Print

[josemas]

I swear, the 3 networks (ABC in particular) often seem to act in very self-destructive ways, when it comes to how they treat their programming.

May be one reason they lagged behind CBS and NBC in the ratings for so many years back in the day.

Best

Joe

[narfstar]

Hollywood and Hollywood writers have always been out of touch with "real" people. I am sure all of us have watched shows and think real life is nothing like this when it was the intent that it be real. I liked both Kung-fu series but did not like the mysticism.

[profh0011]

Today I was SO worn out, I did something I can hardly believe...  With very few exceptions, I have not watched STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION since it was first-run (24 YEARS ago).  So far today, I have just watched the first 14 episodes in a row!!!

   You know what's funny?  The show is actually fun to watch in a sort-of tacky way.  Some of the character quirks are amusing, before they became really annoying.  And I'm reminded of some of the early relationship dynamics, which, it seems to me, got totally screwed over the longer the show was on the air.

   Like-- it's obvious Picard & Beverly are attracted to each other.  WHY did they spend most of the run not having this go anywhere?  Then there's Will Riker & Deanna Troi, who the moment they meet are like a really bad, awkward retread of Will Decker & Ilia.  They're so stiff at first it's unbelieveable.  I think all the acting got 10 times better after the 2-hour pilot.  Anyway, the story that introduces Lwaxana was a hoot, and also showed that, despite whatever the hell the problem is, Will & Deanna do somehow care for each other deeply.  So... WHY didn't it EVER go anywhere (until the 2nd feature film?).  Both Wesley & Data are far less annoying here than they later became.

   Strange but true:  while I saw the show from the first episode (and taped every single one of them), my Mom never saw it until somewhere in the 3rd or 4th season.  And when she did, she got HOOKED, big-time.  She started watching it every time it was on.  Since they got to running the stories twice a week, that means, while I saw each story ONCE, she saw each one FOUR TIMES!!!

   At some point, she got around to seeing reruns of the 1st season.  I always remember walking thru the dining room, where she spent most of her time sitting watching the small tv on the table, and noting she was watching the 2-hour pilot.  And she looked at me and says, "This is the DUMBEST story I've ever seen!"  That's after having seen dozens (maybe a hundred or more) later ones.

   I've noted I have a lot more tolerance for "bad" films when I can't sleep, and that may account for my being able to sit thru so much of this today.

   It's a shame that my favorite woman on the show's 1st season, Tasha, got killed off suddenly when Denise Crosby announced she wanted to quit the show.  She may not have been my favorite kind of woman as far as face or personality, but I have a feeling I might have gotten along with her.  By the episode "Angel One", she seemed to be loosening up a lot.  I can't understand the complaint about her "not having enough to do".  Her movie career sure didn't take off...  (Doesn't that seem to be a running thing in the 80's and beyond?  People quitting successful shows and then regretting it?)

   A few times early-on, I found myself thinking how this might have gone if Paramount hadn't been so cheap.  After the tremendous success of STAR TREK IV, the push was on to finally do a new tv series.  But because the actors' salaries kept getting bigger and bigger by then, the decision was made, purely monetary, to do an entirely new series, with CHEAPER actors.

   What stands out is the thought that the "cruise ship" version of the Enterprise was said to be a brand-new ship fresh out of dry dock (just like at the end of ST4).  And the "battle bridge" seen in Ep.1 was clearly the bridge from the movies.

   I liked how about 10 episodes in, you finally saw a rectangular hallway (like on the old show).  Those octogonal vertical halls from the movies get on my nerves.

[profh0011]

"I liked both Kung-fu series but did not like the mysticism."

The 1st timne I saw it was in the '85 tv-movie when you suddenly saw Caine meditating, and he was FLOATING above the floor (like he was Dr. Strange). I thought they were following SNL's lead, not realizing they'd already introduced this stuff in the 3rd season.

What annoyed me about ...THE LEGEND CONTINUES was the way the kept running certain episodes clearly out of order, when that show had SO MUCH continuity!  For example, I'm sure the 2nd & 3rd episodes were in the wrong order-- that early!-- and one of them introduced the supernatural stuff.

And would you believe, from what I've read, BOTH the old and new series had new episodes run AFTER the final stories? How dumb do you have to be to do that?

