devoted great space to the story, letting Cher, for example, tee off on it -- as she went on to do on David Letterman's show. And yet the story is complete and total bunk. First, Ashcroft had nothing to do with the purchase of the backdrop. Second, the backdrop had nothing to do with Breast aversion. But the story was just "too good to check," as we say, and it will probably live forever. Generations from now, if we're reading about John Ashcroft, we will read that he was the boob who draped the Boob. The story is ineffaceable. So everyone at the Justice Dept. says it's a myth. Who knows. My point is that when a story comes out that fits our pre-conceived beliefs, we'll eat it up without any proof. We all know Ashcroft is some sort of strict fundamentalist Christian, and we know from countless movies and TV shows that those people have 'issues' with sex and nudity. So the story of DrapeGate comes out, and we all say "Of course!" and it becomes instant dogma. Notice that the backdrop was originally put up for a Bush speech, but the myth doesn't work with Bush as the bad guy, since the image of Bush that we're given is such that he probably appreciates a bare breast here and there. So Ashcroft gets stuck with the honors. That's why I'm skeptical of the Rush story. Not that I think Rush couldn't have made a rude and tasteless joke -- hardly. It just fits the image of nasty mean conservatives so perfectly that the truth or falsehood of it has little to do with whether people will believe it or not. A whole cottage industry has grown up around the purpose of catching Rush in lies, so if they want me to believe this story, all they have to do is produce a 15-second vidcap of it. If that can't be done, I'd say that's pretty significant evidence that it didn't happen. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Apr 9 19:13:16 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: We're Waiting Ms. Garafalo... References: <3E9489C1.430926C3@REMOVESPAMcbfbusinesssolutions.com> <20030409172714.16172.00000731@mb-ca.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 09 Apr 2003 19:13:16 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 17 mpoconnor7@aol.comnojunk (Mpoconnor7) writes: > Even though I support the conflict, and have all along, she is one > of the few celeb anti-war protesters who actually made some sense. I'm not sure she made any sense, but I got the feeling she actually studied the situation and made up her own mind about it, instead of just parroting the party line like so many celebs do. Gotta respect that. Or maybe I'm just inclined to give her a pass because she gives me a special feeling. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Apr 10 09:45:46 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: We're Waiting Ms. Garafalo... References: <3E9489C1.430926C3@REMOVESPAMcbfbusinesssolutions.com> Organization: ESC Date: 10 Apr 2003 09:45:44 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 29 lazarus writes: > Of course, out of a city of 5 million, they managed to get less than > a hundred people out partying. Wonder where everybody else is? Might as well suck it up and admit you were wrong. At least you had plenty of distinguished company; Andrew Sullivan is already piling up Von Hoffman Awards. The Iraqis -- those that didn't have a vested interest in the Ba'athist regime -- *are* happy about our presence. They *are* dancing in the streets, and they *are* waving American flags when they can get them. Most distressing, they *are* singing the praises of George Bush. (Great line from Lileks today, by the way: Can you imagine the parties in Baghdad this week? Hospitals had best make a rubber stamp that says GEORGE, because nine months from now they're going to use it on every other birth certificate.) Once again, we see that people the world over -- even those who don't share much economically, religiously, or culturally -- all desire freedom. We've also seen that a tyrannical regime can suppress the display of those desires so completely that the rest of the world can pretend they don't exist. This stuff shouldn't surprise us anymore. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Apr 10 10:28:18 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Whorealdo no longer in Iraq References: <3E93E22B.A34918BA@hotmail.com> Organization: ESC Date: 10 Apr 2003 10:28:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 17 weberm@polaris.net (Ubiquitous) writes: > Jerry Rivers is Geraldo's real name. You're almost half right. His Puerto-Rican father and Jewish mother named him Gerald Rivera at birth. He was mostly called Jerry as a kid. When a TV station hired him to cover Hispanic issues for a news show, the director suggested that he use the name Geraldo, saying, "Gerald? It's not very Puerto Rican, is it?" More details in this fairly unflattering article: . -- Aaron From nobody Thu Apr 10 17:01:20 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Fox's "Test The Nation" listing in TV Guide--a scary moment References: <2908-3E9595DC-201@storefull-2278.public.lawson.webtv.net> Organization: ESC Date: 10 Apr 2003 17:01:20 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 34 bluffs_webbie@webtv.net (David Johnson) writes: > Friday night (4/11), Fox is running a two-hour I.Q test hosted by > Leeza Gibbons. The TV Guide Close-Up listing caught my attention, > and I tested myself on the sample question it lists: > Which one does not fit with the others-- > a. Chair > b. Table > c. Lamp > d. Cupboard > I guessed Cupboard, since that's what you find in a kitchen and a > Chair, Table (as in coffee or end) and Lamp can be found in a living > room. At the end of the listing, they said the correct answer was > Lamp, "...but you knew that". No I didn't. Now I'm burdened with > wondering if they were just being sarcastic and (as usual) I wasn't > aware of it, or if I'm really as dumb as everyone said I was some 35 > years ago. This is scary. I might have guessed C, but it's definitely not obvious. It could be D because the others are all furniture that can be moved around. It could be B because it's the only word with two consecutive letters of the alphabet in order. It could be D because it's the only one that doesn't form a new word when you remove the first letter. It could be A because it's the only one that forms new words when you remove the first letter and the first two letters. It could be D because you don't normally store stuff in the others. And so on. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Apr 11 06:48:51 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Fox's "Test The Nation" listing in TV Guide--a scary moment Organization: ESC Date: 11 Apr 2003 06:48:51 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 22 Jack Ak writes: > A lamp is furniture? I'd consider a floor lamp to be furniture -- it sits on the floor and has to be moved to vacuum. There are also lamp/night table combinations. > All but lamp typicallly hold or store things. A lamp can > illuminate, while the others can't. I've seen cupboards with lights. I agree that lamp doesn't "fit" as well as the others, but whenever I've taken an IQ test, the answers have been more cut-and-dried than this one. It seems like an especially odd choice for a sample question that they want everyone to get easily. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Apr 11 06:56:25 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Heidi on Survivor.... References: <20030410210439.14675.00000869@mb-fe.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 11 Apr 2003 06:56:25 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 15 jennastan@aol.comBOOSPAM (JennaStan) writes: > She looks more like Granny Clampett each week. The teeth, the > mouth... > I hope she's faking being this stupid because if she isn't then she > must be the laughing stock of her school. I know quite a few people who went to school in southern Missouri. I'm sure she fits right in. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Apr 11 06:58:17 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: The coolest commercial of all time? References: <20030404072003.05767.00000110@mb-fz.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 11 Apr 2003 06:58:16 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 18 kenny@panix.com (Kenneth Crudup) writes: > "RA" says: > >It was the one where they used the song Lennon wrote; "Revolution". > >Many people considered it sacreligious to commericalize an > >important political tune like that. > > It's a DAMN SONG! Hear, hear. Isn't "important political tune" an oxymoron, like "swiss cheese"? -- Aaron From nobody Sat Apr 12 08:09:35 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Agent of Influence References: <3e976d49.29882231@news.telusplanet.net> Organization: ESC Date: 12 Apr 2003 08:09:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 18 rgorman@telusplanet.net (David Johnston) writes: > Most of you will never see this made for Canadian TV movie about a > Canadian diplomat who was accused by the CIA of being a Russian spy. > But I have to wonder what the point of a show like this is. > Historical drama compensates for knowing how it's going to end by > filling in details, but the point with this story is that nobody > even knows what really happened. They have to entirely make it up. > So what's the appeal? I'll take a stab: because it portrays Canada-good, USA-bad? I know nothing about it, so that's a total guess. If I'm right, we'll probably see it down here soon on PBS or Lifetime. -- Aaron From nobody Sun Apr 13 17:44:21 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: OT: People Magazine References: <20030413111425.25861.00000686@mb-fg.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 13 Apr 2003 17:44:21 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 paradoxseas@aol.com (Paradoxseas) writes: > I was a 20 year subscriber,but recently StOPPED my subscribtion > since all their articles seemed to be below "Enquirer" standards > (imo) of reporting? It took you twenty years to notice this? -- Aaron From nobody Mon Apr 14 09:51:55 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: CNN References: <20030414054308.08001.00000559@mb-fn.aol.com> <3e9aba7e$0$25663$fa0fcedb@lovejoy.zen.co.uk> Organization: ESC Date: 14 Apr 2003 09:51:55 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 "Draxen" writes: > That article doesn't seem to be online at nyt.com can anyone give > any more details ?? I'm still finding it here: . -- Aaron From nobody Mon Apr 14 15:33:59 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Dennis Miller References: <20030414151858.28606.00000905@mb-cg.aol.com> <20030414153041.00575.00000827@mb-ch.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 14 Apr 2003 15:33:59 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 25 hudsongrl@aol.com (HudsonGrl) writes: > true. wonder what Limbaugh even talks about, now that we have a > republican president? These days, the war, I'd assume. I listened to him a lot back in 1991-1992. His show was a lot of fun then, with all the update themes for various things. Timber updates (chainsaw music), Barney Frank updates (My Boy Lollipop), Ted Kennedy updates (I'm a Philanderer), animal rights updates (Born Free overlaid with gunfire), and so on. He was still an outsider politically, so he didn't take himself too seriously, and he usually didn't beat any one issue to death for too long. Once Clinton was elected, and especially after the list of scandals grew and impeachment loomed, Rush's show often became a 3-hour diatribe about Clinton, which just wasn't nearly as much fun. Also, it seemed like that's when he started feeling like he had some political influence, so he had to be more serious about trying to convince people. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Apr 16 06:56:46 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: TNN to become Spike TV References: <3ea0b2cf.5383861@news8.beaconwoods.org> <34ep9v02fn046u5kghv8l4dup1kg168emm@4ax.com> Organization: ESC Date: 16 Apr 2003 06:56:46 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 11 poisoned rose writes: > I saw this story on CNN.... Ah, so it's just a hoax from the Iraq Information Ministry. That's a relief. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Apr 18 11:13:43 2003 Newsgroups: alt.movies,alt.showbiz.gossip,rec.arts.tv,alt.gossip.celebrities Subject: Re: Sarandon and Robbins at the Axis of Weasel: veterans benefits References: <3E98F624.B5D12D86@vikingphoenix.com> <2VSma.40639$D15.1015324@twister.tampabay.rr.com> <3E9DC108.73976299@cflynt.com> <47c3bbff.0304161708.2a48b77@posting.google.com> <1961e432.0304170517.4075d4e9@posting.google.com> <3E9F36DC.2F15991C@vikingphoenix.com> Organization: ESC Date: 18 Apr 2003 11:13:40 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 24 dennmac@InfoAveExtraneous.Net (Dennis McGee) writes: > Robbins would not have used the BHOF apppearance as a "soapbox" for > his views on Iraq or any other political issue. He was invited to > talk about the making of Bull Durham and that's what he would have > talked about. Oh, come on. Of course they would have used it as a soapbox. I'm sure they would have been classier than Michael Moore about it and it would have been a minor portion of their words, but I can't imagine them not mentioning the war at all. Robbins and Sarandon are well-known political activists; their political views are part of the package you get when they step in front of a microphone. In fact, if they believe everything they say, it'd be wrong for them to have the opportunity to spread their message and *not* use it. That's like inviting Bob Barker to give the speech at your high school graduation and just assuming he won't use the phrase "spay and neuter." -- Aaron From nobody Fri Apr 18 11:33:47 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: "Will & Grace" gets long-term deal References: <3e9d4332.4291881591@news.cis.dfn.de> <3E9E4731.6BE920BF@hotmail.com> <3eb3a79f.4442698@news8.beaconwoods.org> Organization: ESC Date: 18 Apr 2003 11:33:47 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 20 bicker 2003 <1NVAL1D> writes: > If it wasn't funny, so many people wouldn't be watching it, and it > wouldn't be winning so many awards. I can think of lots of reasons besides funniness why people might watch a show: hipness, liking a particular actor, wanting to be in on the conversation about it at the office the next morning, etc. Awards are about all sorts of things, mostly unrelated to the actual quality of the show. > Sorry that you have trouble seeing how funny it is, though. I don't care for it myself, but I can see why people who like that sort of thing like it. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Apr 18 11:51:03 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Scrubs Rocked Last Night - They Saved The Best For Last References: Organization: ESC Date: 18 Apr 2003 11:51:03 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 25 DinkyBossetti@earthlink.net writes: > Last night's show was firing on all cylinders. Scrubs is usually > mostly hit sometimes miss for me but the season ender was first rate > all the way. Yes, this may be my favorite episode yet (keeping in mind that I haven't seen all of the first season). It occurred to me afterwards that this is probably because they finally wrapped up all the sappy relationship plots that were distracting from the other stuff. This was a solid half-hour of alternatingly funny and poignant. I gotta say, though, that too many of JD's dream scenes go on way too long for me. JD imagining his dream job as the Chocolate King or whatever was funny for a few seconds, but by the time he was chewing on Turk's hand, I was saying, "Okay, I get it, get on with it already." NBC had better renew this show. I think Scrubs may be the first new show I've gone out of my way to watch since News Radio ended. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Apr 22 05:31:49 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: NBC (GE) Pulls the Plug on Robbins References: <20030421212648.18935.00000428@mb-m05.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 22 Apr 2003 05:31:49 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 22 kbuck40088@aol.comnospam (KBuck40088) writes: > >From: Scott P quimby2@ix.netcom.com > >The media seems to forget half the country was against the war. > Half? Care to cite sources to that? Numbers that I saw were more > like 65-70% in favor. Before the war, some pollsters were able to get 50-50 numbers or worse by begging the question. They might ask a question like, "Do you support going to war now, or should we get UN approval first?" That implies that UN approval is possible, so the reasonable respondent who doesn't follow the news closely will think, "Sure, why not get UN approval first?" Then that response is reported as anti-war. There's no point in paying much attention to a poll unless you know exactly what the question was. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Apr 22 06:07:20 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Sarandon and Robbins at the Axis of Weasel: veterans benefits References: <20030421205334.18892.00000077@mb-m10.aol.com> <3EA49749.263A8FA7@cflynt.com> Organization: ESC Date: 22 Apr 2003 06:07:19 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 96 Carol Flynt writes: > Sorry to rain on yours. There were several > journalistic recounts. In all but one, > Gore won. You know, it's not that hard to look this stuff up. We have the technology. > From USA Today : George W. Bush would have won a hand count of Florida's disputed ballots if the standard advocated by Al Gore had been used, the first full study of the ballots reveals. Bush would have won by 1,665 votes -- more than triple his official 537-vote margin -- if every dimple, hanging chad and mark on the ballots had been counted as votes, a USA TODAY/Miami Herald/Knight Ridder study shows. The study is the first comprehensive review of the 61,195 "undervote" ballots that were at the center of Florida's disputed presidential election. > From CNN : Using the NORC [National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago] data, the media consortium examined what might have happened if the U.S. Supreme Court had not intervened. The Florida high court had ordered a recount of all undervotes that had not been counted by hand to that point. If that recount had proceeded under the standard that most local election officials said they would have used, the study found that Bush would have emerged with 493 more votes than Gore. Suppose that Gore got what he originally wanted -- a hand recount in heavily Democratic Broward, Palm Beach, Miami-Dade and Volusia counties. The study indicates that Gore would have picked up some additional support but still would have lost the election -- by a 225-vote margin statewide. That's two studies. Finding more is left as an exercise for the reader. > There were two particularly ironic results. > By one "recount", which simulated the partial recount > as Gore originally requested, Bush won. I.e., if > Bush had just given Gore his recount as requested, he would > have won and the whole thing would have ended right there. Hard to say, since Gore's team demanded different recounts at different times, depending on the way the manual recounts were going. You're also assuming that a recount done by the election judges in those counties would have come up with the same totals as a non-partisan media study, which is a huge assumption. > By another "recount," the one that the Right > said would be the *only* fair recount, i.e., > of the entire state, Gore won. Possibly, but at that point the difference becomes so statistically insignificant that it's really a tie. That's the real lesson of the 2000 election -- when you have a "tie", there are always going to be enough screwed up ballots, confused voters, and votes from dead people and felons to sway the results either way, no matter how user-friendly the ballot machines are. That's why you have to follow the rules that are in place *before* the election regarding recounts and final dates for counting. If you ignore those, it becomes a never-ending process. Anyone who thinks it's possible to *know* who got the most votes must not have watched any of the footage of the manual recounts. There would be three people going through the disputed ballots one-by-one, with loads of TV cameras pointed at them and several watchers from both parties looking over their shoulders -- still they didn't always see the same things on the ballot. > I'm afraid the 2000 election will be a bone of > contention for a very long time. I hope so, since it's proving to be a distraction for the Left to equal Clinton's scandals for the Right. > But it sure was a civics-lesson-in-action > at the time, wasn't it! Not a very good one, but sadly, a realistic one. It mostly reinforced the notion that when you aren't happy with the laws on the books, you can always find a court to help you out. It would have been a better civics lesson if the FL legislature had put the smack-down on the FL Supreme Court and made it clear they had no business trying to rewrite clear election rules. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Apr 22 06:16:52 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Scrubs (was Re: Nielsen Ratings Discrepancies) References: Organization: ESC Date: 22 Apr 2003 06:16:52 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 archang@sfu.ca (Andrew Ryan Chang) writes: > So, Scrubs is doing ~80% retention, better than anything else in > that timeslot in years. Why did their season end already? Why > aren't they going to sweeps with new episodes? It's my fault. Every time I really, really like a show, it's doomed to be under-promoted, confusingly scheduled, and prematurely canceled by network execs who don't understand it. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Apr 26 21:15:59 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: What happened to Mr. Sterling References: Organization: ESC Date: 26 Apr 2003 21:15:59 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 17 ACP writes: > If it was cancelled, why? It was the most accurate view of DC, > I've ever seen. Oh, maybe THAT's why -- finally, a show that > got too close to the truth and so there was pressure from the > people in power, to cancel it?? Yeah, that was it. Fictional TV shows are known for their deadly accurate portrayals of real life. Now that you exposed this nefarious deed, they'll be coming for you next. My guess is we only need one West Wing -- if that many. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Apr 28 17:47:27 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: What TV show had first internet reference? References: Organization: ESC Date: 28 Apr 2003 17:47:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 "Rick" <72242.3603@compuserve.com> writes: > Other than news and documentary type shows, what regular TV series > had the earliest specific reference to the internet? I'm guessing > it could have been an early X-Files episode with the Lone Gunmen, > but that is strictly a guess. Any other ideas? Magnum and Higgins communicated over some sort of computer network in the 1986 "Mad Dogs and Englishmen" episode of Magnum p.i. I don't think they specifically mentioned the Internet, since no-one would have known what they meant then. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Apr 29 06:27:43 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Scott Ritter on C-Span References: <4f9c406e.0304281114.575e30af@posting.google.com> <581sav8h757jn62041714ekbue0kv2ugbd@4ax.com> Organization: ESC Date: 29 Apr 2003 06:27:43 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 22 Polar writes: > What's all this about underage solicitation? Is this electronic > character assassinatin, or does someone have FACTS to post? Google is your friend. A quick search for "Scott Ritter underage soliciting" turned up this link, among many: Money quote: However, that might not have been Ritter's first brush with the law. According to the Albany Times Union, two months before that arrest, Ritter tried to meet a 14-year-old girl he chatted with online and was instead met by police officers. The newspaper reports that he was released without being charged. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Apr 30 06:48:13 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Post-"Seinfeld" Era Best/Forgotten Sitcoms References: Organization: ESC Date: 30 Apr 2003 06:48:13 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 34 riud@email.com (WQ) writes: > --- The difference between "Scrubs" and "Richter" is that the former > strains awfully hard and manipulatively so to be clever, witty, > fanciful, offbeat, etc., while with "Richter" it all seems to come > about so naturally. I haven't seen Richter, but Scrubs feels pretty natural to me. The cast seems very comfortable together. The only episodes of Scrubs that haven't been excellent have been ones that focused too much on romances with guest stars. > It's like this: "Scrubs" knows it doesn't have a > plot each week, Nonsense. It has 2-3 plots -- sometimes ongoing arcs -- in every episode, just like every other sitcom. > so it goes overboard on all the shenanigans to make up for it; > whereas "Richter" had a plot each week and worked with the jokes > inherent in it and was even able to further the humor from it. > That's the way it strikes me between the two. Maybe it's also > personal, but there's something a little more grounded and > identifiable with the absurdities of "Andy's" world than the one in > "Scrubs", and it's not because I write defense manuals for a living, > which I don't. I disagree completely on Scrubs, but you guys are making me wish I'd caught Andy Richter's show while it was on. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Apr 30 16:32:44 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Scott Ritter on C-Span References: <793b763d.0304300636.3839e7a7@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: 30 Apr 2003 16:32:44 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 22 Polar writes: > On 30 Apr 2003 07:36:22 -0700, savefarris@msn.com (DanRydell) wrote: > >We've had "control" of the county for about 2 weeks. Before the > >hostilities started, Blix was asking for an additional 6 MONTHS. > >Is it unreasonable to give US WMD seekers the same amount of time > >to search, while continuing to fight pockets of resistance mind > >you, before you call Iraq's WMD program a hoax? > Specious argument. > Professional inspectors are different from untrained military. True. No-one was shooting at the inspectors, and they supposedly had the cooperation of the guys who were building the things in the first place. -- Aaron From nobody Thu May 1 16:56:26 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Watching Ellie: Should be after Friends References: Organization: ESC Date: 01 May 2003 16:56:26 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 15 "Ryan" writes: > Too bad this can't be the show that's "sandwiched" in between > Friends and Will&Grace next year. I wonder how big of a retention > WE would have from Friends? If you like the show, you don't want it there. That just guarantees that it'll be preempted now and then for extra repeats of Friends, pushed around in the schedule to make room for 'super-sized' episodes of things, and scheduled out of sweeps month entirely. -- Aaron From nobody Fri May 2 04:08:36 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Deborah on Everybody Loves Raymond References: <3EAF36AC.1A56405E@cox.net> <80D9E38E7F11E7AA.4208EF4657CED419.C0C0E62C8895FCA6@lp.airnews. <6a2ad276.0305011600.3f4cc4a2@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: 02 May 2003 04:08:36 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 schumy2@lycos.com (schumy) writes: > There are tons of rightie celebs in Hollywood, from Arnold to Heston > to Mary Hart. Yeah, tons of them. That's why whenever someone tries to make this argument, he has to haul out the same old handful of names. -- Aaron From nobody Fri May 2 08:40:18 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Watching Ellie: Should be after Friends Organization: ESC Date: 02 May 2003 08:40:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 15 "manhn" writes: > And I don't get why fans of scrubs are so upset--were there fewer > episodes shown than usual? If not, then why does it matter that you > saw the eps on a March rather than a May? Because during sweeps there would be a bigger potential audience, and it would be sandwiched between more highly promoted episodes of other shows, thus generating higher ratings, thus making it more likely to be renewed for another season. -- Aaron From nobody Fri May 2 14:44:41 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: TWW: Sorkin Leaves TWW References: <6f23bvshdkrgobbaleen3o94m3m4vogloo@4ax.com> <20030501184208.02826.00000373@mb-m13.aol.com> <3eb1eebb$1_4@corp.newsgroups.com> Organization: ESC Date: 02 May 2003 14:44:41 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 15 "Natasha" writes: > Hmm. Any thought--expressed publicly by anyone, or suspected > privately by any of you--that this was political in motive? That > Sorkin, and the depiction of political views on the show, were too > "liberal" in the eyes of the network...or from higher up? It was always liberal. Ratings are down, and Sorkin seems to lose interest in projects and become a pain after a couple years. You don't need to find more reasons than those. -- Aaron From nobody Wed May 7 12:03:21 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Emeril re-signs with Food Net References: <3eb87641.54608428@news.cis.dfn.de> <21892-3EB8A497-580@storefull-2176.public.lawson.webtv.net> Organization: ESC Date: 07 May 2003 12:03:20 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 "Ian J. Ball" writes: > My mother vows that "Emeril Live!" is the problem. He's apparently > much better in "Essence of Emeril"... Yeah, I thought he was good back before anyone had heard of him, when he was just another guy cooking in front of the camera with no audience. He was actually quite subdued then, but the food all looked good. -- Aaron From nobody Thu May 8 20:41:25 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Chris Kattan leaves SNL References: <3eba3db4.4291893279@news.cis.dfn.de> <20030508103559.06750.00000001@mb-m11.