| |
This is not the man on fire you are looking for |
| |
This is a long thread. Click here to view the threaded list. |
| |
|
Jeffrey Lee |
Message #105122, posted by Phlamethrower at 20:22, 5/11/2007, in reply to message #102808 |
 Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff
Posts: 15100
|
Things to Come This is on BBC 4 tonight, with potentially interesting documentaries preceeding and following it. Hurrah! |
| |
 [ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jeffrey Lee |
Message #105485, posted by Phlamethrower at 23:20, 28/11/2007, in reply to message #104642 |
Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff
Posts: 15100
|
Yes, I recommend Jericho, not because it's the best thing on TV - it isn't - but because it's mildly diverting for both the story on-screen, and off it. For instance, the black guy who may or may not be some kind of policeman and talks in an American Southern accent was strangely familiar... naw, it couldn't be that guy from Doctor Who and Snatch and 24 Hour Party People, could it? Plus, the whole being cancelled and then semi-un-cancelled Out of interest, what would you say is better than Jericho? Because, despite its flaws[1], I seem to be enjoying it more than I've enjoyed most other recent TV drama-things (the few that I've watched, obviously - Heroes[2], 24 day 6[3], and, er, Dr. Who). That's not to say that it's the best thing that I could be watching (e.g. I haven't seen any of BSG yet, so I may eventually discover that to be better), just that it seems to be better than the stuff that I have watched/am watching.
[1] I'm not really a fan of the good guy, bad guy chirade they're playing with the black guy. The character itself is interesting, I just don't care for the way they try to keep the audience on a guessing game as to whether he's a good guy or a bad guy.
[2] Which I found to be somewhat unimpressive. But then again, I did watch it all in one sitting, and after listening to friends/family/co-workers/etc. cream their pants over it week-in, week-out, like it's the best thing ever made. I wasn't particularly interested in watching the first series, and I can't say that I'm particularly interested in watching the second.
[3] 24 gets a bit samey after a while, so I'd actually skipped day 5. But after starting to watch day 6 (again, all in one sitting) it was refreshing to see the mental/physical hell that Jack is going through (although completely preposterous that he's in good physical form after being tortured by the chinese for over a year), that they actually nuke a city, and the sadistic side of me was pleased at the way that Audrey had been broken before being handed back to Jack, increasing Jack's torment further. Can't say that I'm particularly excited about day 7, although it is obvious that they're now trying to break the mould a bit, and I'll surely be able to watch it if a copy is put down infront of me.
[editaroo]
Things to Come This is on BBC 4 tonight, with potentially interesting documentaries preceeding and following it. Hurrah!
I watched that, but it only served to remind me that I'm yet to enjoy watching a black & white movie.
[Edited by Phlamethrower at 23:22, 28/11/2007] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Phil Mellor |
Message #105488, posted by monkeyson2 at 00:31, 29/11/2007, in reply to message #105485 |
 Please don't let them make me be a monkey butler
Posts: 12380
|
24 gets a bit samey after a while, so I'd actually skipped day 5. But after starting to watch day 6 (again, all in one sitting) it was refreshing to see the mental/physical hell that Jack is going through (although completely preposterous that he's in good physical form after being tortured by the chinese for over a year), that they actually nuke a city, and the sadistic side of me was pleased at the way that Audrey had been broken before being handed back to Jack, increasing Jack's torment further. Can't say that I'm particularly excited about day 7, although it is obvious that they're now trying to break the mould a bit, and I'll surely be able to watch it if a copy is put down infront of me. It's a pity you didn't watch season 5, because I thought that was the best ever season since the first one. S6 was awful - started off fine, but they threw too many ideas away too quickly, without exploring them properly. The CTU love life/politics were tedious - I cheered when beardy Milo got shot in the head. When the season finale consists of somebody sitting at a park bench for 30 minutes, you know you've got a duffer. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #105489, posted by VincceH at 00:41, 29/11/2007, in reply to message #105485 |
 Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
Heroes
Which I found to be somewhat unimpressive. But
then again, I did watch it all in one sitting That's almost certainly going to be a big factor in the opinion you formed, IMO. A lot of heavily arc'd stuff really doesn't stand up too well when you watch more than two or three episodes back to back, I've found; things are too fresh in your mind from earlier episodes and plot holes become evident that the makers hoped nobody would notice. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jeffrey Lee |
Message #105490, posted by Phlamethrower at 01:33, 29/11/2007, in reply to message #105489 |
Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff
Posts: 15100
|
The CTU love life/politics were tedious Well, obviously.