[narfstar]

I loved and watched every episode of ST:TNG originally but have only watched an occasional rerun. I hated Q and the whole Q concept.

[profh0011]

"I hated Q and the whole Q concept."

Ditto. As a one-off, or a very rarely-recurring figure, maybe, but he turned up way too often. And he was FAR more annoying than Squire Trelane ever was (heehee). The only episode with Q I actually liked was the one where he was de-powered by his people in punishment for being TOO arrogant, and Guinan wound up giving him all kinds of trouble.

Bizarre but true: in the late 80's, John DeLancie appeared in the pilot episodes of STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION, MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE and the reunion movie GET SMART AGAIN! (fortunately, only a cameo in the latter)

[bowers]

At about the same time, De Lancie was also a character on "Days of Our Lives". He played "Eugene" the nutty professor/scientist. Didn't have much to do except provide comic relief. I think his role lasted only for a short time, perhaps to help attract younger viewers. He left the series in a very original way- he was performing an experiment and POOF! He was gone. Really! Cheers, Bowers

[bowers]

Just finished watching the first episode of "Whitechapel"--WOW! I believe it was Paw who gave us a heads-up a few months ago to be looking for "Bedlam" and "Whitechapel". Was he ever on the money! Both are excellent programs. (Of course not for the kiddies) Now if we can just get another run of "Primeval" and "Sherlock". Also rewatched the Ken Burns 3-part "Prohibition" documentary. What I like most about Burn's work is that he doesn't get preachy or over-moralize the issue. Both sides were pretty fairly represented. Even learned a lot about the bootlegging biz in my own Pacific Northwest. Cheers, Bowers

[josemas]

Just finished watching the first episode of "Whitechapel"--WOW! I believe it was Paw who gave us a heads-up a few months ago to be looking for "Bedlam" and "Whitechapel". Was he ever on the money! Both are excellent programs. (Of course not for the kiddies) Now if we can just get another run of "Primeval" and "Sherlock". Also rewatched the Ken Burns 3-part "Prohibition" documentary. What I like most about Burn's work is that he doesn't get preachy or over-moralize the issue. Both sides were pretty fairly represented. Even learned a lot about the bootlegging biz in my own Pacific Northwest. Cheers, Bowers

I've also been enjoying Whitechapel and Bedlam.  Good stuff!  My thanks also to Paw for the heads up.

Didn't catch Burns' series Prohibition but will be soon starting a re-watch of his series The West.

Just learned over the weekend that BBC America will be running the 5th season of Primeval on Saturdays after Bedlam finishes.  Starts November 12, IIRC.  They'll run that right up til Christmas when it should be time for the Dr. Who Christmas episode.

From what I understand about Sherlock there won't be any new episodes until sometime in 2012 when we'll get three new episodes.  Episode titles I've seen listed are "A Scandal in Belgravia", "The Hounds of Baskerville", and "The Reichenbach Fall".

Best

Joe

[bowers]

Thanks for the schedule info, Joe. It's very much appreciated. I don't get BBC America as such, but I can get some of the series through my cable company's "On Demand" feature. As for the rest I have to wait until PBS picks them up. Cheers, Bowers

[paw broon]

Whitechapel etc. Glad to be spreading the word.  Is this the first Whitechapel?  Because, if so, there is a follow up with, what appears to be, the resurrection of the Krays.  And if you found the ripper a bit chilling, just wait.
My pal loaned me a set of Sgt Preston of the Yukon (series 2)  Just started watching them.  Entertaining.
Recently released on dvd is Pathfinders in Space (1960-61), a pre Dr. Who, British, childrens, s.f.serial - done live on the proverbial shoestring but quite imaginative for all that.  Set contains:- Pathfinders in Space; Pathfinders to Venus; Pathfinders to Mars.  It's on Amazon U.K. but it's region 2.
It seems that we're getting PBS here and I think my cable provider will have it.  Curious.

[josemas]

Paw, if I'm not mistaken, BBC America is going to be running the two Whitechapel series back to back (a total of six episodes).  We just had episode two of the first series this past Wednesday and will wrap that up next week.

Sometimes we get the Brit stuff almost as quick you do (Dr. Who) and other times it seems to take months or even years.

Best

Joe

[profh0011]

I just watched (again) one of the best STAR TREKs EVER!!!!!