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 08 May 2003 20:41:24 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 15 poisoned rose writes: > It was time for him to go, anyway. All his characters were totally > worn-out. Well, except for the pseudo-goth kid...always wished Kattan > had tried that a few more times, instead of those deadly unfunny > Peepers/Mango skits. Peepers was funny, dammit. Besides, any character that gets you into a skit where you get half-naked and sandwiched between a writhing Charlize Theron and Molly Shannon is simply brilliant, by definition. -- Aaron From nobody Fri May 9 04:37:05 2003 Newsgroups: alt.tv.nick-at-nite,rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Nick@Nite Upfront 2003 -- Who's the Boss?, Roseanne, Full House, Fresh Prince, etc. References: <1d28bb1.0305081006.15e2e3cd@posting.google.com> <3EBAC0ED.B7A66123@company.com> <3ebad4e3$0$10377$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au> <3ebaf6b7.4292764558@news.cis.dfn.de> <3ebb01a7$0$27786$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au> Organization: ESC Date: 09 May 2003 04:37:04 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 11 "Paul Melville Austin" writes: > what is it that makes shows that were hits "in their time" like you > mentioned, so damm cringe-worthy now? I thought these were all pretty cringe-worthy when they were new. -- Aaron From nobody Sat May 10 22:11:09 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: buy/trade all my children march 2001 References: <20030510212410.20453.00000146@mb-m20.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 10 May 2003 22:11:08 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 11 maryilee@aol.comnojunk (Maryilee) writes: > Okay, am I the only one that did a double take upon reading the > subject line? Nope. -- Aaron From nobody Fri May 16 07:00:28 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: On-the-bubble shows that came back but shouldn't've References: Organization: ESC Date: 16 May 2003 07:00:28 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 32 "The Widower Scally" writes: > "Scrubs" - blows too much of the "Friends'" lead-in, juvenile > writing, can't anchor an hour once "Friends" leaves, overrated You're accusing "Scrubs" of being juvenile in the same sentence where you mention "Friends"? Scrubs is the only thing on TV that I watch regularly now, but I'm of two minds about the time-slot. I realize following "Friends" is good for ratings, but it also creates unreasonably high expectations like yours about lead-in retention. Besides, I can't imagine that there's a lot of overlap between fans of the two shows -- just the opposite, in fact. (Probably not much overlap between fans of "Scrubs" and "Will and Grace," either.) If the type of people who would like "Scrubs" have spent the last several years learning to avoid NBC on Thursday nights, that's going to make it hard for the show to build a solid fan-base that'll keep it going once the ratings bubble from "Friends" goes away. > "Still Standing" - a flimsy cobbled-together rip-off of both > "Raymond" and "Yes, Dear," blew too much of the "Raymond" lead-in, > "The King of Queens" followed by "Yes, Dear" serves the lineup > better than "Yes, Dear" followed by it Yep. "Still Standing" makes "Yes, Dear" look like a smart show. -- Aaron From nobody Sat May 17 07:04:16 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Survivor: Jenna? You gotta be kidding me! References: <20030516234500.25661.00000146@mb-m07.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 17 May 2003 07:04:15 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 23 corwin2@aol.comamber (Corwin2) writes: > >Matt was shown saying that he threw the block-standing challenge as > >a strategic move. > IMHO, he would have lost anyways. > But he did quit too early. I think both Jenna and Rob saw it. Yes, I think he would have been better off just stepping down immediately and feeding the jury some pap like, "These two have played so hard and been such good friends over the last few days that I don't want to have to choose between them." By throwing it but pretending to try, he just added to his 'dishonest' rep, which for some reason was the jury's big issue. Not that I think it would have mattered in the final result, but it might have saved him a vote or two. -- Aaron From nobody Sun May 18 16:09:01 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Would Someone Please ~KILL~ The Person Who Invented WebTV? __ 51dIOvtWIf References: <15AB6C05.7AE165E3@agypgece.ac.id> Organization: ESC Date: 18 May 2003 16:09:01 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 OsamaBinUsenet-AL_Rahavan Daoud bin Gulari@agypgece.ac.id writes: > .. and torture to within an inch of his life, the asshole that > allows them to post to newsgroups? Your ideas intrigue me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. -- Homer Simpson -- Aaron From nobody Thu May 22 07:22:13 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Sci-Fi plans animated series References: <3ecbb307.13318248@news.cis.dfn.de> Organization: ESC Date: 22 May 2003 07:22:13 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 dimlan17@yahoo.com (David) writes: > from toonzone.net > > Sci-Fi Sets First Ever Animated Series for January 2004 > by Pavanbadal > > Location: Linden, NJ Gina Gershon, [snip] Gina Gershon's going to star in a show and we don't get to look at her? That's just wrong. -- Aaron From nobody Sat May 24 06:43:37 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: John Stewart on Charlie make me throw up Rose.. References: <20030522001112.05411.00000165@mb-m04.aol.com> <20030522165709.27140.00000200@mb-m06.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 24 May 2003 06:43:36 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 "Mac Breck" writes: > I'm a Republican who's a fan of Jon Stewart and The Daily Show. I > watch it whenever I can. Guess, I'm just not a member of "the > guard." I call dibs on your share of the Iraqi oil. -- Aaron From nobody Wed May 28 07:54:55 2003 Newsgroups: alt.tv.survivor Subject: Re: OT: American Idol final show (and hi LunaJean!) References: <645e1648.0305250158.7857229c@posting.google.com> <20030525160618.20800.00000219@mb-m27.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 28 May 2003 07:54:53 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 70 "Bunny" writes: > On what servers is this? It's not on comcast and it's not on > easynews. If it's not on easynews, it can't be a very well > propagated group if it exists at all. This is the first reference > I've seen to an existence of an American Idol newsgroup. I'd love > it if someone would actually create one that propagates normally. I pull groups from ispnews.com and slurp.net, and they both have it. Many news servers don't add alt groups automatically, because so many bogus ones are created. If you write to your news provider and tell them they're missing a popular group, there's a good chance they'll add it. > I came here specifically to find posts about AI, this being > Survivor's off season. So meh to the guy who objects, hehe. > Seriously, though, I don't see the harm of some AI posts here when [WARNING: Much pedantic lecturing ahead! I'm using this post as an opportunity to make some points about off-topic posting that may have nothing to do with you. It's not personal! I repeat: NOT PERSONAL! Okay, you may proceed now.] "Harm" is probably too strong a word; I'd go with "undesirable." For a few reasons. First of all, as you say: > the Survivor talk is thin when the show isn't even on and there's > not much Survivor related to really talk about anyway. But that's the worst time for off-topic posts. When there are just a few OT posts mixed in with dozens or hundreds of on-topic ones, it's not that big a deal to skip them. The signal-to-noise ratio is still good. When regular traffic dies down for some reason, it becomes a hassle to wade through the OT stuff to find the good posts. It's also bad for you, the off-topic poster, because you're posting in a place where most of the other users don't care to read your work, and those who would like to read it will miss it. Instead of talking about AI with a half-dozen other fans here, you could take part in the much busier conversation about AI over in rec.arts.tv. (Rec.arts.tv is the place for discussion of any TV show that doesn't have its own group.) By going to the trouble to find the proper newsgroup for your posts, you can make sure they are read and replied to by the greatest possible number of interested people, and isn't that what Usenet is all about? Which leads to another reason most people aren't aware of. My newsreader does something called 'adaptive scoring.' This means that it learns about my preferences and only shows me the posts I'll want to read. It does this by keeping track of the subjects and authors of the posts that I read and the ones that I skip, and scoring them accordingly. When I skip a post, its subject *and author* get small negative scores. If an author's score gets low enough, my newsreader won't show me that person's posts anymore. Kill-files, which are more common, work along the same principle, although they're less complex and normally are handled manually. If someone gets tired of wading past the AI posts and just kill-files everyone who posts to them regularly, he won't see your posts anymore -- even when the next Survivor season starts and you go back on-topic. Ultimately, off-topic posting is like farting in public. It's not illegal, and if you insist on it, there's nothing anyone can do to stop you, but before long you'll be "expressing yourself" to an empty room. -- Aaron From nobody Sat May 31 05:44:33 2003 Newsgroups: alt.fan.tom-servo,rec.arts.tv,alt.tv.survivor Subject: Re: (5/29) "Amazing Race 4" Mr. Hole's brief Comments (Spoiler) References: <27026-3ED80427-289@storefull-2334.public.lawson.webtv.net> Organization: ESC Date: 31 May 2003 05:44:32 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 holefamily1@webtv.net (Int. Frozen Foods Expert Mr. Hole) writes: > No. No, it was not. If you can believe it, it had to do with a > complaint they got after I wacky laced someone's post. At east > that's the post they send me back as the reason when I > inquired. Btw, Google allows crossposting up to 4 groups, and I > rarely crosspost somewhere if the post isn't ontopic in all the > groups (at least marginally). Maybe they occasionally ban a randomly-selected WebTV user, just on general principles. -- Aaron From nobody Sun Jun 1 06:58:40 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Why hasn't TiVo's EVIL spread very far???? References: <8Y3Ca.27240$Io.2282211@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <3edeef16.172426626@news8.beaconwoods.org> <923idvoffap2h47tu596a9t1bc63ktnpv9@4ax.com> Organization: ESC Date: 01 Jun 2003 06:58:39 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 21 "Kristy" writes: > I agree that if you don't watch a lot of TV then TIVO is not for > you. I wouldn't, necessarily. I don't watch very much TV, which means that I don't see a lot of promos, and I don't want to spend more time digging around through TV Guide to find out when the few things I like will be on. Especially since my shows tend to be the ones the networks don't care for, so they get bounced around in the schedule or syndicated to cable where schedules are hazy at best. So I'd love to have a system that would record those few shows I really like and let me view them at my convenience. It'd be great if it would also pick up shows with certain favorite actors and directors. -- Aaron From nobody Sun Jun 1 07:01:02 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Why hasn't TiVo's EVIL spread very far???? References: <8Y3Ca.27240$Io.2282211@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <3edeef16.172426626@news8.beaconwoods.org> <923idvoffap2h47tu596a9t1bc63ktnpv9@4ax.com> <13gidv4mgn1njnkhnu73c2hmho9rjo4fbs@4ax.com> Organization: ESC Date: 01 Jun 2003 07:01:02 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 13 Brian Henderson writes: > There are a few shows worth catching, but none worth changing your > life to see. Which is exactly the point of Tivo: recording your shows automatically so you don't have to rearrange your life to watch them or spend time researching when they'll be on so you can set your VCR. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Jun 2 09:41:03 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: "Born To Be Wild" most overused oldie? References: <20030531104840.20839.00000499@mb-m27.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 02 Jun 2003 09:41:03 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 15 "Marc Sindell" writes: > > >> Is "Born To Be Wild" by Steppenwolf the most overused oldie in > > >> movies, tv shows & commercials? > All-time greatest driving song ever in history. Except for one day in the spring, when you drive with the windows down and see a pretty woman wearing shorts, both for the first time in months. Then the best driving song is "Summertime Girls," by Y&T. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Jun 9 07:31:03 2003 Newsgroups: alt.tv.survivor Subject: Re: OT Amazing Race: Madonna Gondola [filter:BuhByeChrisI] References: <20030607180643.04558.00000218@mb-m23.aol.com> <20030608175700.04036.00000382@mb-m28.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: 09 Jun 2003 07:31:01 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 47 The Horny Goat writes: > Any more word from the others of the top 10 posters on this > newsgroup during Survivor Amazon that want to agree with Chris and > the Goat? Dunno if I'm a top-10 poster, but I'll chime in. I agree that TAR posts shouldn't be here, especially since alt.tv.amazing-race could use more traffic. If I posted there as much as I did here during S6, I'd swamp the place. But we can't *stop* people from posting off-topic. And if you piss them off, as Chris seems to have done, some of them will just do it more to spite you. (Not to blame Chris personally, since I obviously can have the same effect sometimes. Let's see if I can draw some of the ire away...) As for the notion that putting OT in a Subject line makes any post okay, well, sorry, but that's crap. By that logic, we might as well just have one big newsgroup, alt.everything, and put OT on every post. The purpose of OT is to flag threads that have *strayed* off-topic, as threads are wont to do sometimes. If you start a brand-new thread and you're about to put OT on it, that's a sure sign that it should be somewhere else. If your news server doesn't carry alt.tv.amazing-race, your TAR-related posts belong in rec.arts.tv, where they're throughly on-topic. In the meantime, of course, you should badger your news service daily to add a.t.a-r, or switch to one that doesn't treat Usenet like the red-headed stepchild of Internet services. It's too bad groups like these weren't created under the rec.arts.tv hierarchy, like rec.arts.tv.mst3k. That's a more rigorous process than creating an alt group, but once successful, pretty much all servers will pick up the group automatically. With alt groups, most servers require manual addition, and many ISP admins don't even know how anymore. There was one failed attempt to create rec.arts.tv.reality, but that was in July of 2000, when the reality-TV craze hadn't really exploded yet, so I don't suppose people thought at the time it would be long-lasting enough to merit a separate group. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Jun 9 19:21:34 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Episodic re-runs I would watch forever References: <6a58ev8pbc6m50drm3il55k804hrhm1aeo@4ax.com> <%x2Fa.22047$io.379895@iad-read.news.verio.net> <3EE4DC0C.319CE925@ns.sympatico.ca> Organization: ESC Date: 09 Jun 2003 19:21:34 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 17 macthevorlon@yahoo.com (macthevorlon@yahoo.com) writes: > Actually, no. I mean: > http://www.epguides.com/Tick_2001/ > Warburton, Vassey and Carbonell were a hoot. > I liked every character in that show except Arthur. > Never seen even one frame of the cartoon series. The live-action show was worth watching, and I wish it had lasted longer, but the cartoon was simply great. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Jun 10 07:25:27 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Test the Nation - Stupid FOX shit References: <3ee55a42.18778560@news.cis.dfn.de> <0_cFa.32379$pk3.22425@fe09.atl2.webusenet.com> Organization: ESC Date: 10 Jun 2003 07:25:27 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 28 "RA" writes: > That's another thing. I don't see why younger people should be > penalized when calculating your score? Your IQ score only rates you relative to the other people of your age and gender, not the entire population. A 30-year-old with a 100 IQ is actually smarter than a 20-year-old with a 100 score. So if you give a single test to a group that spans different ages, you have to adjust their scores for age. > I could understand it if the math section included postulates.. and > things that are fresh in their minds but older folks have > forgotten.. but that wasn't the case. > In areas like language.. older folks have had more time on Earth to > be exposed to more language, so if anyone should be penalized, it > should be older people. We get dumber after age 30. That varies somewhat for the individual, of course, but basically we gradually get smarter with better memory until about 30, and then it all goes downhill. Older people have wisdom and experience, which aren't measured by IQ. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Jun 10 11:47:03 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: what are you going to watch this summer? References: <5e8367d6.0306091741.6b96b142@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: 10 Jun 2003 11:47:03 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 11 The Amazing Race and Scrubs reruns. (Naturally the only two things I want to watch are scheduled opposite each other.) Sometimes I'll watch CSI afterwards if the previews look good, but I'm not sure I'm cool enough for that show. The rest of the week I listen to baseball on the radio. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Jul 7 06:56:27 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Waterston renews "Law & Order" deal References: <3efc3923.165180653@news.cis.dfn.de> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2003 06:56:27 -0500 Message-ID: <86znjq7dp0.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 15 rander3127@rogers.com writes: > Sounds good. Waterston is a talented actor and his character on the > show is multi-dimensional, which is more you can say for most > characters in TV. My favorite Waterston performance is his SNL bit selling insurance against robot attack to the elderly. It's so absurdly funny he can't even keep a straight face through the whole thing, but he's perfect for it. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Aug 6 11:22:01 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Best and worst ads for new fall shows? References: <20030805142154.01332.00000055@mb-m15.aol.com> <3F3032D4.5EC43E94@mindspring.com> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 11:22:01 -0500 Message-ID: <86ptji7o46.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 39 deering1 writes: > Hmm, the ads for THE LYON'S DEN aren't bad (though one gets the > feeling that the show is going to try and cover more territory > than it can comfortably chew on--g!). JOAN OF ARCADIA's look > surprisingly good (and I was prepared to hate this show with a > passion--I'm not one for TOUCHED BY AN ANGEL/so-called "family > values"/often bogus sentimentality--:PP). I'm not either, but I'll give Joan a try. I figure I'll really like it or really hate it. There's a ton of potential, since God as a real presence in people's lives rarely makes it on screen today except to be ridiculed, but I'm skeptical whether anyone in Hollywood can deal seriously with religious topics without getting overly sentimental. We'll see. The promos for Cold Case are pretty good, in that they let you know that if you like CSI and Without a Trace, you'll feel right at home with this show. It could do a lot worse than to pick up all those viewers. I'd like to comment on the promos for The Amazing Race, but I'm not sure I've ever seen one. And they're disappointed in the ratings. Duh. I already hate Charlie Sheen's new show, whatever it's called, just because I've seen the promo 1000 times, and I only watch a few hours of TV a week. If you're going to promote a show during every single freakin' Thursday night break, please at least have more than two clips to work with. I haven't watched much except CBS lately, but I did happen to catch a Coupling promo once somehow. It looks as bad as Friends, except with less personality and heart. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Sep 10 07:20:21 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Oldest plot cliche in family sitcoms References: <764ca2f2.0309090540.4cc6f1fa@posting.google.com> <20030909145315.17961.00000985@mb-m01.aol.com> <6zt7b.2142$u96.32240@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> <5s8tlv8n8i7qb75s1gtl5r8utegho7mvi2@4ax.com> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 07:20:21 -0500 Message-ID: <86he3kzvga.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 Willondon writes: > How about when one character is supposed to be being hypnotized, but > a bystanding character ends up being hypnotized. "Flinstones", > "Bewitched" and "Cheers" if my memory is correct. And Newsradio. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Sep 10 16:38:27 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Overnight ratings for Tuesday, September 9th References: <44B6925DAF65D5118314000102C740BA0F5559E4@news.mptp.com> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 16:38:27 -0500 Message-ID: <86wucgmii4.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 "Yawn" writes: > I wonder how all those "Whoopi" trashers are feeling today. Probably thinking that if you put together a strong promotion drive, a big-name star, and abysmal competition on the other channels, people will watch absolutely anything for one episode. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Sep 13 06:15:54 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: TV Sitcom Star John Ritter Dead References: <20030912201306.23411.00000988@mb-m19.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 06:15:54 -0500 Message-ID: <8665jxkkgl.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 11 djaxmann@aol.commentary (Andy Jakcsy) writes: > Not unless one of the other Tuesday comedies totally bombs...Monk's > an hour show, while 8SR is a half-hour show... An ABC show bomb? Hard to imagine that. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Sep 13 19:40:16 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: David Letterman expecting a baby References: <20030913134604.07564.00000732@mb-m17.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 19:40:16 -0500 Message-ID: <86d6e45hjj.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 13 "Dwayne Day" writes: > And there, EXACTLY, is my confusion. How the heck is it "old > fashioned" to live with a woman ten years, get her pregnant, and > ONLY THEN talk about marriage? For a writer who spends a lot of time around entertainers, taking marriage seriously *at all* probably seems archaic these days. -- Aaron From nobody Sun Sep 14 16:49:48 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: The floppy drive's jammed?! References: <20030913103144.14444.00000912@mb-m12.aol.com> <20030913211628.08106.00000817@mb-m14.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 16:49:48 -0500 Message-ID: <86brtndoqr.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 37 shawn writes: > Actually I find them very useful in the office. We have a lab setup > where the lab network is kept separate from the rest of the office. > There is a connection, but it requires going through a DMZ to get to > the lab. So it is easier to put a file on a floppy and move it to > another PC, unless the file is too big for a floppy. I've moved a > number of files both ways over the last few months. A few months ago a client of mine needed to get a 30MB compressed file onto an old SCO Unix system. No networking capability, no CD-ROM, no way to communicate with it except through a modem on a serial port. They'd tried dumping the file across the modem with a terminal program, but they couldn't keep a good connection long enough for that. But it did have a floppy drive. So, I downloaded the file to my Slackware Linux laptop and headed in there with two floppy disks (actually, I took a handful, because I haven't bought any in several years, and it's usually hit-and-miss finding a couple that'll format and verify). I used the split command to break the file into 1.4MB pieces, then started copying the pieces onto the disks and reading them onto the SCO system. Two disks made it twice as fast, because I could be writing part #2 to one disk while reading part #1 from the other, and so on. After swapping the disks 20-some times, I concatenated the pieces back into one large file on the SCO box and uncompressed it. It was a major pain, but if not for those floppy drives, my only other option would have been to tear into the system and add an extra hard drive with the file already on it, or a CD-ROM, and even then there would have been driver issues. So floppies definitely came in handy that time. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Sep 15 15:18:57 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: David Letterman expecting a baby References: <20030913104316.07457.00000500@mb-m27.aol.com> <3F63AAD0.68D9@pacbell.net> <3F64FD21.4E40@pacbell.net> <0q8amvchbb6mmiu6ki733a2mr4rt0okbpt@4ax.com> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 15:18:57 -0500 Message-ID: <86vfrt7qku.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 25 Maureen Goldman writes: > Mother of four here: > While not typical, there's nothing unusual about pregnancy at 43. Isn't "not typical" pretty much the definition of "unusual"? One of CBS's news shows just ran a piece a few weeks ago about how rare it is for a woman over 40 to conceive, and how many women don't realize that because they read about these cases. They think they can just put it off until 35-45 and take a few fertility drugs and boom -- a kid. They interviewed some women in their low 40s who are having trouble conceiving (or giving up and going with adoption); then they interviewed some approx. 30-year-olds who weren't in any big hurry, because they figured it could always wait until later. The doctors on that show said 44 was pretty much the practical cut-off date. They said up until 44, fertility drugs and the like could still help, but after that age, there wasn't much medicine could do; you just have to hope your system is younger than most. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Sep 15 17:58:11 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: John Ritter = the bailiffs on Night Court References: Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 17:58:11 -0500 Message-ID: <86ekyhek1o.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 25 raven@typhoon.xnet.com (Heather Garvey) writes: > You are correct. I *know* you are through Logan leaving, at > least. I quit watching the show after Chris Noth left - Sam Waterson > had already ruined the "Law" side for me, and Logan was the primary > reason I watched the "Order" half. As much as they like to think so, > these people are *not* interchangable. I think they just got lucky > with the Greevey/Cerreta/Briscoe casting and the Cragan/whasserface > and took that to mean they could do it indefinitely. It never occurred to me back when I was watching the episodes, but recently I realized that all the main characters on the original L&O were male. A fairly homely bunch, too. How did the show ever make it without some hot models? How did they even get through the casting process without someone saying it was discriminatory to have an all-male group of actors? It doesn't seem like you could get away with this today; every show has to have its carefully proportioned allotment of beef- and cheese-cake. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Sep 16 09:05:02 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: "8 Simple Rules" Cast Addition Candidates References: <20030915122330.03265.00000742@mb-m11.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 09:05:02 -0500 Message-ID: <86d6e0bzht.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 snickersboy4u@aol.commie (SNICKERSBOY4U) writes: > How about Ed O'Neill? As great as it would be to see Married With Children come back -- the early MWC, of course; let's pretend Seven and the No Ma'am Club never happened -- I'm not sure it'd ever be the same again. I'm afraid the influence of ABC would make it a hollow, evil, shell of the original, kinda like the cat the guy brings back in Pet Sematary. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Sep 16 20:24:27 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: TV viewing survey, less than 10 questions -- student project References: <3f6532bd_4@newsfeed.slurp.net> Organization: ESC Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 20:24:27 -0500 Message-ID: <86y8wo6wc4.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 43 Tux writes: [Followup ignored] > 1. Do you watch Friends on NBC? No. > 2. Do you watch ER on NBC No. Is that still on? > 3. Do you watch CSI on CBS Yes. > 4. Do you watch Who's Line Is It on ABC? No. I'd gouge my own eyes out first. > 5. Do you watch WWE Raw on UPN? No. I think when some animal group punked them out of their name, they should have just died off out of embarrassment. > 6. Do you watch 24 on Fox? No. I'm not hip enough. I was just barely cool enough to watch the X-Files. > 7. Do you watch the Jamie Kennedy eXperiment on the WB? Never heard of it. > Last Question > 8. Do you subscribe to cable or satellite DBS services? No. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Sep 17 17:13:09 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: ABC says will continue 8Rules... after indefinite hiatus References: <2ilfmvsf0d3ocj2en2urbd1ms53n0hqltq@4ax.com> <1yZ9b.26989$Aq2.26763@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 17:13:09 -0500 Message-ID: <864qzb5aiy.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 13 "Dwayne Day" writes: > By the way, how did News Radio explain Hartman's absence? Bill had a heart attack, although they never went into a lot of detail. Matthew couldn't deal with it, and for a while (at least one ep) he was convinced that Bill was just playing a practical joke on him and was going to show back up to surprise him. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Sep 18 16:05:42 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,alt.tv.big-brother Subject: Re: Big Brother 4 Brief Comments References: Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 16:05:33 -0500 Message-ID: <867k45dcyq.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 22 finezer54@earthlink.net (Steve Fine) writes: > I cannot agree more. The "X Factor" had some potential, but became > dull. They all became NICE to each other. The recruiting negates > true competition. They probably should have realized that in a stressful situation surrounded by strangers, the exes would gravity toward each other instead of creating conflict. > How so? I can believe a pseudo-fix in other Survivors, but it was > obvious that Matthew was such an anti-social creep that the Jenna > win should not have been such a shocker. We didn't see enough to > know the Matthew truth. Obvious to a few of us, but not obvious to the many people who were predicting an easy Matthew win. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Sep 22 07:40:59 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Discovery channel - bizarre bleep References: <20030921233045.20860.00001082@mb-m21.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 07:40:59 -0500 Message-ID: <868yohatd0.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 11 lazarus writes: > Gods, this sensitivity is going way too far. We're going to raise a > generation that can't handle being offended in any way. Apparently we already did, 30-40 years ago. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Sep 25 23:33:40 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: POLL: Shows Premiering on 09/25 References: Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 23:33:40 -0500 Message-ID: <86d6dow4m3.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 25 "Ian J. Ball" writes: > The ALAN SEPINWALL Memorial* New Shows Poll: > "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation" (CBS) Decent episode, but nothing special. Of course, it's continued to next week, so maybe the good stuff is still to come. > "Without a Trace" (CBS) Consistently a great show. How it isn't piling up awards I don't know. Anyone know what the slow, haunting song was that played a few times during tonight's episode? Apparently CBS can't fit anything as useful as episode credits into their web site, thanks to the ridiculous amount of graphics. > "ER" (NBC) They're still making that? -- Aaron From nobody Thu Sep 25 23:37:43 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: "CSI" tones down to keep family viewers References: <3f735694.97407659@news.cis.dfn.de> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 23:37:43 -0500 Message-ID: <868yocw4fc.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 19 shawn writes: > Very much agreed! As I stated in another post I really liked the > fact that there was at least one person that really could read > Grissom. Marg H.'s character cares about Grissom and probably knows > him the best of all of the people he works with, but Lady Heather > seemed to get so much more out of Grissom than Marg H. did and in > just a few meetings. I liked Lady Heather and thought she and Grissom were interesting together, but the "madam/prostitute who's extremely intelligent and educated" shtick has been overdone in my opinion. When she started quoting Shakespeare or some philosopher, I just groaned and said, "Yes, of *course* she knows that stuff. Don't they all?" -- Aaron From nobody Wed Oct 1 06:53:49 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: POLL: Shows Premiering on 09/28 References: <3f787893.65251454@news.telusplanet.net> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 06:53:49 -0500 Message-ID: <86ekxxuqb6.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 Frank Swarbrick writes: > If the writer thinks that Lilly is actually "seeing" these > flashbacks I think she has misinterpreted it. We see the > flashbacks, but I don't think Lilly does. I don't think anything > supernatural is going on here. I thought she was seeing them, but I didn't think there was anything psychic going on. It was more like as she dug into their pasts, she identified with their younger selves so much that she saw them that way in her imagination. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Oct 1 07:13:15 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: POLL: Shows Premiering on 09/28 References: <3f787893.65251454@news.telusplanet.net> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 07:13:15 -0500 Message-ID: <86ad8lupes.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 63 k581@stopsendingmepornicanfinditmyself.com (axel heyst) writes: > I dug it up online. It's hard to tell exactly what this means- Is anything in this article [from the Denver Post] correct? > The CBS effort, "Cold Case," plays to an older crowd with its > by-the-numbers approach: Maybe, but I'm thinking it might be a little heavy on the profanity, gore, and violence to really be targeted at the "older crowd." It was easily as dark and bloody as CSI, without the zooming in on internal organs. > Low-ranking cop must prove herself through diligence, pluck and what > used to be called women's intuition. Is she low-ranking? The other cops kept giving her a hard time about ignoring their 'triple' to work on this old case, yet she kept at it. She also didn't seem too concerned when the commissioner wanted her to back off the case because of the powerful suspects. I got the impression she was already a proven veteran investigator who could pretty much do what she pleased. > Kathryn Morris ("Minority Report") is Detective Lilly Rush, the only > female homicide detective in the Philadelphia Police > Department. This may all be true, although we surely haven't seen the whole homicide department yet. > She's assigned the dead-end files, the "cold cases," and must use > her imagination to crack them. That sentence sounds more like the X-Files than this show. She doesn't get "assigned the dead-end files"; she didn't seem to even realize they existed until this case got her attention when a witness talked to her. That was one of my complaints about the show: we never really saw this transformation from the cop who wanted to be on the big exciting triple homicide to the cop who wanted to toil away on this forgotten case that no one else wanted her on. Even if this particular case got her imagination, we still haven't seen why she's going to keep going back to the cold cases week after week. Maybe that'll be a gradual change that plays out due to circumstances. > Flashbacks give her insight into the victims' and suspects' prior > lives, sort of an ESP-"Profiler" effect that is the series' proud > gimmick. Like I said elsewhere in the thread, I don't think she was actually seeing any of those things. This looked more like CSI, where the detectives 'see' how the crime happened as they discuss it. They aren't having ESP or flashbacks; they're just imagining it (sometimes wrongly). This looked like the same thing. And mostly it's artistic effect for the viewers. Why don't journalists actually watch shows before they write about them? -- Aaron From nobody Thu Oct 2 07:48:50 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Without a Trace: Too Damn Depressing? References: Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2003 07:48:49 -0500 Message-ID: <86he2rst3i.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 46 mutefan@yahoo.com (Mute Fan) writes: > There wasn't a bigger cheerleader for WAT last year than me, with > the possible exception of someone named Lynn, who mysteriously > disappeared from this group sometime in the winter and who posted > regular reviews of it. > But, damn, Thursday's season opener was the definition of bathos. > Sad, sad, sad. Sadness, sadness, melancholia. Opening and closing > Tears for Fears song to slit your wrists by. Great song, although it's a cover of the Tears for Fears song by Gary Jules. The original is pretty good (I've got it on a greatest hits CD, I think), but doesn't pack nearly the punch of Jules's version. > Sam depressed and killing two cops. Maybe you would have liked it more if you'd paid attention. She shot the two kidnappers. Jack took her gun because it's standard police (and presumably FBI) procedure to take a cop off-duty after any shooting until it's been investigated. And of course she was freaked out. > Jack depressed and worried about his girls. This was the most upbeat part of the show! The guy had an affair, neglected his family, and was separated from his wife for at least nine months. Now he's living at home again and walking his kids to school. Of course it's not going to be easy after that, but I'm pleased to see a TV couple working to keep their family together just because it's the right thing to do. > This show was THE most original thing to come down the pike in a > long time, for about fifteen episodes. It was original specifically > because it was old-time formulaic noir television, a la Perry Mason. > No whining interest in the agents' private lives. True, and that's why I liked the early Law & Order. I don't mind knowing a little about the agents' private lives, though; it makes them more interesting characters. But the cases need to remain the focus of the show. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Oct 8 17:52:23 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: "West Wing" worse off without Sorkin References: <3f843a92.247569546@news.cis.dfn.de> <20031008141520.05886.00000403@mb-m10.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2003 17:52:23 -0500 Message-ID: <86llrv9wbc.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 22 anim8rfsk@aol.comNOSPAM (ANIM8Rfsk) writes: > << This season has been like walking into Starbucks for your cappuccino > fix and having the barrista say, "Our steamer is broken. Can I > interest you in a double espresso?" The jolt is still there but > frankly, it's not as tasty a treat. >> > And this is the exact moment I stopped caring about this guy's > opinion, being as he's more pretentious than Frasier Crane. No kidding. Could he have possibly come up with an analogy that fewer people would have a clue about? Maybe something to do with higher mathematics? "This season has been like trying to solve a matrix of quadratic equations and discovering that the differential is an imaginary number. See how smart and sophisticated I am?" -- Aaron From nobody Wed Oct 8 17:57:58 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Roy of Siegfried & Roy mauled by tiger References: <20031008150342.05886.00000411@mb-m10.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2003 17:57:58 -0500 Message-ID: <86he2j9w21.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 10 anim8rfsk@aol.comNOSPAM (ANIM8Rfsk) writes: > Is there such a thing as a 'minor' tiger bite? "Woke up just now...one sock too many." -- Aaron From nobody Thu Oct 9 05:52:38 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: CA recall: Can it finally be understood that 'Arnold' is not the choice for Governor?? References: <71846d2d.0310031733.40ceb209@posting.google.com> <92b07804.0310072109.3449ba0d@posting.google.com> <574529a8.0310080840.4b0f67cc@posting.google.com> <3F84EE3A.F2551A74@his.com> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2003 05:52:38 -0500 Message-ID: <86u16i8yyx.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 11 Sandy McDermin writes: > Actually, Arnold was running as a Republican in name only. It was > pure celebrity that won it for him. And the fact that many voters are sick of both parties. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Oct 15 07:14:06 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Sorry Phil References: <3f8cbbde.359863@news.cis.dfn.de> <20031014232728.13901.00000330@mb-m13.aol.com> <3f8ce59b.11046348@news.cis.dfn.de> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 07:14:06 -0500 Message-ID: <86ptgypuk1.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 15 dimlan17@yahoo.com (David) writes: > Fact is the guy didn't interfere with ball since this happened in > the stands, the ball may have been uncatchable anyway, and at worst > all he did was prolong an at bat. He's not responsible for the > Marlins scoring 8 runs. And if the Cubs can get so easily shaken > that a simple foul ball getting caught by a fan opens the floodgates > for 8 runs then they don't deserve to be in the World Series anyway. Well yeah, but that last part's a given. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Oct 18 19:31:34 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Cubs loss bad news for Fox References: <20031016053634.02271.00000797@mb-m01.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 19:31:34 -0500 Message-ID: <86n0bygja1.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 11 Brian Thorn writes: > "Broke America's heart?" Chicagoans must have enormous egos... or > incredible inferiority complexes. Why choose? They have both. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Oct 18 19:35:09 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Gal in the 1-(800)-COLLECT Commercials. References: <5548-3F8D9448-106@storefull-2118.public.lawson.webtv.net> <20031015145258.07004.00000083@mb-m18.aol.com> <93kjb.116082$eS5.56129@twister.tampabay.rr.com> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 19:35:09 -0500 Message-ID: <86ismmgj42.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 17 Frank Swarbrick writes: > Don't have an answer to your question, but I think you've > misinterpreted that ad. I don't think the slob guy is the other > girl's boyfriend. Her friend is simply teasing her and she's playing > along. "I do love him." :-) I don't think that's quite it either. The first girl is teasing the second girl by saying this random loser is her boyfriend, but the second girl takes one look at the guy and falls in love -- "I *do* love him." That what I got out of it, anyway. Without that twist, it's not funny at all -- like a US Cellular ad. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Oct 18 19:42:44 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Tonight's "CSI" rerun & NBC too References: <20031016213620.10332.00001231@mb-m14.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 19:42:44 -0500 Message-ID: <86ekxagirf.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 13 corwin2@aol.comamber (Corwin2) writes: > Also, NBC pulled the rerun of Scrubs (My Big Brother) and replaced > it with the a rerun of Will & Grace. Of course they did. NBC never passes up a chance to treat Scrubs like crap. I'm not sure why they renewed it, since they obviously don't like to actually broadcast it any more than they have to. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Nov 3 07:59:20 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: CBS at 75: Crime dramas - no Wiseguy? References: <20031102204636.26622.00000096@mb-m27.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 07:59:19 -0600 Message-ID: <86y8ux364o.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 29 jmsbarber@aol.comnospam (James) writes: > So far the special is, overall, dull, with some decent moments. I > hope they have a bit with some of their big failures, like NBC did > last year, but I know they probably won't. What a hoot to see > "Central Park West" or "Bette" up there. I thought they just had way to much to cover in three hours to do justice to many shows, since they seemed determined to get in a clip of everything. I mean, M*A*S*H was one of the longest-running, most popular shows in the network's history, and it just got a couple of clips, and I don't think any actors from it appeared on stage. By the time the news divisions got done patting themselves on the back, there wasn't a lot of time left for anything else. One thing that struck me: During the segment on Westerns, Selleck said that after Gunsmoke was canceled, there were no Western series on TV until Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman 18 years later. What about Paradise (later changed to Guns of Paradise)? I'm pretty sure it came in that 18 year span. And they let the Smothers Brothers ramble on mindlessly for way too long. Here all these years I thought they got fired for pushing the censors, and it turns out they just aren't funny. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Nov 3 08:05:35 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: CBS 75th Anniversary Show References: <20031102221557.05983.00000202@mb-m13.aol.com> <20031102222430.28553.00000176@mb-m24.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 08:05:35 -0600 Message-ID: <86u15l35u8.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 20 jmsbarber@aol.comnospam (James) writes: > Carol Burnett was hilarious. I wish they'd had her on more often, > and much earlier in the broadcast. I wish they'd just focused on the more popular shows, instead of trying to get a mention in for everything. Or maybe they could have split it up by genre or decade into multiple specials to run throughout the year. Just about the time I'd start to enjoy a clip from a show, they'd cut to something else, maybe something I'd never heard of. > Can't see this doing very well in the ratings. Probably not, but then I don't suppose that was the point. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Nov 4 07:33:40 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Another sitcom scrubbed, when will NBC learn? References: <20031103144353.21118.00000269@mb-m12.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 07:33:40 -0600 Message-ID: <864qxk1cnf.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 jmsbarber@aol.comnospam (James) writes: > I don't see the sex appeal, sorry. She's always reminded me of > Prairie Dawn from "Sesame Street", only with breasts and less acting > ability. She [Sarah Chalke] definitely does it for me. Hubba hubba. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Nov 4 07:46:13 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: CBS 75th Anniversary Show References: <20031103132249.21118.00000248@mb-m12.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 07:46:13 -0600 Message-ID: <86znfcz1p6.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 19 jmsbarber@aol.comnospam (James) writes: >> Er, so what was "Young Riders"? > That was on ABC. They were talking about Westerns which aired on CBS. That's not what he said, though. Maybe someone who has it on tape can check the exact wording, but I remember something like, "...after Gunsmoke was cancelled, there were no westerns television series for eighteen years, until Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman premiered in..." I'm almost certain he said on TV in general, not just CBS. Could have just been a slip-up and he meant to say "on CBS," but I noticed it immediately because Paradise was one of my favorite shows. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Nov 4 07:49:30 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: CBS 75th Anniversary Show References: <20031103162202.17824.00000194@mb-m06.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 07:49:30 -0600 Message-ID: <86vfq0z1jp.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 15 wishy13764@aol.com (Wishy13764) writes: > I found this show riveting..compare what garbage is on tv these > days. Was a pleasure to see the best shows that ever were on > TV..Mash, Mary T Moore, Gunsmoke, The Defenders and etc. Same here. It made me wish I could just watch all the old shows, instead of the mostly worthless stuff they show now. I wouldn't mind devoting 6 nights a week (excepting CBS Thursdays) to a bunch of these old shows. Guess I need to restart my Dish subscription. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Nov 4 07:53:42 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: CBS 75th Anniversary Show References: <20031103162202.17824.00000194@mb-m06.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 07:53:41 -0600 Message-ID: <86r80oz1cq.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 19 jb writes: > I was mostly reminded of how *few* CBS shows I've liked. Outside of > Mary Tyler Moore, All in the Family and Bob Newhart...most were > never interests of mine. I'm not a big fan of those. The first two always seemed to me to take themselves too seriously, like many sitcoms from that era. > And I cringed to recall some other horrors, like Alice, The > Jeffersons, One Day at a Time, Designing Women...brrrrrrrr. Yeah, those are some real stinkers. Again, more clobbering the viewer over the head with the Big F***ing Hammer of the moral of the week. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Nov 4 07:56:03 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: CBS 75th Anniversary Show References: Organization: ESC Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 07:56:03 -0600 Message-ID: <86n0bcz18s.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 11 Linda M. Young writes: > Did anyone notice the one show glaringly missing? Probably one of > CBS's biggest syndicated hits after I LOVE LUCY? Hee Haw? -- Aaron From nobody Tue Nov 4 07:58:27 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: CBS 75th Anniversary Show References: <20031103223428.28173.00000196@mb-m25.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 07:58:27 -0600 Message-ID: <86ism0z14s.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 anim8rfsk@aol.comNOSPAM (ANIM8Rfsk) writes: > Embarrassing was the announcer introducing Andy Griffith and Jim > Nabors as the stars of "Mayberry RFD" Yeah, was that a joke I didn't get? They were actually the two guys from TAGS /not/ on Mayberry RFD, right? -- Aaron From nobody Sun Nov 9 06:19:57 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Sam Waterston References: Organization: ESC Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 06:19:56 -0600 Message-ID: <8665htbuoj.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 drewdr@yahoo.com writes: > Does this guy ever do any kind of publicity ? Talk shows, photo > shoots, award ceremonies ? > It seems like he is the most anonymous leading guy on TV. His bit where he sells insurance against robot attacks to the elderly is one of the funniest things I've ever seen on SNL. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Nov 12 19:52:33 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Why no Andy Griffith newsgroup? References: Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:52:32 -0600 Message-ID: <8665hp5927.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 22 Wes writes: > You can look up almost every TV show on the internet via newsgroup > except one: Andy Griffith. Anyone know why since the fan base is so > high? My news server has alt.tv.the-andy-griffith-show, but google doesn't list it, or show any messages prior to July 2000. Maybe I'll subscribe and see if I get any non-spam traffic. When a TV show has been in reruns for a long time, the newsgroup for it tends to stagnate. Sometimes the regulars have gotten to know each other well enough that they hang around and keep posting, but they've discussed every little detail of the show to death over the years, so there's not much new to say. Usually in that case, it turns into a group of friends chatting about whatever, with little on-topic discussion of the actual show. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Nov 12 19:54:20 2003 Newsgroups: alt.tv.magnum-pi,rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Magnum P.I. and Diagnosis Murder to Hallmark References: <1d28bb1.0311112151.39fe55ec@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:54:19 -0600 Message-ID: <861xsd58z8.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 11 missq@ix.netcom.com (Miss Q) writes: > YEAH!!!! So do any satellite dish systems carry the Hallmark channel? Thanks, -- Aaron From nobody Sun Nov 16 15:46:45 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Family entertainment redefined References: <3fb7be94.68116627@news.cis.dfn.de> <20031116142904.29045.00000396@mb-m12.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 15:46:45 -0600 Message-ID: <86fzgox9yy.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 18 jmsbarber@aol.comnospam (James) writes: >>Today's "WB Family Movie" is "Beverly Hills Cop" and Friday >>family-friendly PAX is airing "The Usual Suspects". And the #1 show >>amongst kids is... "Fear Factor", which next Monday is doing a family >>edition. > I wonder where all those family groups who complain about "CSI" > airing at 10 PM are. This is something that is far more ridiculous. CSI is the #1 show on TV, so complaining about it draws more attention to your little group of nitpickers. If they spent their press releases picking on the WB and PAX, who'd notice? -- Aaron From nobody Tue Nov 18 11:12:59 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: "Average Joe", what a joke References: <414a95f2.0311172003.1b48cd5b@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 11:12:58 -0600 Message-ID: <86fzglpplx.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 40 "Templeton Peck" writes: > C'mon you truly weren't surprised at "the big twist"? I'd hope not. People have been predicting this twist since before the premiere aired. People also came up with several other possible twists that were much more imaginative. > Plus adding these 3 guys still plays into the premise of the show. Not exactly. The premise was "can a hot babe find true love with an average guy?" Not "can an average guy compete with hunky guys for a hot babe?" Similar, but not quite the same thing. If they specifically picked three dumb hunks with boring personalities and no sense of humor, then some of the original premise remains -- when a woman says looks aren't the most important thing, does she mean it? But if the new guys are smart, charming, and funny, why *shouldn't* she pick one of them? If guys on both sides fit her other criteria equally, why not pick one that's good-looking too? Then the question asked by the premise isn't answered at all. > I don't know what was better, seeing Melena's face light up > revealing how really shallow and phony she is. Yeah, that had to be rough for the geeks to look over and see that big, glazed-over grin on her face. > Or the look on Zach's face when he realized he was no longer BMOC, > no longer a man among geeks. I suppose now we're supposed to feel sorry for Zach and root for him against the hunks. I'm not sure that's possible. I think I mostly lost interest in it the moment they went with the obvious twist anyway. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Nov 20 06:40:09 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: "Average Joe", what a joke References: <414a95f2.0311172003.1b48cd5b@posting.google.com> <38iub.3819$us4.3536@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com> <414a95f2.0311180444.388b92e0@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 06:40:07 -0600 Message-ID: <86ptfnmcwo.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 Maureen Goldman writes: > I doubt that more than a week has passed since taping began. It > seems early to mention unlearning "old habits". In the third show, I'm pretty sure I heard one guy say they'd been there for three weeks. That's a pace of one week per episode, with a 'date' about every other day. That would explain a little better why these guys are getting so attached to each other (or hating each other) -- they're spending a lot more time together sans-Melena than it seems like from the show. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Nov 20 06:43:24 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: UPN scheds "Top Model 2" References: <20031120013519.29045.00000552@mb-m12.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 06:43:24 -0600 Message-ID: <86llqbmcr7.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 cmk1996@aol.com (CMK1996) writes: >>"Dramality" is a new one to me. What's it mean? > It's the last part of the word reality. Heh; the first thing I thought of was drama + banality. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Nov 20 06:48:43 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Howard Hesseman References: <20031119233720.05414.00000495@mb-m21.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 06:48:42 -0600 Message-ID: <86he0zmcid.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 jmsbarber@aol.comnospam (James) writes: > He was on "It's All Relative" tonight playing a hippie. He looked > pretty bad, but maybe that was for the part. I haven't seen him on > anything since "Head of the Class". I thought he looked pretty rough twenty years ago in Doctor Detroit. That might have been the part too, though; as I recall, he was on the run from the mob or something. That's one movie that proves MST3K was canceled too soon, by the way. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Nov 20 06:58:56 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,alt.tv.twenty-four Subject: Re: Where did the saying "jump the shark" come from? Was "24" just jumped the shark References: <6_6dnfPGEtn_6yaiRVn-hQ@comcast.com> <0_Qub.11898$iT4.1393906@news20.bellglobal.com> <191120031758390316%roy@hellvision.com> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 06:58:49 -0600 Message-ID: <86d6bnmc1i.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 22 Roy Knable writes: > This phrase has been misused time and again, this pronouncement > about 24 being one of those. You absolutely *cannot* say that a show > has jumped the shark at the moment it happens. How can you know for > a fact that it's all downhill from here? The best may be yet to > come. You can make an educated guess. Say your favorite show has a lot of sexual "Will they; won't they" tension between the main characters (Cheers, X-Files, etc). Suddenly there's an episode where they sleep together or get married, and you say, "That does it; the show will never be the same. The writers are out of ideas." You could turn out to be wrong, of course. The show could go on to be better than ever. But I'll bet a lot of shark-jumping moments are recognized as they happen. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Nov 20 18:09:54 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: NBC wants female "Queer Eye" References: <20031119233212.01432.00000476@mb-m20.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:09:53 -0600 Message-ID: <86vfpelgz2.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 11 smkmirrors@aol.com (SmkMirrors) writes: > Actually wouldn't the ideal show be Stright Guys remaking Gay Women? > Think of what could be done for Ellen! They could call it "Nothing But Flannel." -- Aaron From nobody Mon Nov 24 06:43:09 2003 Newsgroups: alt.tv.survivor Subject: Re: Jenna's Mom died, she was only 48 References: <9uSvb.4219$B04.3528@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com> <9kuvrvcemr0pl77k0glfhsooh8286fli5d@4ax.com> <8b01svkobdcbm0jghuu6lssu1l5ocjcvj8@4ax.com> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 06:43:09 -0600 Message-ID: <86smke2azm.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 10 Henrietta Hungryhole <> writes: > And speaking of James.....anyone heard from him lately? I believe he's still posting to rec.arts.tv. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Nov 25 05:35:04 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: 11/24 development news References: <3fc297f3.11150315@news.cis.dfn.de> Organization: ESC Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 05:35:02 -0600 Message-ID: <86r7zwzno9.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 dimlan17@yahoo.com (David) writes: > CHICAGO (thefutoncritic.com) -- The latest development news, culled > from recent wire reports: > THE COMPLETE ASSHOLE'S GUIDE TO HANDLING CHICKS (FOX, New!) - FOX is > developing a half-hour comedy based on the bestselling book of the > same name. This has to be the one that caused them to take a pass on Tucker Max's project. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Dec 3 07:06:50 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Why all the homosexual plot lines?? References: <20031202125715.04365.00000007@mb-m29.