When the season finale consists of somebody sitting at a park bench for 30 minutes, you know you've got a duffer. I don't remember that  (I was also going to say that I didn't remember Milo getting shot either, but then later did remember. I'd obviously purged that moment from my memory.)
I think I was just more pleased at the fact that Jack is starting to fall apart than at anything else in the series.
Heroes
Which I found to be somewhat unimpressive. But
then again, I did watch it all in one sitting That's almost certainly going to be a big factor in the opinion you formed, IMO. A lot of heavily arc'd stuff really doesn't stand up too well when you watch more than two or three episodes back to back, I've found; things are too fresh in your mind from earlier episodes and plot holes become evident that the makers hoped nobody would notice.
Possibly.
Or possibly it's just a load of boring wank about random people discovering that they have super powers and that they're all part of some plot to save/destroy the world. I can't say that I feel particularly emotionally attached to any of the characters. (Although Malcom McDowell was good, obviously). Plus they mess around with time travel, which is rarely going to win them any points in my book.
And if a show can only be enjoyed at a rate of one episode per week, then surely it indicates that there's a problem with the show?
Unfortunately I can't think of any other TV shows where my first exposure to them has been a single sitting (or more correctly, spread out over 2-3 days as with Heroes), so I've got no real evidence that this is just indicative of something wrong with Heroes. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jeffrey Lee |
Message #105491, posted by Phlamethrower at 02:04, 29/11/2007, in reply to message #105490 |
Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff
Posts: 15100
|
Although, speaking of plot holes, I did just spot one in today's Jericho. The mercenary they find in the hispital initially says that his leg was wounded while trying to stop his fellow mercs from shooting the wounded. But then at the end he says that he also shot the wounded. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #105492, posted by filecore at 09:08, 29/11/2007, in reply to message #105490 |
Posts: 3868
|
Unfortunately I can't think of any other TV shows where my first exposure to them has been a single sitting (or more correctly, spread out over 2-3 days as with Heroes), so I've got no real evidence that this is just indicative of something wrong with Heroes. Well, my wife and I are fans of Babylon 5, and at the end of the summer we started watching the whole lot right from season 1 through to season 5 (at 22 episodes per season). We'd watch something like three or four episodes on most evenings after work, for most weekdays. Never got bored of it. Of course, we'd seen it before and were already fans, but it still goes to show that there are some things which you can watch closely together which still just don't lose their appeal. I'm sure it would have been the same had we never even heard of it before. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #105494, posted by VincceH at 10:05, 29/11/2007, in reply to message #105488 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
I cheered when beardy Milo got shot in the head. I haven't seen S6 yet. I can't remember why - whether it was while I was cable TV-less ATT, or if it coincided with the Virgin/Sky spat - probably the former. Oh well. when I watch it, I'll see that bit coming a mile off. 
Or should that be a milo off?  |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #105495, posted by VincceH at 12:42, 29/11/2007, in reply to message #105490 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
A lot of heavily arc'd stuff really doesn't stand up too well when you watch more than two or three episodes back to back, I've found And if a show can only be enjoyed at a rate of one episode per week, then surely it indicates that there's a problem with the show?
Quite right, but not what I said.
When I watch a show on DVD, I've learnt from previous experience that I find them all a disappointment if I watch "more than two or three episodes back to back". It does depend on the show, at *most* I'd say two or three is fine in one evening, then another two or three maybe two or three days later, and so on. More heavily arc'd shows, that should be reduced - perhaps two or three episodes in one evening, spaced three or four, or four or five days apart.
Unfortunately I can't think of any other TV shows where my first exposure to them has been a single sitting (or more correctly, spread out over 2-3 days as with Heroes), so I've got no real evidence that this is just indicative of something wrong with Heroes. I've done it a number of times, unfortunately. The two that came off worse were shows I had enjoyed quite a bit when watching (other seasons of) them more slowly - one of the seasons of 24, and one of Alias. Both shows that had strong arcs. The less of an arc, the less of a problem when watching them back to back.