   True to my earlier intent, and to my own shock, I am continuing to watch every ST in my collection in chronological order.  I watched ST5 in between seasons 2-3 of ST: TNG.  Now, after watching 111 episodes (in less than 2 weeks!!!!!), I watched ST6.  DAMN!!!!  I LOVE this movie!!!!

   It's pretty obvious they might not have decided to do a "final" ST film if ST5 hadn't been so seriously flawed.  I read the other day some feel ST5 almost "killed" the series.  While ST 2, 3, 4, & 6 are all SOOOOOO damn good, in retrospect, I do feel a bit of regret that nearly every ST movie was formed by behind-the-scenes B.S.  All the problems behind the 1st one, Nimoy wanting to quit during the 2nd one, Nimoy coming back in the 3rd one, The Enterprise having been blown up in the previous film when they did ST4... as for ST5, I'm not sure what to say.  After the end of ST4, couldn't they just, for once, have started a ST film with them already out there in space, like on, oh, say, every single episode of the original show???

   Even ST6 starts with The Enterprise-- ONCE AGAIN!!! -- in space dock.  The closest we got to the opening of a 60's episode was that The Excelsior was on patrol at the start.

   There's so much good stuff in here.  If this hadn't been designed to be a "farewell" movie, it could have stood alone as possibly the BEST ST film ever made.  I kinda think it already may be anyway.

   You know, the more I watch this, the more obvious it is that Valeris was supposed to be Saavik.  It would have had a lot more "emotional" depth if it had been.  Kirk hates Klingons for the death of his son.  Saavik-- it was hinted-- was in love with David, and would have had a motive for being part of the conspiracy.  All thru the film, Spock & Valeris have these question-and-answer things that refect what was going on in ST2.  Kim Catrall was getting Kirstie Alley's lines!

   I find it interesting that The President of Earth bears a striking resemblance to "Bem" from the cartoon episode.  Also, got a laugh to see Rene Aubojonois almost a year before he made his debut as Odo.

   Nicholas Meyer's love for Sherlock Holmes turns up in 2 bits of dialogue-- Spock, refering to "one of his ancestors", and Christopher Plummer saying "The game's afoot!" (he had starred as Holmes in MURDER BY DECREE, and a TV adaptation of "Silver Blaze" which I have never seen, before that).

   I should look up Chris Eidelmann.  What else did this guy do?  His score is FABULOUS!!!

   To sum up... ST6 blows every single TNG story completely out of the water on every level.  (And that reminds me, I think the engineering section in this movie is really the one from the TNG tv series.  It doesn't look anything like it did in any previous movie.)

   Did you ever notice how BIG the bridge is in this film?  For some reason, after ST4, they rebuilt the bridge completely from scratch for ST5, some said, to more resemble the one on the 60's series.  I may be wrong, but while the one in ST resembles the one in ST6, it looks MUCH bigger to me!  I'll have to check that out.

   To me, the only shame of this film is that it WAS the last one.

   And if they weren't gonna do anymore movies about Kirk, they damn well should have done some starring Sulu.

[josemas]

I've seen all of the Star Trek movies but (with the exception of the first movie which I know I rewatched when they ran a version with more footage on TV) I don't believe I've ever completely set through any of them a second time.

I catch bits and pieces of them when the Lil Missus is rewatching them (she has them all on DVD and really is much more into rewatching shows than I am) so have seen some parts again.

My memory of them was that the odd numbered ones were on the weak side and the even numbered movies on the plus side.

The enthusiasm of your post and got me thinking about them again.  It's been awhile so maybe I'll give the series a rewatch. 

The Lil Missus and I have been occasionally rewatching episodes of the 1970s ST animated series which I find dreadfully animated (although not necessarily badly designed) but overall quite well written for a kid's animated series of that era.

Best

Joe

[narfstar]

Wasn't the animated using strips written for the actual show? At least the same writers

[profh0011]

I JUST got done watching the Robert Mitchum version of THE BIG SLEEP!  I forgot a few actors I know...  Richard Todd plays the police commissioner, John Mills plays the Scotland Yard inspector who's Marlowe's friend, and Don Henderson plays the owner of the garage.  (Henderson has a small part in STAR WARS, and was also the main villain in a late-80's DOCTOR WHO story.)