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 07:06:48 -0600 Message-ID: <86n0aa2gpj.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 37 jmsbarber@aol.comnospam (James) writes: > Well, you usually don't see liberals going around beating guys up > because they're gay. I can recall two high profile murder cases involving gays in the last few years. In the one that was huge news, some (presumably) straight guys beat and killed a gay guy. (I can't think of his name; Mike something, I think.) In the other, two gay men sodomized and tortured a young boy until they killed him. There are evil, sick people of both persuasions. > They also tend to not pray for Supreme Court justices to "retire" > because of health problems, They don't? I'll see that and raise you: "I hope his wife feeds him lots of eggs and butter and he dies early like many black men do, of heart disease." - Julianne Malveaux of USA Today on Clarence Thomas. She doesn't just want him to retire; she wants him dead. "If there is retributive justice, he'll get AIDS from a transfusion, or one of his grandchildren will get it." - Nina Totenberg, NPR, on Jesse Helms. Nice touch there wishing death on his descendants too. > or to suggest that the State Department should be blown up, as some > conservative leaders do. I haven't heard this one, but I doubt it came from anyone I'd consider a 'leader.' The State Dept. does need to be reined in and reminded what country it works for, but not blown up. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Dec 3 07:11:47 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Did Linda Tripp ruin her children's life? References: <20031202163150.10830.00000034@mb-m24.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 07:11:47 -0600 Message-ID: <86isky2gh8.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 tomcervo@aol.com (Tom Cervo) writes: > The fact that she got paid half a million dollars of the people's > money, because the truth of her arrest record came out, pretty much > ruined my day. I wish the RNC would pay their own hush money instead > of using mine. That's funny that you'd call it "hush money", when the reason people hate her is because she *didn't* hush at all when asked to. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Dec 3 07:15:18 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: AVERAGE JOE comment References: <5c3cdaf6.0312021027.5f1a2b50@posting.google.com> <069zb.1704$Qd6.167@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 07:15:18 -0600 Message-ID: <86ekvm2gbd.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 "Nikita" writes: > What I found amusing were her comments that she had hoped they were > not into her for just her looks, but when she was on her date with > Jason she kept telling him how "pretty" and "adorable" he was. Yeah, if I were making out with some girl and she said I was "pretty", I'd have to pull back and tell her to cut that out. That's more creepy than complimentary somehow. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Dec 3 07:27:34 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: AVERAGE JOE comment References: <5c3cdaf6.0312021027.5f1a2b50@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 07:27:34 -0600 Message-ID: <86ad6a2fqx.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 43 wunnuy@netzero.net (wunnuy) writes: > I don't know who saw the episode last night (12/1) but > interestingly, the girl wore a fat suit, then watched videos of the > men talking crap about the "fat chick." She got pissed and > eliminated the "stud" nerd (the guy with the healthy orange glow) > Zach, because he was the most harsh. It was pretty lame, really. In the fat suit, she never smiled, made very little eye contact, and refused to shake hands with the guys -- probably to avoid giving away the secret of the fat suit -- while her cute friend sat next to her smiling and doing most of the talking. Big surprise that the guys tended to focus on the other girl, hot or not. Then, as herself, she said some disparaging things to the guys about her fat 'cousin', subconsciously giving them permission to put her down. "Gee, she was rude and standoffish to me, and Melena doesn't even like her. Guess my first impression was right." It would have been more interesting if they'd given the fat girl a fighting chance. They should have found a 250-pound girl with a good sense of humor and some attitude and confidence -- there are plenty of them around. Melena could have introduced her as "my favorite cousin" instead of someone she was embarrassed to have them meet. That way, if the guys still treated the fat girl badly and talked behind her back, it would have clearly been because of her size and looks, and nothing else. > This girl is one of the women who does the exact same thing the guys > were doing, yet here she is copping a 'tude when it's reversed. > Amazing. Sure. You know how they say ex-smokers are the most zealous anti-smokers -- same thing here. Fresh from her trip around town in the fat suit, she thinks of herself as ex-vain, so she's hyper-critical of vanity and condescension in others right now. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Dec 3 18:31:50 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Average Joe / Average Jane References: Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 18:31:50 -0600 Message-ID: <86ekvl1kzt.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 15 albertww2002@yahoo.com (Albert WW) writes: > Taking genuinely unattractive (physically) women and putting them on > TV for laughs (as was done in Average Joe for men) would be > considered too "mean," I suspect. Yeah, making 16 guys stand in a line shirtless with their bellies hanging out is funny. Doing the same thing to 16 women would just be mean. That's not to say some people wouldn't watch it, but I'll bet most people wouldn't. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Dec 3 18:41:51 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: what are your favorite commercials? References: Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 18:41:49 -0600 Message-ID: <86ad691kj6.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 I like the ones about credit card fraud, where you see the victim but hear the voice of the criminal. I absolutely love the one with the black woman and the young guy's voice. "...and twenty thousand dollars to finish my robot -- my giiiirrrl robot. This is gonna be the best prom ever." I've seen it at least a dozen times, and I still crack up laughing just thinking about it. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Dec 4 06:27:17 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: what are your favorite commercials? References: <20031203195214.08055.00000135@mb-m16.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 06:27:16 -0600 Message-ID: <864qwgzs2j.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 mpoconnor7@aol.comnojunk (Mpoconnor7) writes: > I also like the "Real Men of Genius" ads with the singer singing > about "Mr. Wrestling Wardrobe Designer" and "Mr. Bad Toupee > Wearer." The 'wingman' ad is great too, but I don't know which beer it's for. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Dec 4 06:31:52 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: AVERAGE JOE comment References: <5c3cdaf6.0312021027.5f1a2b50@posting.google.com> <069zb.1704$Qd6.167@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <1070530767.517304@news-1.nethere.net> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 06:31:51 -0600 Message-ID: <86zne8ydag.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 11 pimpinit@socal.com (Manny) writes: > Is she going to choose a waiter, or a $100K+ year salary average joe? What a choice. She gets to be shallow and obsessed with looks, or a gold-digger. She can't win. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Dec 4 07:20:17 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: SICK of Apple computers in every movie, TV show References: <20031203223537.11149.00000107@mb-m11.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 07:20:17 -0600 Message-ID: <86n0a8yb1q.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 25 "D.F. Manno" writes: > Almost every time _any_ computer is shown as the "stunt" computer > the technobabble is wrong. I think that's the case with pretty much every profession. I happen to know a lot about farming, and I can tell you that pretty much everything from Hollywood that you see about farmers and rural life is silly nonsense. Cops and lawyers say the same thing about crime shows, and doctors and nurses say the same thing about medical shows. When a show involves your area of expertise, you might as well just plan on enjoying it with a heavy helping of suspension of disbelief, or just not watching at all. Even when a show brings in experts from the industry in question, it doesn't seem to help. The movie "Hackers" had some well-known person helping out in that area, and it enabled them to get some of the terminology straight, but the actual computer work was still 100% poetic license. I liked it anyway. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Dec 4 15:16:12 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: SICK of Apple computers in every movie, TV show References: <20031203223129.11149.00000106@mb-m11.aol.com> <8klusv45bueqe8a394ckn213nt10vb01oq@4ax.com> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 15:16:12 -0600 Message-ID: <8665gwxp0j.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 21 shawn writes: > Definitely the Amiga could have beaten out the Macintosh, but the > CBM management didn't have a clue how to market what they had. Can > you imagine how CBM would have done if Steve Jobs had been there to > help market the product? That's one of the main reasons that Apple > has done so well. CBM is like a case study on how to destroy a business despite good products. The Commodore 128 was a great machine for its time; so good that CBM actively tried to keep it from getting popular, because they were afraid it'd cut into the new Amiga's market. They had a machine that would run all those millions of C64 games out there -- much better backwards compatibility than any version of Windows has had -- but also had the 80-column screen and the speed to make a good business machine, and they didn't want to sell it. Fools. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Dec 5 17:52:52 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.past-films,rec.arts.movies.current-films,alt.cult-movies,rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Common pop cultural references? References: <2780a446.0312042144.663fa679@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC berkeley-unix) Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 17:52:51 -0600 Message-ID: <86y8tqrfe4.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 43 lisamorgendunst@yahoo.com (Lisa Morgendunst) writes: > Give one of three possible answers: > 1. Yes, have seen or heard it. > 2. Haven't seen or heard it but heard about it. > 3. Never even heard of it. > The SNL skit "Samurai Night Fever" 2 > > Berlin's "You Take My Breath Away" 1 (have it) > > Three's Company episode where Jack gets punched by a blind sailor. 3 > > Last episode of Seinfeld. 1 > > Any Death Wish sequel. 1 > > Pee Wee's Big Adventure. 2 > > David Bowie's "Let's Dance". 1 > > Second City skit parodying "Moulin Rouge" by Huston. 3 > > Any Godzilla movie. 1 > > Brady Bunch episode where Marsha's nose get hit by a football. 1 > > Gilligan's Island episode where SOS ends up as SOL. 3 > > Sonny and Cher show. 1 > > Some sappy 70s song called "Seasons in the Sun". 1 > > Song "Car Wash" and the movie. 2 > > Herman's Hermit's "Mrs. Brown You've Gotta Lovely Daughter". 3 > > Seeker's "Georgy Girl" and the movie. 3 -- Aaron From nobody Mon Dec 8 06:04:13 2003 Newsgroups: alt.tv.survivor Subject: Re: OTP: Where is James??? References: Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 06:04:13 -0600 Message-ID: <86u14bldmq.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 17 bostonbarney@hotmail.com (Sheila) writes: > He hasn't posted here in months and I haven't seen him on Survivor > Fever....I miss his comments and insights...anybody know what's > become of him???? He had to go on injured reserve after he wore his fingers down to nubs posting replies to every one of thousands of negative posts about Andrew. Actually, I think he still posts regularly over in rec.arts.tv, if you want to go say hi. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Dec 8 07:54:23 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: what are your favorite commercials? References: Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 07:54:22 -0600 Message-ID: <86wu97jtyp.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 20 Linda M. Young writes: > My favorite Sprint commercial is still "flour the children." Yeah, that one was great. The flour-covered little girl grinning up at the Sprint guy is the best part. My favorite commercial of all time might be from the Dairy Council. Two parents and a little girl come downstairs Christmas morning to find their living room completely stuffed full of great gifts. One of the parents, in awe, says something like, "Those must have been some great cookies you put out for Santa." The little girl says, "I didn't leave him cookies. I left him cheeeeeeese." The way she grins and says 'cheese' makes me laugh every time. Hopefully they'll be running that one again this season. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Dec 8 08:24:11 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Why 'TABITHA" series (spin-off of BEWITCHED) didn't make it References: <041220031836364013%roy@hellvision.com> <20031207213422.04031.00000420@mb-m07.aol.com> <081220030726440086%roy@hellvision.com> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 08:24:11 -0600 Message-ID: <86oeujjsl0.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 29 Roy Knable writes: > High school was a breeze. College sucked. You forgot having to walk > all over campus between classes. "Flexible schedules" included > classes late into the evening. Little privacy in the dorms. And like > ANIM8Rfsk wrote, it was a lot tougher. That depends on the high school and college in question. I attended a private seminary high school, where everyone took four years of Latin, three years of French, two years of algebra, and both physics and chemistry. My freshman class started with 23 students and we graduated with eight. Not everyone left for academic reasons, of course, but that probably took out half the guys who left during or after the first year. Then I went to a state university. I tested out of English 101, but 102 was still remedial. Each class skipped over a certain number cost against one's grade, so I attended just enough that my A turned into a C. Other classes didn't require attendance, so I skipped all the chemistry and calculus classes after the first couple weeks and got Cs on the tests. I dropped out after one semester because my pizza delivery job was more challenging and interesting. My only regret is wasting $3500 on one semester of out-of-state tuition and housing costs. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Dec 8 17:47:49 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Who is that fat girl on the Old Navy comercials? References: <20031208105001.15210.00000507@mb-m04.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 17:47:48 -0600 Message-ID: <86n0a2j2hn.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 23 philcycles@aol.communged (Phil Brown) writes: > What's wrong with AOL? When I started using the Internet it was > either Compuserve or AOL and Compuserve was PC only. There were other services, like GEnie and Prodigy. None of them were part of the Internet then, though; they all had their own proprietary networks. Most of them had some sort of gateway between their e-mail systems and the Internet, and as the web became popular, they added web gateways. The only actual Internet users were mostly at colleges and military installations. > Since I use Macs that kinda sealed it. And now, more than 10 years > later it's very hard to change. and since when did a person's online > service say anything at all about them? Guilt by association, I guess. Luckily for AOLers, WebTV came along to make you guys look good. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Dec 13 07:38:40 2003 Newsgroups: alt.tv.survivor Subject: Re: Jeff's Challenge Commentaries References: Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 07:38:38 -0600 Message-ID: <864qw44z35.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 28 "Brent McKee" writes: > A poster in another group (rec.arts.tv) indicated that Jeff's > commentaries on the various challenges are actually dubbed in > _after_ the various challenges are completed. A lot of it has to be done that way. After all, think back to this last IC; could Jeff even see those farthest tubes well enough to tell exactly when each person grabbed the float so he could yell it out? There are times when he gives running commentary about things he couldn't possibly see, like when they were putting objects in chests underwater, or when one person had to run back into the trees and fetch an idol. In last season's F4 IC maze challenge, they said afterwards that it took something like an hour or more -- very unlike the impression we got. I doubt Jeff actually posed on top of that platform in the rain the entire time, shouting out "Matt runs into a wall....Rob trips and falls....Butch bumps into Jenna....Matt runs into another wall...." He would've been hoarse by the end. More likely, once they got started and got plenty of footage of him up there, he went for a snack and came back for the final shot when someone got the fourth necklace and was headed back to the center. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Dec 22 06:52:45 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: tv Christmas cliches/inaccuracies References: <20031218194923.26263.00001180@mb-m06.aol.com> <314d8f37.0312200616.2f740d21@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 06:52:45 -0600 Message-ID: <86y8t56mle.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 vmacekesq@yahoo.com (Vince Macek) writes: > Considering how the 12 Days of Christmas acually begin at Christmas, > and not the day after Halloween, it's a good move. Me, I wait until > the December date goes into double-digits. Got mine yesterday. My family has always left ours up until Epiphany, so we don't get them too early. Price isn't a factor, since I cut mine out of the timber for free. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Dec 25 08:59:27 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation 2 References: <20031222202852.19782.00000828@mb-m01.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 08:59:27 -0600 Message-ID: <86u13p2bao.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 20 wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) writes: > Huh, I see by the IMDb that they broke tradition by _not_ having > Audrey Griswold played by an actress who hadn't played her before. > I guess they made up for it by not having son Rusty (four actors in > four appearances) appear at all. Weren't Rusty and Audrey the same actors in the original Vacation and European Vacation? Or did I miss one of the movies? Vacation European Christmas Vegas Christmas 2 -- Aaron From nobody Fri Dec 26 07:47:14 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation 2 References: <20031222202852.19782.00000828@mb-m01.aol.com> <86u13p2bao.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> Organization: ESC Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2003 07:47:14 -0600 Message-ID: <86y8szzo65.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 19 mzmeryze writes: > Nope. They were different actors. > > Dana Barron - Audrey "Vacation" > Anthony Michael Hall - Rusty "Vacation" > > Jason Lively - Rusty - "European Vacation" > Dana Hill - Audrey - "European Vacation" Thanks. They sure did a good job of casting similar kids for the second one. I've seen both movies many times, and always thought they were the same actors. Now that I think about it, I can see the differences. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Dec 29 07:30:11 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,alt.showbiz.gossip Subject: Re: Micheal Jackson 60 Minutes Interview - a few comments References: <17976-3FEFC77E-118@storefull-2293.public.lawson.webtv.net> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 07:30:08 -0600 Message-ID: <86u13jsqe7.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 aalucard@webtv.net writes: > I thought he was innocent going into that interview but I am just > not sure now. I just caught a couple minutes of it when I turned on the TV to see how late Cold Case was going to be (and discovered it wasn't showing at all, damn it). Looked to me like they're preparing a strong insanity defense. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Dec 31 08:08:42 2003 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: My own mid-season review References: <3ff1bdff.38249946@news.individual.net> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 08:08:42 -0600 Message-ID: <864qvhjd05.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 49 dimlan17@yahoo.com (David) writes: > "Las Vegas" (B-) Fun locale and it looks like no expense was spared > to bring the show to life but the plots are predictable and if by > 9:20 you can't guess how they'll be resolved you're not paying > attention. I also find myself rooting for the cheaters and various > other bad guys because rooting for a rich casino boss and his > pretty-boy lackey is like rooting for Microsoft. I'm really enjoying this show -- sort of against my will. I was prepared to hate it for going overboard in the flash and looks department, but it so obviously doesn't take itself at all seriously that I can just relax and enjoy it as goofy fun. Sort of like the movie "The Fifth Element" or some of the less-serious episodes of "Magnum p.i." (Danny's narrative reminds me of Magnum a little, too.) It kind of feels like a throwback to a time when crime shows didn't take themselves so seriously. I like the earnest crime shows like "Without a Trace" and "Cold Case," but "Las Vegas" is a nice change of pace from those. > "Scrubs" (C) Needs to decide whether they want to be an off-beat > comedy or a melodramatic WB-type drama and whether they want to do > intellectual jokes or wallow in toilet humor (they seem to have set a > quota of at least 2 poop jokes per episodes). But this being season 3 > I guess this is what they'll always be. I haven't liked the third season as much as the first, but it's still the only sitcom I'm watching. I could do without the poop jokes too. Some of the best musical selections on TV. > "Without A Trace" (B) Does some great episodes and then follows it up > with sub-par offerings. Needs to get out of the rut of having every > missing person lead a secret double-life. Have a great weapon in > Anthony LaPaglia, one of the finest leads in a current drama. Agreed on the double-life bit. The last one I saw, with the female surgeon who went missing to help the daughter she gave up to adoption, was especially weak. She was supposed to be this brilliant, driven surgeon; yet she just sort of stumbled through the episode and they never gave me any reason to care whether she turned up alive or dead or at all. But in general, I love the show. Like Scrubs, it often sends me searching for a musical selection they've used. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Jan 3 05:22:17 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: CSI: New Orleans vs. CSI: New York References: <3ff3688d$5$nynaurff$mr2ice@news.md.comcast.giganews.com> <3ff369b0.74758134@news.individual.net> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 05:22:17 -0600 Message-ID: <867k09b7km.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) writes: > CSI: Alternate Universe Where Rome Never Fell... That'd be great. I'm a big fan of Stephen Saylor and Lindsey Davis, both of whom write detective novels set in ancient Rome. Davis's Falco series is up to 13 or so books, so there's a half-season of plots right there. They're not very CSI-ish though; more Mike Hammer-ish. -- Aaron From nobody Sun Jan 4 06:16:30 2004 Newsgroups: alt.gossip.celebrities,alt.music.michael-jackson,rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: "Michael Jackson Number Ones" ratings References: <1g6zs6c.1hu31gf1gca5ikN%BettyBoop*begone*toYou@hotmail.com> Organization: ESC Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 06:16:24 -0600 Message-ID: <86llon9aef.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 15 "Jorabi" writes: > This one had glowing testimonials from industry people, taped before > the accusations came out. It wasn't fair to them either, and they > might have felt uncomfortable about it airing now. I almost watched it just to see who would be squirming after going on record praising the guy. This may have been made before the most recent accusations, but certainly not before the first time Jackson paid a bundle to make a molestation case go away. -- Aaron From nobody Sun Jan 4 06:34:08 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films,rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Bruckheimer vs Bruckheimer References: Organization: ESC Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 06:34:02 -0600 Message-ID: <86hdzb99l1.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 19 "Ken from Chicago" writes: > Will the REAL Jerry Bruckheimer please stand up? > The producer of such movie schlock, BAD BOYS II, ARMAGEDDON, PEARL > HARBOR turns around and on tv produces CSI: CRIME SCENE > INVESTIGATIONS, CSI: MIAMI, WITHOUT A TRACE and COLD CASE. Not only > are the tv police dramas good, but the quality of the drama > increases with each succeeding show. In the words of the leader of > one famous comedy quarter: What is the deal? I've wondered that too. He also produces The Amazing Race, probably my favorite show of the past several years. Yet I've never been able to stomach any of his movies. Weird. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Jan 6 09:58:07 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Comcast "anti satellite dish" commercials References: <20040106063826.19126.00002382@mb-m13.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 09:58:07 -0600 Message-ID: <86fzet133k.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 31 jstone9352@aol.com (JSTONE9352) writes: > "This thing is like a sail" catching the wind, rain and snow and > giving a bad picture etc etc. So..... you dish owners out there. > What are your real experiences with the dish and would you consider > going back to cable? Those ads are lying, or at least exaggerating greatly. I had Dish for several years, and rarely had weather-related trouble with it. If an unusually intense storm came through, the signal might go out for a few minutes as the leading edge of the storm passed over, but then it'd come back. I think one time in really high winds (40+ mph) it got out of kilter enough to lose signal, and once in a very wet snowstorm I had to go knock the snow off it. Big deal. I dropped the service because I got to where I wasn't watching enough TV to justify the cost. I'll probably get it back one of these days when there's something I really want to see, like the NHL playoffs. I live in a rural area without the option of cable. Which reminds me of something I've been wanting to ask: are the big (5' or so in diameter) dishes a viable option at all these days? Lots of people put those in around here in the country back before the small dishes were available, but I don't know how many are still in use. Can you get very many channels for free with them, or do you have to pay for some sort of descrambling service? -- Aaron From nobody Wed Jan 7 09:27:16 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Comcast "anti satellite dish" commercials References: <20040106063826.19126.00002382@mb-m13.aol.com> <86fzet133k.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 09:27:14 -0600 Message-ID: <86k743wzhp.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 46 estasiak@att.net (Ed Stasiak) writes: > Do any of you dish users also have a dish/satellite modem for > your PC, how much are you paying and what's the service like? I don't have it, but I've used a friend's. Web browsing was good, compared to modem, but telnet, which is what I was doing at the time, was terrible. The problem is latency. It takes about 1/4 second to bounce a packet off the satellite and back down. That's at the speed of light, so that's as fast as it's going to get. When you click on a link in your browser, it takes 1/4 second to send your request, then another 1/4 second before the data starts arriving back at your machine. That doesn't count any processing time at either end, so realistically you're looking at about .75 seconds minimum round-trip time. By comparison, I get about .25 seconds round-trip time on my modem. Granted, the satellite feed will move a lot more data once it gets started, but it'll always take longer to get the first bits through. When I used it for web browsing, I'd click on a link, wait a second or so, and then the page would load very quickly. When using it for telnet, the display would always be a second or two behind my typing, which is pretty annoying. I'd type some_command and wait a second or more for the results. That's worse than just being slow, because at least on a slow connection you get some info for your brain to process right away. That same latency means it's pretty much useless for online gaming, too. The ping times are just way too high. Likewise, IRC and other real-time chat systems will be delayed. Direct Usenet usage would also be painful, since every post would be a separate transfer and wait; but that could be avoided by using a newsreader that downloads posts in advance or running your own small news server. If all you do is browse the web and download large files, you'd probably be thrilled with a dish-based system, except for the price. I'd check out the appropriate newsgroups (alt.satellite.direcpc, rec.video.satellite.dbs) for opinions on them before buying, though. Last time I checked, there was a lot of dissatisfaction with the quality of the service. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Jan 8 07:47:05 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Why is Mike Ditka doing viagra commercials? References: <764ca2f2.0401071247.dd2a057@posting.google.com> <20040107165356.03823.00002782@mb-m07.aol.com> <3FFCA591.8C8F4F60@SPAMBLOCKnullibicity.com.invalid> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 07:47:05 -0600 Message-ID: <867k02tuw6.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 Nullibicity writes: > I think it's funny how they never say what Levitra does. According > to the commercial it seems to be some product that helps you play > football. Maybe you're supposed to infer some connection between > Levitra and "levitating". The imagery is hilarious in the ad where the guy can't throw the football through the tire...he pops some Levitra...suddenly he's getting it right in the hole! Sooooo subtle. Maybe they'll do another one where a guy's driving nails. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Jan 8 08:20:12 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Average Joe is just a reformulated Bachelorette References: <3FFC9322.3F4D7C5B@xilinx.com> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 08:20:10 -0600 Message-ID: <863caqttd1.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 62 John Rinck writes: > EPISODE FOUR: The nerds will face off versus the models and the > nerds will basically get their asses kicked in a variety of > competitions. Maybe they will throw in a Chess match to give the > nerds some semblance of self-worth, but most of the competitions > will be physical. Some of the nerds will cry. The models will have > their own squabbles, but with each other. Testosterone City. In the first AJ, the losers beat the models in the basketball game (the only direct competition they had). Spending a lot of time in the gym toning your abs doesn't make you an athlete, and at least one of the models had never played basketball before. So unless they tried to cast more for jocks than models this time, I wouldn't bet on the pretty guys in anything physical. > EPISODE FIVE: Because the producers will no doubt prevent Larissa > from dumping all the nerds all at once, she will be forced to dump > some of the models to keep the GEEK/HUNK ratio where it needs to be. > She will cry over the decision to drop Sven while Carrot-Top gets to > stay. They never came right out and said it, but there were hints in the first one that she was required to boot them evenly -- from 3-3 to 2-2 to 1-1. It appears they'll be bringing in more models sooner this time, so it's hard to say if they'll still keep it even, but I assume it'll come down to Loser vs. Model at the end again. > EPISODE SIX: One of the nerds actually begins to tickle her fancy, > but she only uses him as a shoulder to cry on, all the meanwhile > getting her groove on with one of the models. That's life. > EPISODE SEVEN: As the producers require, it will come down to a geek > versus a model for the coveted Larissa to choose over. She will go > on and on about how she feels the geek would make a better husband, > but, and I quote "Sure, he may be better for me in the long run, but > you can't sustain a relationship without a physical attraction." > The hunk will win. Well, it is supposed to be reality TV, right? > REPEAT THIS TIMELINE FOR "AVERAGE JOE 3", 4, 5, ETC. They could get the Jane to pick an AJ if they didn't cast such losers for it. These guys aren't average; they're odd. What's 'average' about a 30-year-old virgin, or a guy who's wearing the clothes and hairstyle his grandpa wore in the 50s, or a guy with teeth so bad you can smell the halitosis through the TV, or a guy who thinks it's funny to break an egg over the head of someone he's just met? Of course, truly average guys would be boring TV (and mostly wouldn't sign up), so that's why we get a bunch of odd-balls. Every one of them has some odd feature or personality trait that's kept him from finding the girl of his dreams, and lo and behold, the star of the show discovers it too! -- Aaron From nobody Thu Jan 8 08:32:40 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Average Joe is just a reformulated Bachelorette References: <3FFC9322.3F4D7C5B@xilinx.com> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 08:32:40 -0600 Message-ID: <86y8sise7r.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 38 victorthecleaner@netscape.net (zach) writes: > That is why I did not bother with watching past the 1st episode of > the first one. However, this one showed her freaking out (the > "hidden" camera bit) since she didn't know about the average Joes, > and she seemed a lot more bitchy than the first one. The previews > also showed her making out with several of the Average Joes (won't > call them nerds, because not all of them are), or did I NOT see > that? Did that happen in the first AJ?? She made out with Zach and Adam, and gave John a Let's Just Be Friends peck on the lips (which sent him into a really pathetic flurry of devotion). It's like Joe Bob Briggs said in a column about co-ed roommates: Obviously the bureaucrat who wrote this policy has never witnessed an office romance. The girl may look like your idea of warmed-over corned beef hash, but when you spend EVERY DAY with her, there's going to be that moment when the bare shoulder, the funny laugh, or the overheard conversation with her girlfriend when she talks about getting naked at the bachelorette party, suddenly ZAPS you, and you start wondering what's under there. Add to that the fact that these ladies have spent who knows how many weeks leading up to the show getting themselves into a romantic frame of mind. Once the shock wears off and they decide to be good sports and have a good time -- and are put into exciting and romantic situations by the show -- it's not surprising if they develop some attraction with some of the least-odd guys. Until something better shows up, of course. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Jan 31 17:09:51 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Apprentice 1/29 References: <401a026c.441041@shawnews> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 17:09:51 -0600 Message-ID: <86ptczd8ao.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 20 ronnie@twitch.mit.edu (Ronnie Schnell) writes: > Bowie does not make for good TV. Why do you think Sam lasted so > long? He makes for good TV. Sam only lasted three weeks, and he was fired as soon as he was responsible for a loss by the men. If "good TV" were the criteria, Sam would have been kept a lot longer. Bowie did a poor job of what he was assigned to do for this challenge (inside sales of overpriced crap); he hadn't shown any particular leadership or desire to lead; and he waffled when asked for an opinion on the conflict between Nick and Kwame. Trump had plenty of good reasons to let him go this week besides his "TV presence" or lack thereof. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Jan 31 17:14:08 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Apprentice 1/29 References: <401a026c.441041@shawnews> <57b1bef8.0401300841.7c88e750@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 17:14:08 -0600 Message-ID: <86llnnd83j.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 17 archer1267@yahoo.com (Wendy) writes: > Nick's gone if he doesn't produce next week. I was glad when Trump > said to him "I'd like to see you lead next week," and I wonder if > he'd heard from the grapevine that Nick deliberately avoided leading > the team this week. I'm really curious whether Trump and the Viceroys get to see the behind the scenes stuff, like what goes on in the suite. I get the impression from comments like that one that they do, but then the same information could be conveyed by the Boardroom meetings, which are apparently much longer than what we see. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Jan 31 17:15:39 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Are there any shows you watch twice a week? References: Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 17:15:39 -0600 Message-ID: <86hdybd810.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 13 "Alex Wai" writes: > Just wondering if anyone out there thinks any show is good enough > that not only do you watch it when it airs, but you tape it and > watch it again before the following week. The Amazing Race. Partly to catch details I missed the first time for online discussion purposes, and partly because it's just that good. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Jan 31 17:21:33 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: The Apprentice on-topic in alt.tv.reality References: Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 17:21:33 -0600 Message-ID: <86d68zd7r6.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 20 Maureen Goldman writes: > alt.tv.reality isn't included in the Supernews group, I'm afraid. Yeah, I don't think it's propagated very well at all. If it were, it would surely be busy enough that no one show would be able to "take it over." > Anyway, it isn't as though there are a huge number of Apprentice > messages in rec.arts.tv. The group was swamped during the first > Survivor and Big Brother outings; this is very mild. The Apprentice forum over at TWoP is pretty busy, so that probably makes a difference. Although all their forums seem to be down this weekend. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Jan 31 17:28:44 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Yet Another Politically Biased News Show References: <40175cf3.197567328@news.telusplanet.net> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 17:28:44 -0600 Message-ID: <868yjnd7f7.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 13 rgormannospam@telusplanet.net (David Johnston) writes: > Dennis Miller is not a journalist. He's a comedian. > He is not going to have a news show. He's going > to have a talk show. Hence, there are no rules > of journalism that apply. Just like Larry King. Except for the comedian part. -- Aaron From nobody Sun Feb 1 17:43:35 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Unaired Nikki episodes References: <20040130160907.24764.00001214@mb-m16.aol.com> <2l6q105u8veaj2dcl5hhj1eirtmp6uk5ip@4ax.com> Organization: ESC Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2004 17:43:35 -0600 Message-ID: <86oesi9xi0.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 15 S John M-M writes: >>She's a regular on "Las Vegas". Originally her character was >>supposed to be a call girl, but she seems to have morphed into a >>casino hostess. > Ok, who plays the boss guy's daughter. I thought that was her. That's Molly Sims. It's easy to tell them apart; Nikki Cox is the one with some acting talent. -- Aaron From nobody Sun Feb 1 17:51:42 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: The Apprentice - Bowie References: <95513a07.0401300646.984e188@posting.google.com> <57b1bef8.0401301143.3782c2a@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC berkeley-unix) Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2004 17:51:41 -0600 Message-ID: <86isiq9x4i.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 archer1267@yahoo.com (Wendy) writes: > I completely agree but for the looks part. (And I'm a person with > extra upholstery.) If this was going to come down to a beauty > contest, I don't think Bowie would have made the cast to begin with. Exactly. The producers obviously chose not to cast any women who were at all overweight. If they didn't want any fat guys, they could have done the same thing with them. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Feb 2 16:55:02 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Phil's take on the Super Bowl References: <20040201233628.21885.00001271@mb-m14.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 16:55:02 -0600 Message-ID: <86smht3xdl.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 "BugBarbecue" writes: > As for the halftime show...Totally sucked. I wonder how many > Right-wing talkshow hosts will be fuming over Kid Rock using and > actual american flag cut down the middle as a poncho....then > throwing it to the ground...very disrespectful. Do you have to be right-wing to find that kind of treatment of the flag disrespectful? -- Aaron From nobody Tue Feb 3 18:59:15 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,alt.tv.survivor,alt.music.pearl-jam Subject: Re: men vs women - reasons for the results. References: <4XTTb.8012$jH6.33@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> Organization: ESC berkeley-unix) Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 18:59:14 -0600 Message-ID: <868yjj3bj1.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 "JohnG" writes: >> 3.Every contestent is supposed to have an IQ of more then 200 > That is the funniest thing I have ever read in this group. "More > than" 200, even. . . . Yeah, that was just Trump's penchant for yooge exaggeration where anything he owns is concerned. A 200 IQ is the 99.999999999th percentile. There probably aren't 16 people with 200+ IQs in the entire USA. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Feb 4 05:39:46 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,alt.tv.survivor,alt.music.pearl-jam Subject: Re: men vs women - reasons for the results. References: <4XTTb.8012$jH6.33@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <868yjj3bj1.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> <402061f3.35499143@news.individual.net> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 05:39:43 -0600 Message-ID: <86d68v13b4.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 dimlan17@yahoo.com (David) writes: > Hilarious. 2 different people not realizing that John was pointing > out a spelling error. Guess I've been on Usenet too long; I don't even notice most spelling errors anymore. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Feb 4 10:36:12 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: TiVo says Janet's flash was biggest moment ever References: <401eea6a.18566540@news.individual.net> <101u3j58b2nvr2b@corp.supernews.com> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 10:36:12 -0600 Message-ID: <8665em245f.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 18 kenny@panix.com (Kenneth Crudup) writes: > "Brandy  Alexandre" says: >>Being able to track what I'm watching and what I'm doing is >>precisely why TiVo will never be permitted in my house. > Two words: "aggregate data". They couldn't care less about exactly > what *you* are doing unless you fully opt-in (as I have). True, but I'm still surprised TiVo would make an announcement like this that reminds people just how much data they're collecting. I don't suppose most TiVo owners thought it was tracking minutiae like when and how often they pause and replay something. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Feb 5 11:45:19 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: AOL wants CBS to refund halftime cost References: <4020d180.64060859@news.individual.net> <1022abqh2r1ul94@corp.supernews.com> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 11:45:19 -0600 Message-ID: <86hdy5whcg.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 kenny@panix.com (Kenneth Crudup) writes: > dimlan17@yahoo.com (David) says: >>America Online has canceled plans to stream on-demand the halftime >>show that it reportedly paid $7.5 million to sponsor. > They've gotta be kidding- wouldn't downloads *increase* for this > show? That's probably what they're worried about -- their servers won't be able to handle the load. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Feb 5 12:05:16 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Honestly, I'm more pissed at Kid Rock... References: Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 12:05:16 -0600 Message-ID: <86d68twgf7.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 17 "Moviesounds.com" writes: > for turning the American Flag, which hundreds of thousands of > soldiers lived and died for, into a poncho. I don't think most people nowadays are even aware that such a thing as flag etiquette exists. Willie Nelson's been wearing the flag as a bandanna for years, and country music fans, who tend to be pretty patriotic, don't seem to care. Last time I was at a parade and the color guard went by, I think less than half the people stood, and very few saluted or put their hands over their hearts. People just don't know. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Feb 5 12:08:19 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Best Superbowl ad References: Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 12:08:19 -0600 Message-ID: <868yjhwga4.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) writes: > "Ken from Chicago" said: >> The best Superbowl ad I saw was clearly the Nextel ad with Dale >> Earnhardt being called in to play in a football game > Sorry, I just thought that it was really dumb. Agreed. But then I don't care about Nascar. I can't recall any ads I thought were especially good. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Feb 5 12:10:41 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: America uptight about Breasts References: <20040202160014.20558.00000819@mb-m21.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 12:10:40 -0600 Message-ID: <864qu5wg67.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 kbuck40088@aol.comnospam (KBuck40088) writes: >>Which is the original point: "America uptight about breasts" > We are also uptight about women shaving under their arms, regular > bathing and good dental care. Deal with it. Yeah. We don't find it necessary to try out fascist or communist dictatorship as our method of government every few decades, either. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Feb 5 12:15:52 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: NHL ratings may send it to cable References: <401e8171.135094597@news.individual.net> <101t5l628gfuqb1@corp.supernews.com> <020220042052443064%seeker#@tds.net> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 12:15:51 -0600 Message-ID: <86znbxv1d4.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 43 "Laddy" writes: > FIGHTING > > NHL: Five-minute penalty. > > Olympic: Ejection. That's just not right. Pansy furriners. > ICING: > > NHL: Defending team must touch puck. > > Olympic: Icing when puck crosses goal line. The majority of icing situations are very dull, so I can see trying to eliminate them. But every once in a while an offensive player is able to beat the defense to the puck, and that's an exciting play I'd hate to see eliminated. > TWO-LINE PASSES > > NHL: Offsides for two-line passes. > > Olympic: Two-line passes are allowed. This would probably be the biggest change, as far as opening up the middle and encouraging more offense. > OFFSIDES > > NHL: Players must clear offensive zone until puck clears zone. > > Olympic: Players must clear zone, but then can attack (tag-up rule) > again. Interesting; I hadn't heard that one. Sounds like a good idea. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Feb 7 06:33:02 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: NBC renews "Apprentice" References: <4022ebdb.26649448@news.individual.net> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 06:33:02 -0600 Message-ID: <86r7x7qdc1.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 18 Newton Wai writes: > While the people mentioned are very successful (more so than Trump, > IMHO), they won't make good TV since Trump is a celebrity (not to > mention that Eisner works for Disney, owner of a rival network). Yeah, I wouldn't quite say Trump makes the show, but he's essential to it. He's credible as a businessman, but he's also a celebrity. He does a good job on the show, with a good mix of humor and seriousness, and his reasons for his firings have been solid. Yet he's got bizarre qualities -- the Hair, claiming everything he owns is the bestest ever, painting his entire apartment with gold leaf -- that make him fun to laugh at too. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Feb 7 06:37:12 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: CBS's Karma My point was References: <8gq720hohuemu72lkgtfbe8imq31iqgba6@4ax.com> <3764-4023F40E-416@storefull-3195.bay.webtv.net> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 06:37:12 -0600 Message-ID: <86n07vqd53.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 11 crg903@webtv.net (clint gandy) writes: > Isn't it funny that it happened to the overly cautious CBS. Considering the reaction of their customers, it looks like their caution has been warranted. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Feb 7 06:40:00 2004 Newsgroups: alt.tv.survivor,rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: OP: Apprentice... what product would YOU have sold at the flea market? References: <1c4f9312.0402061348.518c5f50@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 06:39:56 -0600 Message-ID: <86isijqd0j.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 13 natch@my-deja.com (natch) writes: > Are any of the contestants New Yorkers? I would think not they may > have an advantage. Kwame and Ereka both claim to know their way around NYC, although I don't know if either of them lives there now or grew up there. So far they've always been on opposite teams. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Feb 7 06:51:05 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: The Apprentice: Discuss References: Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 06:51:05 -0600 Message-ID: <86ekt7qchy.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 31 ndooley@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu (Nancy Dooley) writes: > Anyone surprised at the end of the program last night, who was > fired? I certainly wasn't. I think Kristi was trying too hard to > take Jessie's advice and just absolutely clammed up...poor thing. > No defense, whatsoever. Jessie said talk when Trump talks to you > directly, and still Kristi couldn't talk. Kristi knew that ultimately she *was* responsible for the loss. She said as much on the balcony, when she said no one else did anything particularly wrong that she could put the blame on. I think as much as she wanted to stay in the game, she knew she deserved to be fired, so her heart just wasn't in her defense. She even looked disheveled and downcast in the boardroom as if she was just waiting for the axe. In the two cases where someone other than the project manager was fired, it was because one of the other players did a poor job in the boardroom, and Trump thought the manager had potential enough to get another chance. David tried to avoid having any opinions or responsibility by saying he wasn't in sales. Bowie waffled on the issue of the ethics of Kwame's autograph stunt. Trump really seemed to want to keep Kristi, but neither of the other two screwed up like David and Bowie. As despicable as I find them, Omarosa and Heidi both defended themselves well in the boardroom, and didn't give Trump any excuse to switch his firing focus to them. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Feb 7 07:07:17 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: The Apprentice: Discuss References: <40244a57.76828404@news.md.comcast.giganews.com> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 07:07:16 -0600 Message-ID: <86ad3vqbqz.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 68 void@no.spam.com (void) writes: > Now where was this supposed Betrayal that all the previews > mentioned? In the previews, they showed Donald saying "I just don't > get it" as if he was saying that to the betrayer. But that was not > the case. I think they might have gotten the promos mixed up a little. They're still predicting a betrayal for next week. > Some people think Jesse betrayed Kristi when Donald asked her what > went wrong and Jesse said that the problem was management. When we > saw Kristi and Jesse strategizing on what to say in the boardroom, I > don't remember Jesse ever telling Kristi that she would be > supportive of her. It was implied. When the scene starts with the two of them in the park, Jesse says something like, "When I say what I say in the boardroom, it's not going to be for you, it's going to be for me, because I need you to stay in the game. I don't want to be here without you." That pretty clearly implies that she's going to speak up on Kristi's behalf. > If my memory is correct, then Jesse didn't betray Kristi. She was > only giving her honest opinion on why the team failed. But then we > saw Kristi shaking her head when Jesse blamed her, so maybe I missed > something. A lot of boardroom stuff is edited out. Jesse may very well have praised Kristi's talents, but when Trump pinned her down and made her give an opinion on this loss, she had to admit it was management's fault. After all, that's what Kristi said was the problem, so it'd be hard to argue otherwise. It's really hard to say. > So if Jesse really betrayed Kristi and Kristi realized it, then why > did she not bring Jesse with her into the boardroom instead of > Heidi? Just before she selected Heidi, she said something like > "This is only because I have to make choice" which suggested that > she thought the remaining people were all equally at fault. So if > everyone else is equally to blame, why not take Jesse, who just > backstabbed you? Maybe because she liked Jesse, and figured she'd still rather see her win than the other two women. She might have figured by that point the decision was made, so it was just as well that Jesse protected herself. > I am surprised that in the preview for next week, everyone in the > suite is shocked when they see Omarosa walk in. I mean sure, > Omarosa handled the money so a case could have been made for her to > get fired (although the missing money wouldn't have given the team > the win), but to think that she would have definitely been fired is > a real stretch. I think it's mainly shock that Kristi *was* fired. Remember the scene in the car, where Nick said no way would Trump fire her, that he'd keep her based on potential, and everyone else seemed to agree. Plus, that's what they all *wanted*, because the other two are disruptive and depressing. So when Heidi walked in, they all assumed Kristi would be behind her. If Omarosa had walked in first, I'll bet Heidi would have received shocked silence. (Although I don't think Omarosa would have gotten the same cheer, because she's made sure no one likes her.) -- Aaron From nobody Sat Feb 7 07:36:49 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Booger is God? References: Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 07:36:49 -0600 Message-ID: <8665ejqadq.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 17 Captain Infinity writes: > It was quite a shock seeing Curtis Armstrong doing a walk-on as God > in tonight's Joan of Arcadia. How the mighty have fallen. He must > need the work; has he done *anything* since the Nerds movies? Wait, > I remember he was in an episode of Sabrina...but he was a nerd > there, too. When did he start to appear Godlike in the eyes of > casting directors? He was great as a stoner/slacker in the old movie "Better Off Dead" with John Cusack. "I've been going to this high school for seven years. I'm no dummy." -- Aaron From nobody Sat Feb 7 07:39:59 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Anyone hate the Antique genre besides me? References: <20040206054851.21810.00001465@mb-m14.aol.com> <20040206065422.15185.00000496@mb-m06.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 07:39:59 -0600 Message-ID: <861xp7qa8g.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 15 dirtydog48@aol.com (DirtyDog48) writes: > Does BBC's "Lovejoy" qualify as part of the antique genre? > > For those who haven't seen it, the Lovejoy character is an antique > dealer in Britain who combines treasure-hunting with a bit of > mischievous larceny. The books are good too, although I haven't seen the TV show, so I can't say how they compare or whether they follow the same stories. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Feb 7 07:48:46 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: The Apprentice 2/5 References: <4023c319.874142@shawnews> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 07:48:45 -0600 Message-ID: <86wu6zov9e.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 30 boshu22@STOPSPAMyahoo.com (Felonious Monk) writes: > Does anyone think Jessi was intentionally screwing over Kristi with > the advice to "keep quiet"? No. It just makes no sense for Jesse to try to get Kristi fired. Kristi would never have taken Jesse to the boardroom, and she confided in Jesse and followed her advice. Why get rid of her? Now Jesse is the odd man out on her team. Everyone else has a tie to someone else: Troy and Kwame are the only men on their team, and they were partners in the autograph thing; Omarosa and Heidi are forming a Bond of Bitchitude. Everyone's still going to think of Jesse as "Kristi's friend." This isn't Survivor, so being alone isn't going to get her voted out, but it probably does mean she'll be in the boardroom next time her team loses, even if she didn't do anything especially wrong. > It certainly seemed that way when you couple it with how she > responded "it was the leadership" when Trump asked her what > happened. That looked like she saw which way the wind was blowing, and decided to protect herself. Since Kristi wasn't defending herself, it would have looked silly for someone else to do it. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Feb 9 17:11:35 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,rec.arts.sf.tv Subject: Re: SF shows with real endings? References: <1939-4025B50C-134@storefull-3315.bay.webtv.net> <186ee292.0402090233.78af6830@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 17:11:32 -0600 Message-ID: <86bro7g863.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 22 Jerry Brown writes: > Also, The Adventures of Brisco County Jnr completely resolved the > 'orbs from the future' story arc started in the pilot and was a > couple of episodes into a new, less SF-oriented (IIRC), arc at the > time it was cancelled. That was all part of the single season it lasted, although the show changed so much after Bly was gone that I always thought it started a second season too, until I looked it up. Brisco killed Bly and the orbs went back to the future in episode 20. The season ends with a two-parter (26 and 27), "High Treason", guest-starring Terry Bradshaw and a whole pile of football puns. I don't think the final episode really wrapped up anything other than what was happening in that episode, though. Great show. I miss Dixie Cousins. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Feb 11 07:42:27 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: TiVo says Janet's flash was biggest moment ever References: <401eea6a.18566540@news.individual.net> <101u3j58b2nvr2b@corp.supernews.com> <8665em245f.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 07:42:25 -0600 Message-ID: <86d68ld96m.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 26 Barry Margolin writes: > Nothing having to do with TV recording/playback would be in the > Linux kernel. Extra kernel modules are needed for the chip that does the on-the-fly video compression/decompression. I believe that chip is the only proprietary piece of equipment in a Tivo; everything else is standard PC hardware. I also seem to recall hearing that they use a custom filesystem, which probably has a kernel module. > I doubt very much that TiVo has made the service-specific part > of their software available to the public. I've always gotten the impression that *all* the code is GPL, but I don't know for sure. You can check it out here if you're interested: . Or do like someone else said and build your own system with a PC, TV card, and the free MythTV software. Then you'll never have to worry about anyone tracking your usage. That's what I'm planning on -- not because I'm worried about anyone tracking me, but because I'm cheap. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Feb 11 15:33:17 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,alt.tv.pol-incorrect,alt.news-media Subject: Re: What liberal media? References: Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 15:33:15 -0600 Message-ID: <86znbpb8tg.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 11 lazarus writes: > And this explains why the media was all over the AWOL story back in > 2000, right? Right? They just /lean/ left; they aren't *completely* insane. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Feb 11 18:32:09 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Time to ban all prescription drug advertising from TV? References: Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 18:32:09 -0600 Message-ID: <86oes5b0ja.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 21 "Jude Cormier" writes: > Listening to the side effects alone makes one wonder if you should > even bother taking the drug to begin with i.e. "In some cases, > nausea or stomach bleeding should be expected. In rare cases, death > may result." I've wondered at times if, since they're required to mention the side effects, some ads try to make them sound extra scary. As if viewers are going to say, "Wow, must be powerful stuff if you have to be that careful with it. Better get me some." Paul Gilmartin did a great stand-up or radio bit called "Gropecia" (sp?) once, as a takeoff on the hair-growth Propecia, which had an ad saying that pregnant women shouldn't even handle the tablets. It was pretty hilarious, but I've been unable to find it online. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Feb 11 18:59:35 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,alt.tv.pol-incorrect,alt.news-media Subject: Re: What liberal media? References: <86znbpb8tg.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> <3lel20tjjneeg1543ikefp6vi6nrntehvm@4ax.com> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 18:59:32 -0600 Message-ID: <86k72taz9n.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 38 lazarus writes: > So, they're covering it now because they /have/ gone insane? No, now the context has changed. In 2000, the outgoing President, who got elected and stayed in power partly due to strong support from the media, was a draft-dodger who loathed the US military and actively protested against it from the safety of foreign soil. Since the media and the voters didn't have a problem with that, why would they have a problem with Bush technically being AWOL once? Compared to Clinton, against whose legacy Bush was running in the person of Gore, accusing Bush of being AWOL would have been like putting the fact that he once kissed a woman not his wife on the front page. Now it's different, because Bush has sent soldiers to war, which brings a possible hypocrisy issue into it. And the Clinton comparisons have had four years to fade. Of course, Clinton sent soldiers to war too, including those UN-run quagmires known as Bosnia and Kosovo, but we've forgotten that. I'm not a big Bush fan; in fact, I'd have a hard time naming one thing he's handled well *besides* foreign policy. I'm disgusted with his big spending and his ignoring of our borders. If his opponent promised to get serious about stopping *illegal* immigration and punishing companies that take advantage of it, and I thought he meant it, I'd probably vote Democrat for the first time in my life. But I think the Bush-haters need to come up with something better than some old paperwork if they want to take him down. Trust me, we Clinton haters went down that road for eight years, and it just leads to frustration. People didn't care about the details then, and I don't think they're going to care any more now, even if the press does push the issue. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Feb 12 08:47:07 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: TiVo says Janet's flash was biggest moment ever References: <401eea6a.18566540@news.individual.net> <101u3j58b2nvr2b@corp.supernews.com> <8665em245f.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> <86d68ld96m.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> <110220041954528791%roy@hellvision.com> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 08:47:07 -0600 Message-ID: <86oes49wyc.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 28 Roy Knable writes: > That's a little too cheap. You can get a Series 1 20-hour TiVo that > will work without a subscription or phone line on eBay for about > $80, not much more than a TV card. Granted, you'll probably need to > buy a decent size hard drive for it, but you'll want to do that with > a PC PVR anyway because your existing drive is probably not big > enough for the video files. And the advantage of the TiVo is that > it's a dedicated machine. It's always on, so you don't have to turn > your PC on just to watch TV. Being always on, the 30-minute buffer > is always available. It can be put in the living room next to the TV > where most PCs aren't. All good points for the typical home user. But in my case, I've got spare PCs, and I prefer to leave them on full-time anyway. I can stick the PC PVR on top on the TV and easily network it to my other machines, so it can access the 200GB or so of drive space I've got in other machines for long-term storage. With a PC PVR, if I download video or music off the net to my workstation, I can just copy it over to the PVR and play it. I could also get a DVD burner for a PC, which I don't know if you can do with a cheap TiVo. But mostly I want to do it because it sounds cool. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Feb 13 06:53:16 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: TiVo says Janet's flash was biggest moment ever References: <401eea6a.18566540@news.individual.net> <101u3j58b2nvr2b@corp.supernews.com> <8665em245f.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> <86d68ld96m.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> Organization: ESC Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 06:53:14 -0600 Message-ID: <86lln787k5.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 20 Guardsman writes: > That said, I've been using my MythTV system for more than a year and > have been very happy with it -- two tuner cards, >300GB of storage, > commercial detection, various plugins, ... with more features > getting added all the time. What tuner cards are you using? From reading the MythTV docs, I get the impression the Hauppauge 350 is the way to go, since it'll do all the video/audio ins and outs, and I won't need any other video or sound cards or a separate monitor besides the TV. It also does all the compression in hardware, which is good because while I've got plenty of disk space, I don't have tons of CPU power. (The system I'll be using is a 1Ghz Pentium.) Thanks, -- Aaron From nobody Sat Feb 14 11:36:23 2004 Newsgroups: alt.tv.survivor,rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Jessie, The Apprentice References: <130220041232520975%nobody@nospam.com> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 11:36:22 -0600 Message-ID: <8665e94l7t.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 22 finezer54@earthlink.net (Steve Fine) writes: > I cannot fathom why Trump does half of what he does. If he is really > looking for a good employee, the Omarosa person would be gone in a > second. Omarosa has survived the last two weeks the same way Sam survived the first two: there was someone else in the Boardroom who also deserved to be fired, but who was less interesting for TV. I think Trump basically uses whether the person will make interesting TV next week as a tiebreaker. "Well, I can't fire both of them today, so I might as well get rid of the boring one and keep the spaz for another week." I don't think he'd fire a promising candidate for the sake of keeping around a ratings-hound, though, which is why Sam didn't last past week three, and why Omarosa will be gone the first time she goes to the boardroom with two people who don't screw it up. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Feb 14 11:38:36 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: KFC=Kitchen Fresh Chicken?? References: <402B739F.8010108@earthlink.net> <402CFD92.BCBDDB71@ucdavis.edu> <402CC8D0.7000904@earthlink.net> <402D6F27.9D469D46@ucdavis.edu> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 11:38:36 -0600 Message-ID: <861xox4l43.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 21 Arthur Lipscomb writes: > Reminds me of when McDonalds starting selling "frozen yogurt" which > in reality was the same ice cream they were previously selling. One > day I ordered one ice cream and one frozen yogurt. Of course the > employee made both from the same machine. Really? But frozen yogurt and ice cream are definitely *not* the same thing. > And what's with UPS calling itself "Brown"? Are people out their > really calling UPS Brown, or is the company making a sorry attempt > to change its name? And why does it bug me so much when people say it? I can't explain why, but it makes me cringe. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Feb 14 11:41:06 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: KFC=Kitchen Fresh Chicken?? References: <402B739F.8010108@earthlink.net> <20040212191754.18794.00000397@mb-m04.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 11:41:05 -0600 Message-ID: <86wu6p36fi.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 leasley@netexas.net (Lexy) writes: > Maybe I need to lighten up,but the idea of the famous REAL Harland > Sanders being turned into a cartoon mascot is tacky,not to mention > offensive to his family.Can you imagine what its like for them?How > would those corporate heads feel if one of their deceased relatives > was turned into an animated mascot? Wealthy? -- Aaron From nobody Sat Feb 14 11:44:49 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: KFC=Kitchen Fresh Chicken?? References: <402B739F.8010108@earthlink.net> <402c52b4_2@corp.newsgroups.com> <89c6a6bb.0402130822.5d9f4005@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 11:44:49 -0600 Message-ID: <86smhd369a.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 bz811@go.com (888eight888) writes: > geez...I'd hate to gross people out...I heard the original name > change had to do with that they weren't allowed to say "chicken" in > their name because "KFC" was technically not chicken being the > product was cloned/harvested/headless chickens produced just for the > meat... This doesn't even make sense. Cut its head off and chop it up, it's still a chicken. Is anyone saying the burger places can't call their products "beef" unless they sell you the whole cow? -- Aaron From nobody Sun Feb 15 17:10:28 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: CBS in trouble again, Grammys called racist References: <402bbb00.166957381@news.individual.net> Organization: ESC Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 17:10:28 -0600 Message-ID: <86lln40wij.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 18 "Dr.Phil McGRaw" writes: > people are too PC these days. Screw um - they have a choice - TURN > OFF THE TV No, they have another choice: complain to the networks and the advertisers to try to get them to stick to content the viewers like. That's a free society at work, supply and demand between seller and buyer -- not a system where a small group does whatever the hell it wants and everyone else averts their eyes. (For the record, I have no idea what happened at the Grammys, and I don't care; the point stands.) -- Aaron From nobody Tue Feb 17 16:56:38 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Spin off of NBC's Las Vegas? References: <40j330509n1f89ui1pua5nt0hrf7jqst2t@4ax.com> <20040217054012.14339.00001192@mb-m01.aol.com> <2dd7d739.0402170823.451964f8@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:56:38 -0600 Message-ID: <86vfm5wc0p.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 "Ian J. Ball" writes: > And yet Cox is still coming out of this better than either Vanessa > Marcil or Molly Sims (the latter, especially, seems like a mere > afterthought). Molly Sims is simply awful. I'm normally a sucker for tall blondes, but her acting is so terrible it makes her downright unappealing. And that's saying something, considering this show isn't exactly packed with great thespians. It's not the kind of show that needs great actors, but I've seen better than Sims in grade school plays. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Feb 18 10:06:58 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: las vegas: wet t-shirt References: <1077095151.547969@news-1.nethere.net> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 10:06:58 -0600 Message-ID: <86ptccv0bh.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 13 pimpinit@socal.com (Manny) writes: > I saw the wet t-shirt contest on Las Vegas. Is it ok to show this > stuff on TV? The contestants were gorgeous, but that had to be the least lascivious web t-shirt contest in history. Those must have been some very thick t-shirts, to be wet and still reveal no more than they showed dry. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Feb 18 10:09:45 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Petersen Plans to Leave CSI References: <15168-403296CF-488@storefull-3272.bay.webtv.net> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 10:09:45 -0600 Message-ID: <86lln0v06u.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 holefamily1@webtv.net (The Ghost of Grandpa Hole) writes: >>CSI: Crime Scene Investigation star and >>producer William Petersen is >>considering quitting the show next year. Is David Duchovny still looking for work? -- Aaron From nobody Thu Feb 19 07:42:00 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Spin off of NBC's Las Vegas? References: <40j330509n1f89ui1pua5nt0hrf7jqst2t@4ax.com> <20040217054012.14339.00001192@mb-m01.aol.com> <2dd7d739.0402170823.451964f8@posting.google.com> <86vfm5wc0p.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 07:41:58 -0600 Message-ID: <86eksrrxsp.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 46 riud@email.com (WQ) writes: > --- Actually, I thought Dennis Hopper - a "seasoned pro" - was far > worse in that backdoor pilot episode than Sims. I couldn't get a > handle on the kind of character he was supposed to be and there was > just no conviction in anything he said. Not to mention that he also > came across stiffer than a sheet of steel and made Sims look like > she's mastered method acting by comparison. Yeah, he was pretty bad. I think he would have bothered me more if I could have understood half of what he mumbled. (And I loved the movie Space Truckers, so I don't have a problem with cheesy Dennis Hopper.) But Sims is there every week, like a bad toothache. You just know that sooner or later she's going to cruise across the screen, haltingly read something vapid off a cue card, and cruise off. > The show as well has become distressingly inconsistent in its > quality and has a cheaper look about it now. The Van Damme and Alec > Baldwin episodes were probably the best in the last two months, but > still fall short of the original tone and style of the series' first > five episodes. What happened after the 5th episode? Did Zucker > really think it would come across better as a kind of "Love Boat, > Casino Style"? Yeah, I thought that last good episode was the one with Baldwin (whom I hate normally). The plot generally made sense and everyone had something to do. I enjoy the cheesiness of the show; it's a nice change of pace from all the dead-serious crime shows these days. But there still needs to be a discernible plot without too many gaping holes. Some continuity would be nice too, especially with Danny's character. One thing I liked in the pilot that I think they should bring back was Danny's narration. It reminded me a little of Magnum p.i., another great show that had a lot of fun and didn't take itself too seriously, while still doing interesting stories most of the time. Danny's obviously the straight man here, so it works better when we see things through his eyes. Lately, with the way he seems to have his eye on a different woman each week, we have no idea what's going on inside his head, which hurts the show. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Feb 19 07:45:50 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Petersen Plans to Leave CSI References: <15168-403296CF-488@storefull-3272.bay.webtv.net> <86lln0v06u.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> <40339779.E7F1B75B@sympatico.ca> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 07:45:49 -0600 Message-ID: <86ad3frxma.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 17 Anna writes: > However, if Peterson is determined to leave, Duchovny would be a > wonderful replacement. I'd bet the chemistry with Helgenberger > would be mind-blowing ;-) I'm not a big fan of Helgenberger, so I was hoping they could get Gillian Anderson too. As far as I know, she hasn't exactly been putting out the blockbusters either. I've always thought of CSI as X-Files without the aliens and conspiracies anyway, what with the similarities in personality between Mulder and Grissom, and the way it's dark almost everywhere they go. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Feb 19 07:48:10 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Apprentice rerun? References: <403437F2.17D3F359@cox.net> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 07:48:10 -0600 Message-ID: <8665e3rxid.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 Marcia Rovins writes: > Anyone have a clue why they reran last week's Apprentice? Sweeps > sure aint what it used to be. Because a rerun of The Apprentice is better than a first-run of most of NBC's stuff. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Feb 23 05:15:45 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films,rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Lost in translation References: Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 05:15:42 -0600 Message-ID: <86u11ikpwh.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 13 "Ken from Chicago" writes: > But it occurred to me that maybe, just perhaps, could it be > . . . possible . . . that there might be . . . oh . . . one or two > . . . common American phrases or figures of speech that might > confuse or maybe even amuse non-Americans? -- Aaron From nobody Mon Feb 23 05:44:15 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Diane Sawyer's Mel Gibson Interview References: <20040218173126.19644.00000905@mb-m22.aol.com> <71396465.0402201749.9bbfa25@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 05:44:13 -0600 Message-ID: <86ptc6koky.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 50 jimmyzed@sbcglobal.net (jimmyz) writes: > What exactly is the purpose of the complaints of anti-Semitism > against this film? > To censor it? To ban it? To keep people from seeing it in one way or another. Pressure theaters to turn it down; convince people they shouldn't see it; whatever it takes. Same way community groups ban together once in a while to try to keep the latest "Showgirls" type movie out of local theaters. Of course, just like often happens in those cases, the people trying so hard to build controversy here (mostly just by shouting the word 'controversial' over and over) are just providing great buzz for the movie in the long run. > Should we stop saying that Islam is responsible for most of > terrorism the world is suffering today because Muslims don't want it > to be said? According to our President Bush, yes. Islam has absolutely nothing to do with it. In fact, terrorism runs completely counter to the Religion of Peace. This uproar about Gibson has to be the biggest to-do about nothing in ages. When Heston starred in Ten Commandments, did people protest that it showed Egyptians in a bad light? What really bugs the people who are so against this movie is that Gibson *believes*, and his movie may bring others to believe, or strengthen their faith. It's one thing for us Neanderthals out here in fly-over country to stick to our old-fashioned religions, but smart, talented, good-looking, rich Hollywood types are supposed to be above that. If they get a yearning for some sort of higher power, they're supposed to at least be hip enough to go for something obscure that doesn't stress about sin or rules, not a Church that white-haired quilting grandmas all over the country attend faithfully. If Gibson were a struggling nobody of a director who made a movie where Christ was really a con man who was banging Mary Magdalene on the sly and tricked Judas into taking his place on the Cross, the same people who are freaking out about this movie would call that thoughtful art and throw NEA grants at it. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Feb 23 05:50:17 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: OT: Please help how would I do this???????? References: <20040221014803.20529.00000097@mb-m24.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 05:50:17 -0600 Message-ID: <86llmukoau.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 neverland@jwgibbs.cchem.berkeley.edu (Pete) writes: > This command line does it: > > cat words.txt | tr "," "\n" | sort >sorted.txt Nice useless use of cat. tr "," "\n" sorted.txt -- Aaron From nobody Wed Feb 25 06:35:53 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: TV norm; Homely men, attractive women References: <57679ca4.0402242302.1b2c8ab2@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:35:53 -0600 Message-ID: <86eksjfiae.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 18 archang@sfu.ca (Andrew Ryan Chang) writes: > Pretty much every single girlfriend or date on Drew Carey... No kidding. I pretty much lost interest in that show after the first episode I saw (the pilot, I think). Drew was dating this gorgeous girl with an incredibly sultry voice -- the kind of girl a guy like him (without his wealth and fame) would never get near in real life. She started working at his company, which had a no-dating-co-workers policy, so he broke up with her when he had to choose between his relationship and his job. Never mind the fact that the main theme of the show was how much he hated his easily-replaced cubicle-jockey job anyway. It was just stupid. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Feb 25 06:41:49 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Andy Rooney is a has-been clown References: <20040224175316.06733.00000297@mb-m05.aol.com> <20040224201242.24808.00000367@mb-m26.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:41:48 -0600 Message-ID: <86ad37fi0j.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 15 wishy13764@aol.com (Wishy13764) writes: > I like Andy Rooney's humor, and look forward to it each time. Most > of what he says has a ring of truth. Too bad you have to dig through so much of his crap to find it. He's amusing sometimes when he talks about stuff that doesn't matter, like labels on shampoo. It's just when he gets on politics that he sounds like he and Ted Kennedy got really drunk and wrote his script together. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Feb 25 06:46:51 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: "Scrubs" 2/24 Shocker (spoiler, yes there be one) References: <26462-403C1ABC-525@storefull-3273.bay.webtv.net> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:46:51 -0600 Message-ID: <8665dvfhs4.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 20 holefamily1@webtv.net (The Ghost of Grandpa Hole) writes: > They killed off Brendan Fraser!!! :~( WoW! That was quite a powerful episode. It took me completely by surprise, even though I'd heard speculation he'd be dying. When Cox suddenly realized they were at a cemetery, my first thought was that Jack had died, and he had completely flipped out so much he'd blocked it from his mind. Then I saw the picture on the casket, and realized he *had* sort of flipped out, but in a whole different way. It's going to be interesting watching this episode again and seeing the clues to what's really going on. Great, great show. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Feb 25 06:51:10 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Scrubs tonight, no spoiler References: Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 06:51:10 -0600 Message-ID: <861xojfhkx.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 muzicmakr@yahoo.com (michelle) writes: > I happened to watch tonight's episode with Brendan Fraser. > Excellent! I'm not a regular viewer, so I didn't know what to > expect. Wow. Well, that was an exceptional episode, so don't expect them to all be *that* good. It's generally a good show, though, and the only sitcom I watch. I'd say last night's is probably the best episode yet, and totally makes up for a bit of a drop in quality this season. They've still got it. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Feb 25 22:06:22 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Scrubs tonight, no spoiler References: <861xojfhkx.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> <20040225115834.09343.00000331@mb-m12.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 22:06:21 -0600 Message-ID: <86y8qqfps2.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 drpimpdaddi@aol.complaint (He Hate Retards) writes: > You mean the toilet on the roof wasn't a good episode? Not particularly. There's wacky, and then there's just dumb. Plus, after all the hype about Fox's guest appearance, the actual episodes were a bit of a let-down. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Mar 2 06:36:25 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Gillian Anderson in a CSI : New York series ? References: <3795ae2a.0403012127.247b7d9d@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 06:36:24 -0600 Message-ID: <86hdx74e9j.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 23 gaz201@hotmail.com (Jeff Stanton) writes: > Don't flame me, as I only read it in a magazine and am unsure how > true it really is, but I read a CSI New York spin off is being > seriously planned and Gillian Anderson's name has been mentioned as > being a possible star of it. If it happens, I want my cut, since I suggested this a few weeks ago. Actually, I suggested her as a replacement for Helgenberger, but close enough, right? > The New York concept will apparently only have two main characters, > unlike the other two CSI's. Gillian sadly hasn't had a notable > acting gig other than XF in quite a while, but I hope she doesn't > take it on, as this territory she's covered before. Anything that gets Gillian Anderson back on my TV is a good thing. Make her a blonde, and I'll watch even if it's as bad as CSI:Miami. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Mar 2 06:44:04 2004 Newsgroups: alt.gossip.celebrities,rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Average Joe: I Don't Get It References: <5e8bb33c.0403012257.3a3c4e2b@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 06:44:01 -0600 Message-ID: <86d67v4dwu.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 19 "Johnny C" writes: > It's Fabio. Come on. I totally felt for Gil. I won't be able to > look her in the eyes. My opinion of her totally was shattered when > I first heard that on the Tonight Show. Fabio. Maybe you can explain it to me then, because I don't get it either. I could see finding it a little strange, but to actually throw a tantrum and dump her after weeks of pursuit? It's not like she said she wanted to name her kids Fabio and Fabia or invite the goof to family gatherings. Was Gil threatened by the fact that she'd already had a man buffer and prettier than him? My reaction would have been, "Wow, I always figured he was gay. Guess not. So, how'd you crazy kids meet?" -- Aaron From nobody Tue Mar 2 06:59:21 2004 Newsgroups: alt.gossip.celebrities,rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Average Joe: I Don't Get It References: <5e8bb33c.0403012257.3a3c4e2b@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 06:59:18 -0600 Message-ID: <868yij4d7d.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 27 "Love L.A." writes: > Larissa made a very poor choice choosing "pretty boy" over someone of > substance who obviously loved her. The editors must have really hated her for her stupid final choice. They spent 45 minutes showing us -- mostly in Larissa's own words -- that there was absolutely nothing there of value with Gil. If there was any spark or rapport between them that originated above the waist, the editors kept it well hidden. Then she picks him anyway, and rationalizes it as 'instinct.' Well, yeah, if you mean the instinct that makes you want to mate with the biggest, strongest, prettiest buck in the herd. Her parents must be so proud. Of course, that's pretty much how everyone does it on the American dating scene today: wander around bumping into things until someone makes our loins tingle, and then hope like hell to find something of value on the inside of that person. It's just usually not laid out so blatantly for us. This show might be the 'realest' of the reality TV shows. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Mar 3 10:47:38 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Gillian Anderson in a CSI : New York series ? References: <3795ae2a.0403012127.247b7d9d@posting.google.com> <86hdx74e9j.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 10:47:38 -0600 Message-ID: <86ptbt27yt.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 17 "Templeton Peck" writes: > I was with you up until the make her blonde comment. No sir. We got > enough blondes on TV. Blasphemy! > We need more redheads. Well, yeah, I wouldn't complain about that either. But they'll have to do *something* to keep us from thinking "Scully" every time we see her. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Mar 3 10:49:33 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Gillian Anderson in a CSI : New York series ? References: <3795ae2a.0403012127.247b7d9d@posting.google.com> <0K91c.650998$JQ1.554664@pd7tw1no> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 10:49:32 -0600 Message-ID: <86llmh27vn.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 17 "W. Blaine Dowler" writes: > Her X-Files contract prevents her from playing a law enforcement > officer for three years after the end of The X-Files, or from > playing an FBI agent for five years, without permission from Fox. > (It's basically a non-compete clause; similar roles are restricted.) > This might get in the way, so I wouldn't hold my breath (although > I'd like to see it happen.) Aren't CSIs not really cops, though? That's the impression I've gotten, but then I only started watching last season. Might be a loophole. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Mar 3 11:02:05 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Larissa, not so awwwwsome after all References: <20040303065932.22806.00000713@mb-m10.