    Between John Mills and Colin Blakely, the film sports 2 different "Dr. Watsons".  (Mills was in THE MASKS OF DEATH, Blakely in THE PRIVATE LIFE OF SHERLOCK HOLMES.)  I love noticing stuff like this.

    Some people do not like this movie.  I love it.  I love every frame of it.  I consider it an almost-PERFECT film.  Gorgeous locations, incredible cast, PRECISE script.  There's not a line wasted (unlike the '46 version).  Every bit in it advanced the complex plot, with nothing getting in the way of clarity.  I completely understood it the FIRST time I saw it.  Oddly enough, my over-familiarity with the story NOW, and my having seen the Bogart film many more times than this, in a way makes it a bit more difficult to follow on its own terms.  By that I mean, I know the story so well, that watching it tonight, there were moments where I wasn't quite sure the story makes as much sense as I know that it does, because some parts fly by so fast, and I'm not paying as much attention as I was that first time.  (Does this make sense?)

    I should probably watch it a few times all on its own, without the other version.  Then it could "live" more in my mind.

    I love how they SHOW things in flashback, just like DEATH ON THE NILE (made the same year).  It makes it much easier to follow what was going on, because you don't just hear people talk abot things, you see them happen.  This includes the chauffer, who you didn't even see in the '46 film.  Here, Marlowe passes the guy outside the mansion, then we see the same scene in flashback later. 

    Also... a major point of contention in both the novel and the '46 film, was NOBODY (including Raymond Chandler) was sure who killed the chauffer.  In this film, you SEE it happen!!  He drives off a pier and kills himself.  It's not really explained.  But it makes sense.  He was in love with Camilla, and murdered the man who was taking naked photos of her to use for blackmail purposes (and possibly to include in porno books). In the process, he steals the film of her.  But then someone else steals the film from him!  So he committed murder, and all for nothing.  Distraught, he kills himself.  Makes sense to me.

    Oliver Reed is so CREEPY in this as Eddie Mars.  He seems polite at times, yet you keep sensing something's not right.  The full scope of the motivations don't come out until the very end of the film... at which point, Mars has walked away scot free.  See, the Hayes Office wouldn't like that-- that's why he got killed in the original.

    Camilla is SHOWN in flashback at the end, so the audience knows what happened and why the entire plot hingers around her actions.  SHE couldn't get away with it in the Hayes Office's eyes, either, so it's hinted at so vaguely that it probably flew right by the censors without then even realizing the stunt they'd pulled.

    Camilla (Candy Clark) is MUCH crazier in this film.  That's what makes it such a tragedy... there's moments where I kinda liked her.  But then, there's other moments...  (Candy Clark was one of my favorite characters in AMERICAN GRAFFITTI.  I also liked McKenzie Phillips in there.)

    The film has 3 acts.  1) The blackmail scheme  2) Eddie Mars' missing wife  3) Gen. Sternwood finally asks Marlowe to find Rusty Regan.  The final act is shockingly short.

    Instead of the climax between Marlowe & Mars as made up from scratch in the '46 film, the '78 film follows the book, and goes from Marlowe's 2nd meeting with Sternwood to the incident with Camilla to his conversation with the older sister.  She thinks he wants money.  He explains just how "greedy" he is (in a sarcastic way).  And he's got a great line where he says he's trying to let a sick, old man die in peace without thinking that his daughters are "perverts and killers".  And then, as he departs, his voice-over touches on the title of the story, which is never even mentioned in the '46 film.  There IS no voice-over anywhere in the '46 film.  This film has it from start to finish.  It may not be a happy ending, but for once, I don't care.  This movie is MAGNIFICENT.  I just wish I had a better print of it.

    Actually, there's only one thing that bothers me about this... sometimes the sound is a bit hollow.  All this gorgeous, intelligent magnificence let down by a "technical" flaw...  (I bet they could fix that, though, with the right technology, remastering, etc.)

[josemas]

Wasn't the animated using strips written for the actual show? At least the same writers

I don't know if the scripts had originally been planned for the original series but they definitely used some of the same writers.

Best

Joe

[narfstar]

Anyone watching the new shows Grimm and Once Upon a Time?
I have only watched the first episode of Grimm and liked it but have not watched the others yet. Once Upon a Time my wife and I watch and enjoy together. Interesting concept to see how it plays out. We also watch the new Shows Revenge and Ringer. OUAT, Revenge and Ringer seem best suited for one good season and wrap it up. Good stories that will wear old if continued.