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 11:02:05 -0600 Message-ID: <86hdx527aq.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 18 smkmirrors@aol.com (SmkMirrors) writes: >>I'm waiting for Average Jane. > This will never bappen. While it is not a problem male bashing in > hollywood, you will not see women made fun of in the same way as the > average Joes were. They could do it, but the male contestant would have to be the victim of the twists and surprises, not the females. Otherwise it'd be too mean-spirited, like you say. And of course the women would all be well above average in looks, since Hollywood typically casts someone like Jeananne Garofalo as an ugly duckling. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Mar 3 18:59:08 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,alt.politics Subject: Re: Another Ploy by The Right References: <6a2ad276.0403031420.67e72b98@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 18:59:06 -0600 Message-ID: <86ptbtzaud.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 28 schumy2@lycos.com (schumy) writes: > This whole same sex marriage ban announcement charade is a ploy > timed with the Presidential election this year. > It's yet another made-up "issue" to get non-rich people to vote for > Republicans. I don't care to debate gay marriage here, but I just had to say that your basic premise is stupid. Campaign issues can't be "made-up"; either voters care about them or they don't. If voters care about gay marriage, then a candidate can only discover it and take advantage of it, he can't create it. If voters don't care, he can't use it as an issue no matter how much he might want to. Republicans tried to make Bill Clinton's philandering an issue in 1996 even though voters repeatedly insisted they didn't care. Ask Bob Dole how well that worked out. What you really mean is: How dare Bush bring up an issue that could help him win broad-based support! He's supposed to stay in that wealthy, tax-cuts-for-the-rich, religious-fundamentalist, racist, out-of-touch corner we're trying to paint him into, and leave the popular positions for the Democrats! -- Aaron From nobody Thu Mar 4 16:02:06 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: why can't conservatives have their own hollywood? References: <95cfd468.0403021540.1d141600@posting.google.com> <40452a3b$0$4889$a32e20b9@news.nntpservers.com> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 16:02:05 -0600 Message-ID: <86y8qguv8i.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 25 "D.F. Manno" writes: > Yeah, all those poor conservatives just can't get a break in > Hollywood. I mean people like Arnold Schwarzenegger, Charlton > Heston, Fred Thompson, Michael Moriarty, Mel Gibson, James Woods, > Ben Stein, Joan Collins, Rick Schroder, Shannen Doherty, and Bruce > Willis, just to name a few, are having so much trouble finding > acting work. You know, the fact that anyone who makes this argument always whips out the same list of a dozen people pretty much proves the point you're trying to argue against. The exceptions that prove the rule. I could name a dozen different Hollywood liberals every day for months without needing to repeat myself. Not that I particularly *care* that Hollywood is overwhelmingly left-wing; that's probably the way it should be. And how /conservative/ is Arnold really, anyway? Being a Republican hardly makes you a conservative, anymore than being a Democrat surely makes you a liberal. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Mar 5 06:31:29 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: why can't conservatives have their own hollywood? References: <95cfd468.0403021540.1d141600@posting.google.com> <86y8qguv8i.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> Organization: ESC Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2004 06:31:29 -0600 Message-ID: <86u113tqzi.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 27 gwangung@u.washington.edu (R. Tang) writes: > If Hollywood is overwhelmingly left wing, yet right wing actors and > directors can get work, what is the argument about anti-right wing > conspiracy anyway? > Your point may have some validity, but you aren't supporting it > very well. That's because I'm not arguing the point you're ascribing to me. I never claimed there was a conspiracy to keep all right wingers out of Hollywood. I just said most people in Hollywood are left-wing, which naturally means most of what they produce has a left-wing bent. That's about as surprising and controversial as the sun coming up in the east. Hauling out a short list of so-called conservatives who have made it doesn't prove anything otherwise. I would be interested to know how many Hollywood "conservatives" were open about their political beliefs *before* they became successful. Did people know that Arnold, Gibson, and Willis voted Republican back when they were struggling to break into the business, or did they keep their political beliefs in the closet until they were proven stars? -- Aaron From nobody Sat Mar 6 19:41:13 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: APPRENTICE References: <20040306015715.25108.00000825@mb-m07.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2004 19:41:11 -0600 Message-ID: <8665dhph6w.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 22 twc6@aol.comunardsin (Twc6) writes: > Except she shouldn't have gone this week, since she was the one > person on her team to disagree with the artist they chose AND she > was the one person on her team who managed to sell ANYTHING. As they say over in rec.sport.baseball, sample size. When you need $13,000 to win, there's very little difference between selling one item for $900 or zero items for $0. When it only happens once in a full day of selling, it could be she just lucked into the one customer who really liked that artist. She'd have to sell more than one item to prove she was actually better at it than the others. Truth is, they all failed that specific task, so it made sense for Kwame and Trump to look elsewhere besides the art sales for reasons to fire someone. Omarosa has supplied a whole barrel-full of reasons; Troy hasn't. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Mar 8 11:42:56 2004 Newsgroups: alt.tv.survivor Subject: Re: Has the List Held Up? (No Spoilers; Keeping This Vague) [Was Re: Probst's Words to Sue & Others Tonight] References: <40481138.34345857@news.west.earthlink.net> <86k71vo6gt.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 11:42:54 -0600 Message-ID: <86oer7i6ap.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 29 "Caroline" writes: > But I am wondering: Are there one or two said to be reliable spoiler > lists? One from ChillOne; another from some other source? I haven't actually seen the ChillOne list, but I've heard it's very similar to the sleek28 list, which I have seen. It was posted to rec.arts.tv, and I thought it was just someone's prediction until I got to the end of it. The sleek28 list is now 5-for-6, only predicting #5 wrong -- he picked Jerri, not Hatch. However, other things about sleek28's list post-semi-merge don't ring very true. He predicts Sue to go #6, but says it's because Lex and Shii Ann force her out. They weren't even on the same team. Surely anyone with enough inside information to put together a complete boot list would know why Sue left. My guess is that the show intentionally leaked a boot list which started with a lot of accurate things about the first few boots, so the spoiler sites would all suck it up. Now, even if a true spoiler comes out, it'll be harder for people to trust it. Either that or someone is just having fun mixing fact and fiction and seeing how many people can predict which is which. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Mar 8 12:49:03 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Fear Factor: All Female References: Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 12:49:03 -0600 Message-ID: <86d67ni38g.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 15 Ablang writes: > The teen fear factor is a great idea, especially when you > wonder how they would do on the "eating gross stuff" segment of the > show. I fear this could never happen due to the fact that teenagers > aren't allowed to give their own consent, and what parent would > allow their teen to do this show? They've already had parent/kid combos on the show. I'm sure lots of parents out there would be thrilled to sign their kids up. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Mar 8 12:51:10 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: 'Average Joe' Finale: I Can't Believe It's Not Better References: <20040308070622.06623.00001101@mb-m05.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 12:51:09 -0600 Message-ID: <868yibi34y.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 anim8rfsk@aol.comNOSPAM (ANIM8Rfsk) writes: > << Larissa, ever as sharp as a Tic Tac, is able to deduce that Brian > is talking about himself and not Boston at all. He gives her a > lobster. >> > And she throws it back into the sea - foreshadowing at it's finest. Except that Brian named the lobsters Gil and Jim, after his competitors in the final three. So you could easily take it as foreshadowing that she was going to reject them and pick Brian. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Mar 9 09:52:33 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: * Lifetime Cleavage awards @ @ Curtis and Sarandon References: <20040307190516.12245.00001149@mb-m02.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 09:52:33 -0600 Message-ID: <86r7w2dnlq.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) writes: > (Hey, I'm a 46-year-old white guy and I just used the word "dis" in > a sentence. Does that mean that the term is now officially dead?) I'm a 34-year-old white guy, and I've used it too. Problem is, I can't think of a one-word synonym for it. I don't think 'disrespect' really has the same meaning. Everything else I can think of is either multiple words (put down) or sounds awkward. -- Aaron From nobody Tue Mar 9 18:01:41 2004 Newsgroups: alt.gossip.celebrities,rec.arts.tv,alt.showbiz.gossip,alt.tv.survivor Subject: Re: Omarosa References: <8nao4090v85ggqj0er390ch0909hh8ktp4@4ax.com> <3zc3c.21527$rs2.12826@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com> <607c00f6.0403091421.3ec750a5@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 18:01:39 -0600 Message-ID: <86r7w1d0yk.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 17 lucieboone@yahoo.com (lucie) writes: > Does anybody else wonder why she didn't have any powder, dust, > residue, whatever in her hair if she was hit with plaster or cement? > Her hair is black, right? Wouldn't there be a trace of something > there if she was hit with falling ceiling? She did brush some plaster dust out of her hair, but that didn't mean much. As I recall the scene, her reaction wasn't "Ouch" so much as "Did I just feel something hit me?" She reached up and brushed the dust out of her hair, and realized that, indeed, something had fallen and hit her hair. It really was that much of a non-event. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Mar 10 16:05:27 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: The Next Apprentice? References: <20040310135042.25923.00001001@mb-m01.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 16:05:27 -0600 Message-ID: <86wu5s8ijc.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 milchama@aol.comscalpers (Ian Ian) writes: > NBC also renewed The Apprentice for a thrid season, but they are > considering finding another high profile business leader to run it > instead of Trump. I don't think it would be nearly as good with someone else. Trump just has a perfect combination of seriousness, business acumen, ego, and over-the-top goofiness that really works well on the show. There's really no one else like him, or at least no one else who's recognizable that can fit all those requirements. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Mar 11 06:22:56 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Bush to learn spanish References: <20040310185149.25073.00001121@mb-m07.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 06:22:56 -0600 Message-ID: <868yi78ten.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 wishy13764@aol.com (Wishy13764) writes: > so he could try to get more spanish voters to his side. First he has > to learn english. He already speaks Spanish. It's Math he seems to have some trouble with. His people seem to think that picking up a few extra percentage points of the Mexican-American vote is worth losing a few points of the everyone-else vote. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Mar 11 06:27:13 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Whoopi, season 2? References: <20040310102242.29635.00001156@mb-m21.aol.com> <20040310170751.25108.00001034@mb-m07.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 06:27:12 -0600 Message-ID: <864qsv8t7j.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 19 S John M-M writes: > You actually think that? Granted the show itself, IMO, doesn't > really showcase her talent... Seinfeld's the only show I can think > of that managed to sucessfully translate a comedian's presence into > a sitcom... I think Tim Allen's show was pretty much a direct translation of his comedy routine. I'd probably throw Bill Cosby in there too. > but, you think Whoopi Goldberg's "a hack"? I never have thought she was funny, although she was pretty good in "Loaded Weapon I." -- Aaron From nobody Sat Mar 13 06:38:18 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: The Apprentice's Kwame - No passengers? References: <20040312113257.02859.00001335@mb-m15.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 06:38:18 -0600 Message-ID: <864qss53d1.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 43 twc6@aol.comunardsin (Twc6) writes: > It's the second week in a row Troy has done the exact same > thing. It's really annoying that Trump and his assistants haven't > pointed this out, because Ereka was fired for doing the same > thing. It's interesting that they are giving the guys a pass on > this, but the women got raked over the coals. It's completely different (and last week it was Kwame, not Troy). When Ereka sent Katrina upstairs, she took Bill to the boardroom, and proceeded to proclaim how great a job Bill did. She made it obvious that she was trying to force Trump to fire Nick by using Bill as a pawn. Then she made it even more obvious when she admitted that Nick and Katrina worked as a team on the task, so if he deserved to be there, so did Katrina. Heidi and Kwame both did a poor job on this task, so whichever one Troy picked was a good candidate for firing. He certainly wasn't keeping Heidi as a pawn, since that would just get himself fired. Since they both stunk, and neither one has done anything special in the past either, Troy used loyalty and friendship as a tie-breaker. Trump is big on loyalty, so I don't think he'd have a problem with that. Ereka put loyalty and friendship first, ahead of all practical considerations, and she got fired for it. Also, Kwame stunk at selling rides, but he did handle the finances and the incentive program, so he contributed something. Heidi appeared to contribute nothing, and her embarrassing display in the afternoon, complete with cursing, might have actually driven away potential customers. So you *can* make a case for firing Heidi based on this task, although it's not as clear-cut as most of the past ones have been. And of course, you should never say about reality TV, "So-and-so didn't do such-and-such." For all we know, they blasted Troy for saving Kwame, but we didn't see it because it wasn't as interesting as the stuff we did see and doesn't have any effect on the game in the future. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Mar 13 06:55:32 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Apprentice 3/11 References: <31c5522d.0403120729.3cfe49bc@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 06:55:31 -0600 Message-ID: <86znak3nzw.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 24 bklyntv@yahoo.com (Scott) writes: > I've only been watching since about 1/2 way, but I haven't seen > Kwame contribute anything. You didn't miss anything. In week #1, he picked a spot for their lemonade stand (since he's the native NYer) which sucked. In week #2 he gave a lackluster PowerPoint presentation. In week #4 he was project manager for the Planet Hollywood task, but you couldn't tell it because Bill was handling everything while Kwame sold autographs and merchandise outside. Most other weeks he's been invisible. > Katrina's so abrasive. She really looked disgusted when they won, and even more so when she found out the reward was going to be spending the whole day with the team on a yacht. It really looked like she wanted them to lose so she could explode on Nick and Bill in the Boardroom, and either take one of them out or go join her BFF Ereka in Loserville. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Mar 13 07:11:14 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Apprentice 3/11 References: Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 07:11:14 -0600 Message-ID: <86vfl83n9p.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 71 void@no.spam.com writes: > So Carolyn was talking to Heidi. No surprise there. But NBC > certainly mislead us by suggesting that she provoked Carolyn's > comment. No such thing happened; her comment was in response to > Donald. I thought after Carolyn made it clear that she wanted Heidi gone, maybe Trump would fire Troy anyway, so he'd be the one crossing her. Yeah, sometimes I think the people making the promos just get rumors about the show third-hand, instead of actually watching it to see what happens. It's like when you read a novel, and the people on the cover don't look anything like the descriptions of the character inside. > I finally saw something good out of Amy. It was her idea to plaster > ads on those carts. Bill took the idea and ran with it, and it led > to victory. Almost every winning idea any team has had so far has come from Amy or Troy. Amy came up with the shirts with ribbons in the flea-market episode; she negotiated for the golf club that won the third episode; she had the Shooter Girls idea that brought a lot of drinkers into Planet Hollywood; she was the lead on the team that brought in winning auction packages from people like Regis Philbin and Carson Daly, despite having Tammy along screwing things up; and she spent a whole day with Omarosa and only kicked her three times. Pretty impressive. The others don't seem to look to her for leadership the way they do Troy, though. Troy was made PM his first week, and he was also the first one to do it twice and then three times. When he's not officially PM, you still see his teammates look to him for advice and decisions. > Troy picking Kwame to go up to the suite, especially after his > comment about how they've agreed to make decisions based on how well > each other has done, was laughable. From what they showed, I think > Heidi did a better job than Kwame. Based on what? It looked to me like Kwame did nothing, and Heidi did less than nothing, with her dancing around cursing. > It was also a little surprising to see Troy and Heidi get along fine > after Heidi had called him an a$$hole. I think she was blowing off a little steam, and didn't really mean it. Troy danced around the question of whom to keep long enough for her to know he *really* didn't want to make that choice, so she didn't seem to hold it against him. She probably realized that she really did deserve to be picked. > Donald has shown himself to have a poor memory. Yes, Troy has been > PM 3 times. But he has lost only twice (he lost this one and the > lemonade one, and he won the apartment one), not every time like > Donald said. Troy didn't help himself by not pointing out the fact > that he did win once. Amy is probably the favorite now, even though > Troy has probably had more creative ideas than the rest of the > players combined. Troy probably pointed out that fact, but it was edited out to fit the theme of the night, which seemed to be: Apprentice tries to say something in his own favor; Trump or a Viceroy cuts him off with a quick pointed comment; Apprentice shuts up and hangs head. Accompanied by a sort of 'thud' from the sound guys. There were several moments like that where an Apprentice seemed to give up way too easily, so I'm guessing they edited out some protesting to make it look like more of a one-sided dressing-down. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Mar 13 07:27:07 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: The Next Apprentice? References: <20040310135042.25923.00001001@mb-m01.aol.com> <86wu5s8ijc.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> <31c5522d.0403111339.1a615a72@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 07:27:07 -0600 Message-ID: <86r7vw3mj8.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 85 bklyntv@yahoo.com (Scott) writes: > I disagree, reality TV stars are created every day. People who reach > the top of their profession are very rarely short on personality. Most viewers don't know most of the people you list, though, whereas everyone's heard all sorts of stuff about Trump, so viewers have an idea why they'd want to tune in. I'll bet a lot of people tuned in to the first Apprentice simply to see what that weird rich dude was up to this time. Then they stuck around because he delivered the goods. There are lots of people who could do a good job with the show, but they wouldn't all have the draw Trump has. > Bloomberg couldn't do it as he's too busy being mayor, but I think > he'd be good. People who don't follow politics or live in NY don't know the guy at all. > Guiliani's running a consulting firm and he's got a mouth made for > reality TV. Not quite ditto Bloomberg, but seems too staid from out here in fly-over country. We mostly know him as the stern-but-comforting administrator who handled 9/11 well and made it safe to be a tourist in NY again after previous mayors let crime run rampant. Seems like a good guy, but not TV-interesting at all. > Bonnie Fuller, editorial director of American Media (publisher of The > Star and nearly every other tabloid as well as Men's Fitness and some > other titles) is a forceful personality and having worked with her > myself, could DEFINATELY be edited for some compelling TV. Who? > While we're on publishing personalities, Anna Wintour anyone? > (Probably too reserved and chilly, but then that could be fun also.) See above. > Steinbrenner's a great suggestion, and has experience having > appeared on "Seinfeld." (OK, I know, it wasn't really him). Except that he's actually unlikable in a way that Trump's not. Trump, on this show at least, is actually a likable guy with a decent sense of humor. That's not to say I think he'd be great to work for, but for the show, it works. I'm not sure Steinbrenner could pull that off. In his appearance on this show, he just seemed a little creepy and slow. > Rupert Murdock? Head of News Corp (FOX, New York Post, etc...) Like Bloomberg, just a name for most people who've heard of him. > Jeff Zucker head of NBC? Why not? Only TV junkies have heard of him. > Michael Eisner? Assuming he keeps his job long enough to film a > season. Almost ditto Zucker. A little more name recognition, but no clue to his personality. > Don't know much about her, but Sherry Lansing is a big Hollywood > studio chief, and that could be interesting. Who? > Bruce Ratner recently bought the NJ nets for $300 million and > intends to move them to Brooklyn into a new $2.5 Billion > development. Could be an excellent setting. Who? > I hear Martha Stewart may be looking for work! She might actually be the best one on the list, in terms of wide-spread name recognition and people tuning in to see if she's really as /whatever/ as they've heard she is. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Mar 13 07:34:13 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: THE APPRENTICE References: <40523065.AD27A20B@boeing.com.invalid> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 07:34:12 -0600 Message-ID: <86n06k3m7f.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 13 Default User writes: > It seemed as though they were all surprised that only two would go > in this time. I would have thought the rules would have been > explained to them. You don't watch much reality TV, do you? It's pretty much a given that they're going to try to surprise the players a couple times. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Mar 17 10:24:27 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Crossing Jordan 3/14 23rd Psalm Version? References: <20040316165757.06226.00003411@mb-m19.aol.com> <1409881115fac373adb48c5b0aa6b5f3@news.teranews.com> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 10:24:27 -0600 Message-ID: <868yhz30hw.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 38 "Brandy  Alexandre" writes: > I agree about jarring. The "modern" didn't even seem to have the > correct interpretation from the way I learned it. And, like I said, > I don't believe the Catholic church endorses rewrites, especially in > rituals. Generally not, although you never know when your local priest or bishop will decide to ignore the rules and start having interpretive dance instead of the Gospel or something. The Church has been trying to crack down on parishes making up the Mass as they go along, but Rome is a long ways away. It doesn't help that the Vatican burned up a lot of moral authority as far as American Catholics are concerned by scolding us for overthrowing a dictator who punished dissidents by throwing them in shredders and putting their children in prison. Aaaaanyway, my New American Bible, which is used for the Catholic Mass, has: The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want. In verdant pastures he gives me repose; Beside restful waters he leads me; he refreshes my soul. He guides me in right paths for his name's sake. Even though I walk in the dark valley I fear no evil; for you are at my side With your rod and your staff that give me courage. We've dropped the thees and thous, but with words like verdant and repose, it still sounds "churchy." I'm kind of surprised 'he' isn't always capitalized, but it's not in my 1970 edition. -- Aaron From nobody Wed Mar 17 18:10:47 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Tonight's "Century City" premiere References: <170320040727036687%roy@hellvision.com> Organization: ESC Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 18:10:47 -0600 Message-ID: <868yhz10c8.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 25 Roy Knable writes: > I agree with the reviewer in USA Today. Much too preachy, as > typified by the "father's" how dare you speech. Initially I was excited to see a futuristic show coming out, but I never made it past the promos. They just screamed heavy preachiness to me. Looks like I guessed right. > And don't even get me started on Anthony Zerbe. Watching a 68 > year-old do boy-band dance moves (at least with his hands) is > nauseating, even if they ripped off "Cocoon" with a bit of > breakdancing by his double. Ah, one of my most-hated TV cliches: old people gettin' jiggy. > Looks like poor Nestor Carbonell has picked another short-lived > series to follow his few episodes on The Tick. Too bad; he was good on that show. -- Aaron From nobody Thu Mar 18 06:28:56 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Crossing Jordan 3/14 23rd Psalm Version? References: <20040316165757.06226.00003411@mb-m19.aol.com> <1409881115fac373adb48c5b0aa6b5f3@news.teranews.com> <868yhz30hw.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> Organization: ESC Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 06:28:54 -0600 Message-ID: <86ad2egwzd.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 13 "D.F. Manno" writes: > I suggest the Vatican's near-total lack of moral authority these > days is due to pedophile priests, bishops who covered up for them, > Rome's defense of those bishops, and the church's unbelievably > callous suggestions that the pedophile priests are the real victims. You're absolutely right; those things haven't helped either. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Mar 19 07:05:14 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: 'deux ex machina' and other fashionable terms? References: <1d7e07b1.0403162344.61700f17@posting.google.com> <7jxithsm.fsf@therogoffs.com> <3c85u65p.fsf@therogoffs.com> Organization: ESC Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 07:05:14 -0600 Message-ID: <86wu5hasxh.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 David Rogoff writes: > That's the point - it sounds really cool in French, but is really > stupid in English. Maybe that's John Kerry's problem: he should be doing all his speeches in French. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Mar 19 07:11:41 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Tonight's "Century City" premiere References: <121k50lbu4t30i0t78842135tbvrtrs9u5@4ax.com> Organization: ESC Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 07:11:41 -0600 Message-ID: <86smg5asmq.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 17 Barry Margolin writes: > I'm guessing that the holographic conferencing is relatively new in > 2030. When current video-conferencing first started, it was also > pretty poor quality, but people who wanted to be on the cutting edge > put up with it. Heck, we could probably have holographic conferencing now, if anyone wanted it. The technology certainly isn't 25 years away. I know companies that have expensive video-conferencing equipment gathering dust while they fly people back and forth across the country every day, simply because that's what they're comfortable with. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Mar 22 15:18:17 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Why TiVo is doomed References: <405f101f.6917260@news.individual.net> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 15:18:17 -0600 Message-ID: <861xnka8di.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 22 dimlan17@yahoo.com (David) writes: > from abcnews.com > > TiVo Will Die > Three Trends Spell Doom for the Popular Personal Video Recorder > By Jim Louderback > Fast-forward to today. Nearly half of what the industry calls > multichannel homes (those with cable or satellite) receive their TV > in digital form. He destroys his own argument right here, but doesn't even realize it because everyone he knows fits into his "nearly half." If "nearly half" have cable or satellite, that means *more than half* don't. As long as Radio Shack still sells rooftop antennas, there will be a market for standalone PVRs. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Mar 22 15:39:17 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Donald Trump commercial References: Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 15:39:17 -0600 Message-ID: <86wu5c8su2.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 13 Crowfoot writes: > Watch out; this rich dork will be running for Prez next, now that > he's got all this air time racked up. Maybe the Dems could draft him at their convention. Then John Kerry could go run for President of France, or Vietnam, or some country he actually likes. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Mar 22 17:38:52 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Why TiVo is doomed References: <405f101f.6917260@news.individual.net> <861xnka8di.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> <08nu50lksls3qn08mbt9u8lcjomvrg7h22@4ax.com> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 17:38:52 -0600 Message-ID: <86n0688nar.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 Donna B writes: > He's saying that nearly half of 'however many homes have cable or > satellite', not that nearly half of us have cable or satellite. The > number of US homes that do not have either cable or satellite is so > small that Nielsen et al consider it statistically > insignificant. I've also heard 98% have|2% don't have. Years ago, 10 > years ago or more, I believe the number was at 80% have|20 % don't. Cripes. You'd think I slept through Reading Comprehension 101. Never mind. I didn't realize the number had gotten so low. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Mar 26 05:40:26 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Apprentice: Biggest mistake ever promos... References: <20040326002828.27035.00000105@mb-m12.aol.com> Organization: ESC Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 05:40:26 -0600 Message-ID: <864qsbq1jp.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 22 "Michael H." writes: > The inane choice to offer a $300 car RENTAL as a big draw prize. I > thought the $1000 the guys were doing was lame, until I saw that > that was more the 3x what the other team did. It wasn't a great idea, but biggest mistake ever? Hardly. I can think of several worse ones: Sam keeping his two salesmen, Troy and Nick, in the suite much of negotiation day; Jason not meeting with the client; Kwame riding a bike around half the day without a single fare; Omarosa signing up for the show.... Despite having a much worse idea, Versacorp team still registered far more gamblers who spent something like 80% as much as Protege's gamblers. It was actually one of the closest results yet of the season, so if Protege's idea was so great, like Trump said, Versacorp couldn't have been *that* bad. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Mar 26 05:45:52 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: "The Apprentice" 3/25 Huh? References: <19390-4063B8F9-277@storefull-3278.bay.webtv.net> Organization: ESC Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 05:45:52 -0600 Message-ID: <86zna3omq7.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 holefamily1@webtv.net (NOW STAND BACK YOU ITs Mr Hole) writes: > What was the deal with the 10 year old they had to negotiate with? > Some kind of joke, I don't understand. Basically that they're supposed to be the best of the best -- handpicked from thousands of bright young business people from across the country -- and they were getting pointers on success from a 10-year-old. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Mar 26 08:10:24 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: The Apprentice 3/26 References: <4063a988.3466671@shawnews> <98e6320a.0403260449.3fd8edd0@posting.google.com> Organization: ESC Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 08:10:23 -0600 Message-ID: <8665crog1c.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 21 dtschet@yahoo.com (Donna) writes: > Katrina on this morning's today show gave her opinion ~ She thinks > Nick will win. She feels he is manipulating Amy to believe that he > has a crush on her. According to Katrina, he does *not* and is using > that to derail her ambitions. It obviously just kills Katrina that Nick likes Amy better than her. Katrina was flirting with him big-time back at the flea-market task, and Nick went elsewhere. In fact, none of the guys showed much interest in her, which is just not right in her world. The sad thing is that she insists Nick and Amy must be playing each other, and one of them is going to 'win' (the relationship, not the game). Apparently in Katrina's world, two people can't just like each other without ulterior motives. -- Aaron From nobody Fri Mar 26 16:44:35 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Apprentice: Biggest mistake ever promos... References: <20040326002828.27035.00000105@mb-m12.aol.com> <864qsbq1jp.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> Organization: ESC Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 16:44:35 -0600 Message-ID: <86brmjmdnw.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 22 mike1cheng@yahoo.com (Mike) writes: > "Why should I meet with the client? The client has no bearing on > the ad campaign...the winner is choosen by the AD AGENCY (well > Donnie), NOT by the client. So if anything, I should find out what > Donnie wanted." Donnie presumably knows the client and will choose the ad campaign he thinks they'll like, so it still makes sense to meet with them and feel them out. There's also the fact that in real life, you'd definitely meet with the client, so you need to go through those motions in the game just to show you know that's important. Maybe in the context of the game you could shortcut around that, but if you're trying to impress Trump, you want to show that you'd perform well in real life, not just in the game. -- Aaron From nobody Sun Mar 28 19:58:51 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: **AMAZING RACE** -Another one? References: Organization: ESC Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2004 19:58:51 -0600 Message-ID: <86ekrch0ro.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 13 "Ekim Miller" writes: > Are there plans for another 'Amazing Race'? > Hadn't heard anything but hoping so... TAR5 is either being run right now or already completed. CBS is taking applications for TAR6, for what that's worth. There's a link at cbs.com. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Mar 29 07:14:12 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: **AMAZING RACE** -Another one? References: <07ef609bqk12678elec0a6dp8mcb4t48go@4ax.com> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 07:14:12 -0600 Message-ID: <86oeqfeqxn.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 11 John Duncan Yoyo writes: > AR5 has been run and is due to air this summer. Figure when the > current run of Survivor peters out. About four weeks ago? -- Aaron From nobody Sat Apr 3 07:55:01 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: APPRENTICE 4/1 References: Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2004 07:55:00 -0600 Message-ID: <86y8pdmaiz.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 29 void@no.spam.com writes: > Let me start out by saying that I remember someone posting about how > they read an article saying that in the apartment episode (the one > where Troy's team hadn't signed a lease with anyone with 10 minutes > to go), the producers sent someone in at the last minute to rent the > apartment. That's not what was claimed at all. The woman who rented the apartment turned out to be a journalist who had already talked to the landlord and had a handshake agreement to rent the place for $1200 (the landlord's asking price) before the show came along. The landlord agreed later to let the place be used for the show, and told this renter that if she signed an agreement with the team, he'd honor his original $1200 offer and ignore whatever amount she agreed to with Troy's team. She never claimed that the producers or the players knew anything about this side-deal. Her article also said some things that simply can't be true, like the claim that she was surprised to see herself on TV. Obviously there were cameras all around, and she had to have signed a release for her footage to be shown. She came off like a TV snob who didn't want her PBS-only friends to think she willingly got involved in something as tacky as a Trump reality show. -- Aaron From nobody Sat Apr 3 08:04:11 2004 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: survivor needs reruns----spoiler References: <406D5F1A.66B4@hotmail.com> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2004 08:04:11 -0600 Message-ID: <86u101ma3o.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 22 Lord Vader III writes: > Why does everyone keep saying the switch was rigged? IIRC, when > everyone got back from their lunches, Jeff told them to stand > anywhere. They then drew buffs from the container. If they had > stood in different places, it would have all been different. And a more mixed-up switch would have been more interesting. If they were rigging it, they wouldn't have designed the result they got. Nothing seems to be going right for the show this season. The players are mostly sheep; their main strategy consists of "boot anyone who did better than me last time"; I can't remember the last interesting challenge (and having one per week sure doesn't help that any); and it's being followed by another Burnett show that just kicks Survivor's ass in every way. When they try to throw in a twist like this tribe mixing, even that falls flat. -- Aaron From nobody Mon Jul 26 05:29:29 2004 Newsgroups: alt.tv.amazing-race,rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: lying on The Amazing Race References: <95a543c.0407241925.109c6859@posting.google.com> <4105973b.878800937@news.comcast.giganews.com> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 05:29:25 -0500 Message-ID: <861xizdptm.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 32 *bicker* <1NVAL1D@1NVAL1D.1NVAL1D> writes: > Lying to other players seems like a legitimate strategy. > The bowling moms did it, and it was pretty well executed, > and not horribly objectionable. As it turns out, this didn't happen. Marsha said in a post-show interview that she *overheard* the moms talking to a local about changing money. So if anyone lied, it wasn't to them. > What Charla did was lie to people outside the game -- for > all intents and purposes she lied outside of the game. > What's worse, she could have ended up pre-empting a > passenger, outside of the game. That's reprehensible > behavior. Eh. I'm not a traveller, but my observation of human nature tells me that people probably routinely claim false emergencies hoping to get the flight they want. Hell, I've seen people do it to get moved up in line at the grocery store. This looks to me like one of those situations where everyone involved knows that everyone else is lying, but there's a dance of protocol they have to go through. The person claiming the emergency just wants the seat; the ticket agent who says there's nothing he can do just hasn't been danced with enough yet. That's not to say I like it, and I'd like to see a rule change to eliminate it. But I think it's interesting that Charla and Mirna are taking way more heat for doing it than previous liars have. -- From nobody Sun Dec 19 19:12:03 2004 Newsgroups: alt.tv.survivor,rec.arts.tv,alt.tv.amazing-race Subject: Re: Why Do People Watch Extreme Makeover: Home Edition? References: Organization: ESC Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 19:12:02 -0600 Message-ID: <86fz21zsbh.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 sdfasa writes: > The show does something for a family that deserves it...They don't > take women that are insecure and give them nose jobs I've never seen it, so I'm curious: What does the family do to deserve it? Is it something like Habitat For Humanity, where they help build someone else's house before getting their own done? -- From nobody Mon Dec 20 06:12:18 2004 Newsgroups: alt.tv.survivor,rec.arts.tv,alt.tv.amazing-race Subject: Re: Why Do People Watch Extreme Makeover: Home Edition? References: <86fz21zsbh.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 06:12:17 -0600 Message-ID: <86zn09w4m6.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 12 mnc@admin.u.nu (Miguel Cruz) writes: > Someone who is down on their luck deserves a helping hand, even if > they don't participate in a Welfare to Work program. Ah, thanks. I don't want to argue that point, but the way the word was used made me think they had done something specific -- something their equally down on their luck neighbors hadn't, in other words. -- From nobody Mon Dec 20 08:12:35 2004 Newsgroups: alt.tv.survivor,rec.arts.tv,alt.tv.amazing-race Subject: Re: Why Do People Watch Extreme Makeover: Home Edition? References: <86fz21zsbh.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> <86zn09w4m6.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:12:34 -0600 Message-ID: <86hdmhvz1p.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 14 "*Calinda*" writes: > I've only barely watched the show a few times, but the ones I saw > was a home where the woman had taken in a lot of foster kids, and > needed better space for them, as they got older.. and where she had > sacrificed a lot of personal comforts so that she could provide more > for them. Sounds like an interesting show. If I got ABC here, I'd give it a try. -- From nobody Tue Feb 15 07:53:48 2005 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,alt.tv.amazing-race Subject: Re: "Amazing Race" renewed for 8th, 9th runs References: <1107944574.816317.320930@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <420ABF17.5F2079F9@his.com> <110mvp8bb806011@corp.supernews.com> <371np7F565kgqU1@individual.net> Organization: ESC Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 07:53:44 -0600 Message-ID: <86is4u6iaf.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 15 urban@panix.com (Michael Urban) writes: > I don't know whether I'll like it or not. But I don't think of it > as a format change, since TAR9 will go back to the adult-pair teams. > I think of it more as a different show that has the same title and > basic idea. That's what I was thinking. I wouldn't mind if TAR got the Law & Order or Trading Spaces treatment, so we could watch "TAR Family" and "TAR Collegiate" and "TAR Seniors" and.... I'd give them all a chance. -- From nobody Tue Feb 15 07:58:00 2005 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,alt.tv.amazing-race Subject: Re: "Amazing Race" renewed for 8th, 9th runs References: <1107944574.816317.320930@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <1107959517.267753.242770@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1107959829.620693.231820@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <36v11rF58uvtoU1@individual.net> Organization: ESC Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 07:57:59 -0600 Message-ID: <86ekfi6i3c.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 11 "PTravel" writes: > Though TAR is my favorite show, an overt Disney theme would be more > than enough reason not to watch it. Yeah, that would do it for me too. I'll give it a chance with kids, but not with Disney. -- From nobody Thu Mar 3 10:10:30 2005 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,alt.tv.amazing-race Subject: Re: House And Scrubs Fall To TAR References: <1109531684.519490.288180@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <5Y%Ud.2105$Ke.1984@fed1read03> <1109693198.008445.265180@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> Organization: ESC berkeley-unix) Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 10:10:29 -0600 Message-ID: <86ekewyakq.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 17 "Ken McElhaney" writes: > Given the fact that this season debuts in the same timeslot as TAR6 > did and has about the same competition, any rise in the ratings can > logically be bestowed on the presence of Rob 'n Amber since most of > CBS's marketing campaign for TAR7 has put these two front 'n center. > (Note: Comparing the TAR6 season premire to the TAR7 one tonight) I'd also say that since TAR6 was generally thought by viewers to be inferior to TAR5, for the TAR7 premiere to even hold the same ratings as TAR6's would be impressive. I know people who stopped watching partway through TAR6 out of disgust. If the TAR7 promos bring those people back, they must be doing something right. -- From nobody Fri Feb 3 08:21:10 2006 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,alt.tv.survivor Subject: Re: "Survivor" Is a Fire Dancer a fancy name for a Stripper? 2/2 (No Spoilers) References: <1138936165.564959.223700@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> Organization: ESC Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 08:21:07 -0600 Message-ID: <86u0bgfrqk.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 13 "Steven L." writes: > She is what is known as a "performance artist." Performance art is > like circus acrobatics but oftentimes more shocking and avant-garde. So, a stripper who can ignore any local decency laws because she calls it "art" and does it in a theater and you have to pay at the door instead of giving her dollar bills. -- From nobody Sat Feb 4 08:14:05 2006 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,alt.tv.survivor Subject: Re: "Survivor" Is a Fire Dancer a fancy name for a Stripper? 2/2 (No Spoilers) References: <1138936165.564959.223700@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <86u0bgfrqk.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> <43E43466.6F9B3AF6@survive-this.com> Organization: ESC Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2006 08:14:03 -0600 Message-ID: <86zml7dxec.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 Purple Rock writes: > Aaron Baugher wrote: >> So, a stripper who can ignore any local decency laws because she >> calls it "art" and does it in a theater and you have to pay at the >> door instead of giving her dollar bills. > I swear, you guys simply don't deserve to have wild, imaginative and > unselfconscious women in your lives. I didn't say it was a bad thing, did I? -- From nobody Mon Feb 6 16:44:07 2006 Newsgroups: alt.tv.survivor,rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Survivor12 Bullet Points-02-02-06 Episode References: <18654-43E2F5CC-1681@storefull-3278.bay.webtv.net> <1139249299.432358.50420@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> Organization: ESC Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2006 16:44:03 -0600 Message-ID: <86u0bcaz0s.fsf@cail.baugher.pike.il.us> berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 "DavidCrow" writes: > Who said she was hungry? If you wait until you are actually hungry > to finally eat something, your body is already starting to feel the > effects. She should eat whenever she has a chance as the next meal > is not guaranteed. I wonder how many contestants try eating something like that right off the bat, just to see if they can handle it while they aren't starving. After all, they can almost count on a gross-food eating contest that'll be worse than eating a single bug. -- From nobody Sat Apr 28 22:20:58 2007 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Does Alec Baldwin's Voicemail Hurt 30 Rock? References: <1177698791.452491.298730@r35g2000prh.googlegroups.com> <01r6339rmosaoes8i635qnacpn7stkjkcm@4ax.com> <795733105t07kc5c0va2lahamkl22j1g6p@4ax.com> From: Aaron Baugher Organization: Baugher Salvage and Really Wild Stuff Corporation Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2007 22:20:58 -0500 Message-ID: <86veffg92d.fsf@brinn.baugher.biz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 Stan writes: > Re: Does Alec Baldwin's Voicemail Hurt 30 Rock? Isn't it kind of expensive for Baldwin to fly to Hollywood for filming from France or wherever he moved to when we reelected Bush? He was good in "Hunt for Red October." I can't think of anything worthwhile since then. -- "Take what you need and leave the rest." From nobody Sun Apr 29 08:48:37 2007 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Does Alec Baldwin's Voicemail Hurt 30 Rock? References: <1177698791.452491.298730@r35g2000prh.googlegroups.com> <01r6339rmosaoes8i635qnacpn7stkjkcm@4ax.com> <795733105t07kc5c0va2lahamkl22j1g6p@4ax.com> <86veffg92d.fsf@brinn.baugher.biz> From: Aaron Baugher Organization: Baugher Salvage and Really Wild Stuff Corporation Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 08:48:37 -0500 Message-ID: <86ejm3fg0a.fsf@brinn.baugher.biz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 21 David Johnston writes: > He never said he'd leave the country in the first place so far as I > know. That came from a garbled version of Kim Basinger's statement > in an interview in Stern where she speculated he might leave. True, we don't have a recording of him saying it, but his wife seemed to think he did, and other famous Lefties were saying it at the time, so it fits. And now considering the bizarre stuff that we *do* have recorded as coming out of his mouth.... Besides, it's a lot more fun to ridicule him over something meaningless like that than to joke about him being a total prick to his own daughter. -- "Take what you need and leave the rest." From nobody Tue May 29 10:57:52 2007 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,rec.arts.sf.tv,rec.arts.startrek.current,alt.tv.star-trek.voyager Subject: Re: VOYAGER - it doesn't make sense to stop & gather food from a References: <1179954554.883556.89340@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com> <4lc6i.319130$2Q1.230412@newsfe16.lga> <1338723@news1.IPSWITCHS.CMM> From: Aaron Baugher Organization: Baugher Salvage and Really Wild Stuff Corporation Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 10:57:49 -0500 Message-ID: <86abvn7hc2.fsf@brinn.baugher.biz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 37 Sean Carroll writes: > Dan Lanciani wrote: >> When you beam something into space, where do the available >> particles come from? > Even the emptiest space in the Universe has a sea of virtual quantum > particles appearing and disappearing in various arbitrary > ways. There is a basic zero-point vacuum energy that can be tapped > in many ways, theoretically. Matter is always being created and > quickly 'destroyed' (turned back to energy) and then created again > and again, all over the place. If the transporter is capable of gathering up a bunch of zero-point forces and turning them into whatever matter/energy it has in its pattern buffer (as when Paris and Torres transported themselves into space when their shuttle was coming apart), then Voyager should never have had any shortages. Simply transport some warp plasma, or food, or replicator goo into space, to get the pattern in the buffer. Then put a GOTO in the code so it skips the "breakdown" step and goes right to forming the same pattern in space again. Or, since zero-point forces are everywhere, make it more convenient by creating it in a containment field, or the mess hall, or wherever you want it. I don't think there's one answer that satisfies all episodes. Sometimes the transporters acted like straight matter/energy converters, and sometimes they didn't. -- "Take what you need and leave the rest." From nobody Tue May 29 11:03:11 2007 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,rec.arts.sf.tv,rec.arts.startrek.current,alt.tv.star-trek.voyager Subject: Re: VOYAGER - it doesn't make sense to stop & gather food from a planet References: <1179954554.883556.89340@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com> <1180016010.642309.37950@h2g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> <7vre53lq4tehf8bcnrnlm0alsqhnjm2tmo@4ax.com> From: Aaron Baugher Organization: Baugher Salvage and Really Wild Stuff Corporation Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 11:03:08 -0500 Message-ID: <86646b7h37.fsf@brinn.baugher.biz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 23 Sean Carroll writes: > Every time someone transports out, their last pattern is stored in > the buffer. They've used this several times, I seem to recal, to > reconstruct a person lost in transport, even though their original > matter was destroyed or dispersed. They simply use the recorded > information to reconstruct a new copy, out of new matter, in the > exact same state the original was in at the moment of transport. Which raises the obvious question: Why didn't they make occasional "backup copies" of themselves? Yeah, yeah, it took large amounts of memory. Whatever. If one transporter can hold the patterns of a half-dozen people, the ship's memory ought to be able to do far more than that. If nothing else, one transporter room could be used to hold backups of the senior officers, and whenever they stopped at a starbase, they could make backups of themselves there too. -- "Take what you need and leave the rest." From nobody Wed May 30 07:33:09 2007 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,rec.arts.sf.tv,rec.arts.startrek.current,alt.tv.star-trek.voyager Subject: Re: VOYAGER - it doesn't make sense to stop & gather food from a References: <1179954554.883556.89340@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com> <4lc6i.319130$2Q1.230412@newsfe16.lga> <1338723@news1.IPSWITCHS.CMM> <86abvn7hc2.fsf@brinn.baugher.biz> From: Aaron Baugher Organization: Baugher Salvage and Really Wild Stuff Corporation Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 07:33:06 -0500 Message-ID: <86y7j64hkt.fsf@brinn.baugher.biz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 16 Anim8rFSK writes: > The only shortage they had was food, 'cause replicator power is > different. That was the shortage they talked about the most, but they often stopped at planets for one kind of phlebotinum or another. Surely it wasn't always for the replicators -- at least the 'babble terms weren't always the same. -- "Take what you need and leave the rest." From nobody Thu May 31 09:55:50 2007 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,rec.arts.sf.tv,rec.arts.startrek.current,alt.tv.star-trek.voyager Subject: Re: VOYAGER - it doesn't make sense to stop & gather food from a planet References: <1179954554.883556.89340@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com> <1180015890.807334.287360@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com> <1180032487.872789.293180@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com> <1180525701.132377.116320@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> From: Aaron Baugher Organization: Baugher Salvage and Really Wild Stuff Corporation Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 09:55:49 -0500 Message-ID: <863b1d3uve.fsf@brinn.baugher.biz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 35 SFTVratings writes: > Let's bring this down to TODAY'S world. Maybe you'll better > understand the concept. I need to conserve energy. Which is more > efficient: > > - driving to work and burning 2 gallons of gasoline per day > - staying at home and doing my work there (hence NOT burning gasoline) That's a pretty crummy analogy. Here's a better one: Which is cheaper, going out to eat, or staying home and cooking a meal? Normally cooking at home is much cheaper, but if the gas company turned off your gas, that's not an option, so you have to go out. That's the situation they presented on Voyager. They simply didn't have enough "replicator energy" to supply all their needs, so it wasn't a question of efficiency. Yeah, it's stupid, and yeah, it makes no sense, but there it is. > The same principle applies to the replicator. It makes more sense > for the crew to "stay home" and eat food in the ship, rather than go > taking a journey to a planet & wasting several megawatts of energy. How on earth can you compare the two, when both technologies are fictional and vaguely defined? Where are you getting "several megawatts," other than pulling it out of your hat? Why not "gigawatts" or "terrajoules"? We have absolutely no way of calculating how much either costs. -- "Take what you need and leave the rest." From nobody Mon Jun 4 13:05:34 2007 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,rec.arts.sf.tv,rec.arts.startrek.current,alt.tv.star-trek.voyager Subject: Re: VOYAGER - it doesn't make sense to stop & gather food from a planet References: <1179954554.883556.89340@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com> <1180015890.807334.287360@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com> <1180032487.872789.293180@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com> <1180525701.132377.116320@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> <863b1d3uve.fsf@brinn.baugher.biz> From: Aaron Baugher Organization: Baugher Salvage and Really Wild Stuff Corporation Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 13:05:31 -0500 Message-ID: <86tztnoas4.fsf@brinn.baugher.biz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 15 Sean Carroll writes: > For one thing, there's no such thing as 'terrajoules', unless you're > talking about some kind of strange Earth-energy. That was my point. As long as we're comparing measurements that we're pulling completely out of our asses, they might as well be in fictional sci-fi-ish units too. -- "Take what you need and leave the rest." From nobody Mon Jun 4 13:13:42 2007 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,rec.arts.sf.tv,rec.arts.startrek.current,alt.tv.star-trek.voyager Subject: Re: VOYAGER - it doesn't make sense to stop & gather food from a planet References: <1179954554.883556.89340@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com> <1180015890.807334.287360@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com> <1180032487.872789.293180@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com> <1180525701.132377.116320@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> <863b1d3uve.fsf@brinn.baugher.biz> <1180641690.371658.296680@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> From: Aaron Baugher Organization: Baugher Salvage and Really Wild Stuff Corporation Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 13:13:40 -0500 Message-ID: <86ps4boaej.fsf@brinn.baugher.biz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 34 SFTVratings writes: > Hence the title of my post: "it doesn't make sense". All they have > to do is divert some energy from the warp drive to the replicator & > make food. Agreed. The concept of "replicator power" that can't be converted to and from other "types" of power is ridiculous. >> How on earth can you compare the two, when both technologies are >> fictional and vaguely defined? Where are you getting "several >> megawatts," other than pulling it out of your hat? > (sigh) It was just a casual expression in a casual conversation. > Megawatts. Gigawatts. It doesn't matter.... the point is youre > burning a LOT more energy trying to climb a shuttle (laden with > Leola roots) out of a gravity well, then if you just walked to the > mess hall & replicated some meatloaf. Casual or formal, it still makes no sense. We can determine how much energy it takes to lift a pound of food into orbit, although it's going to vary based on the gravity and size of the planet. But we have no idea how efficient replication is, so how can you say it costs more or less than any other process? You aren't comparing apples to oranges, you're comparing apples to the mystery fruit behind door #3.