[josemas]

The Lil Missus and I are watching both Grimm and Once Upon a Time.   I wonder if it was the success of DC's Vertigo title Fables that influenced the networks to pursue such similar concepts as a weekly show.

Best

Joe

[narfstar]

I have seen some messages calling them network Fables rips. Given the age and experience of network writers I would say it is very likely the success of Fables that prompted their efforts.  BTW I just watched Machete. One of the best intentional Drive In B movies. Had the right elements done right.

[Menticide]

Wasn't the animated using strips written for the actual show? At least the same writers

Yep, a lot of the same writers, but they were new stories for the animated show. A lot of the episodes were pretty good, especially since they could do things with animation that they couldn't afford to do live action. It was a Filmation production, they were also responsible for the New Adventures of Superman, I was just watching their Superboy cartoons last night.

[profh0011]

STAR TREK VI:  THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY
THE BIG SLEEP  (1946)
THE BIG SLEEP  (1978)
HALLOWEEN  (1978)

[josemas]

Wasn't the animated using strips written for the actual show? At least the same writers

Yep, a lot of the same writers, but they were new stories for the animated show. A lot of the episodes were pretty good, especially since they could do things with animation that they couldn't afford to do live action. It was a Filmation production, they were also responsible for the New Adventures of Superman, I was just watching their Superboy cartoons last night.

My only real problem with the animated ST is that the animation is so extremely limited.  Much of the artistic design of the show-from the addition of alien characters to the crew to the look of various "sets" is just fine and even quite well done at times, IMHO.  Its kinda' like they spent all their money getting most of the original actors, good scripts, good art direction and then had almost no money left to do the actual animation. 
I have a friend who recorded the shows on reel to reel tape back when they originally ran and says that he misses little by just listening to those now-a-days as there was so little movement to see in the video aspect of the show.  Am exaggeration, of course, but you get my point.

Best

Joe

[profh0011]

Saturday mornings in the 70's were a wasteland. The censors had a field day, and totally gutted it of anything fun, exciting, etc. It's a miracle anything watchable got on the air at all. This is something you have to remember when looking at the STAR TREK cartoons. Believe it or not-- at the time-- it was, by a wide margin, the BEST damn thing on!!!  And, it actually did manage to capture the look and feel of the original show, between the writing, the actors, the design of the ship (something the Gold Key comics never bothered with), and even getting some real science-fiction writers involved (something that was few and far between in the 3rd season, and virtually non-existent on ST:TNG).

But you also have to realize it was Filmation. The same company that did ARCHIE, and JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH. Try watching that show, and you'll see that by comparison, on every level, STAR TREK was a real masterpiece. I believe ST was the first Filmation show to make extensive use of rotoscoping (for the Enterprise). This was continued and expanded with some of their later shows, like BATMAN, TARZAN, and FLASH GORDON.  (The FLASH GORDON cartoon feature film was probably the greatest piece of work ever achieved by the studio; not only did it have extensive rotoscoping, and it took its subject matter seriously, it also had ALMOST no reuse of animation from start to finish.)

Some of the episodes were disappointing, but I feel in general they had better stories than most of the 3rd season. For a ST fan almost from the word go, it was a real treasure. My biggest disappointment was that they only did 16 episodes the 1st year-- and then, only 6 the 2nd.  (6 !!! Cheap B******s!!!)  Did studios and networks really think kids were happy to just keep watching the same few stories over and over and over??

Regarding the budget... I understand they originally only wanted to spring for Shatner, Nimoy & Kelley. I believe Nimoy told them he wouldn't do the show unless they got the rest of the cast.  They agreed, but fell short by ONE actor... Walter Koenig. To make it up to him, they wound up filming a story he wrote.

I was also a bit disappointed (and baffled) by the music. WHY change the theme song? And why not use ANY of the original music? I only recently learned that Ray Ellis did the score (he did the classic jazz music on the 1st season of SPIDER-MAN / 1967). Seems to me it should have been relatively inexpensive to reuse existing music from the original 3 seasons-- and there was so much of it.  Instead, we got NEW music, but not that much, and what we did get was reused over and over for all 22 episodes.

[narfstar]

Animated Flash Gordon feature film? Did not know such existed. Sounds like it is worth watching.