A part of the problem is that the shows are generally written piecemeal - while they might have penned the overall arc beforehand, the nitty gritty tends to be written written as and when its needed, so plot holes creep in. And then you have unforseen or unexpected changes, which force a change of direction and, oops, more plot holes.
The more of an arc, the more the holes and mistakes will stand out - especially if the events of an episode are still reasonably fresh in your mind a few hours later when you're watching the nth episode after.
Plus, there's also an argument that with shows of this kind, a large part of the enjoyment comes in the suspense of having to wait to find out what's going to happen - which rapidfire viewing doesn't give you.
There's a similar problem with sympathising with characters, as well. If you watch a show rapidfire, you don't spend as much time reflecting on it, and the characters, between episodes. That reflection would otherwise help build up your sympathies for the characters. At least with watching back to back for repeat viewings, rather than first time viewings, you've already crossed that particular hurdle.
(This is also a problem, I think, for couch potatoes who just come home and plonk themselves in front of the TV for the entire evening, instead of *only* watching the stuff they would normally enjoy. They end up calling everything crap and complaining how there's nothing on - though they'll still carry on watching it - because they're watching too much of it, and not giving themselves the time to reflect on and enjoy that which they would otherwise enjoy. Yes, I know people like this.)
ICBW, everyone is different, but the general rule of thumb I've found is that the more of an arc a show has, the less it will stand up to back-to-back viewing. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #105497, posted by VincceH at 13:00, 29/11/2007, in reply to message #105492 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
Well, my wife and I are fans of Babylon 5, and at the end of the summer we started watching the whole lot right from season 1 through to season 5 (at 22 episodes per season). Babylon 5, as well as being an excellent show, is a good example of a show with a strong arc, done well. Most episodes are purely episodic, with some arc-related elements thrown in, some more than others, and then there are spells of episodes which are largely arc based.
It isn't without its flaws, however. Unexpected changes due to actors leaving, a prematurely rushed ending due to the threat of cancellation, which then didn't happen, and so on. All of these things helped weaken the show because storylines had to be changed to accomodate them, and not everything worked out as well as it could have.
We'd watch something like three or four episodes on most evenings after work, for most weekdays. Never got bored of it. I'd wager that's partly because of what I say above - with most episodes containing a self contained story as well as arc related material.
Also, I note that's "most" evenings after work and "most" weekdays - not all.
Of course, we'd seen it before and were already fans, And therefore were already familiar with the characters and already sympathised with them. Related to this, one of Babylon 5's strong points IMO is that we know how certain characters grew and evolved (G'kar and Londo in particular) and watching all over again how they gradually changed makes for good viewing. Kudos to JMS et al, and in particular to the actors for playing the parts so well.
but it still goes to show that there are some things which you can watch closely together which still just don't lose their appeal. I'm sure it would have been the same had we never even heard of it before. I would be very surprised if you found it as good if you'd watched S1 for the first time over a mere two or three days - but we'll never know for sure.
I'm currently part way through season 3. I'm watching the whole thing again before embarking on The Lost Tales. However, my rate is no more than a disc per week because I just don't have the time.  |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #105498, posted by VincceH at 13:05, 29/11/2007, in reply to message #105491 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
Although, speaking of plot holes, I did just spot one in today's Jericho. The mercenary they find in the hispital initially says that his leg was wounded while trying to stop his fellow mercs from shooting the wounded. But then at the end he says that he also shot the wounded. That's not necessarily a plot hole - he could have just lied about how he got shot. Perhaps a stray bullet in the excitement or perhaps he was shot by someone else (did I see a sherrif/deputy or cop on the floor when the entered the hospital?). Perhaps the only truth was that because he was wounded he was left for dead, woke up thanks to the doctor's efforts, and from that point regretted what he had done. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #105499, posted by filecore at 13:12, 29/11/2007, in reply to message #105497 |
Posts: 3868
|
I'm currently part way through season 3. I'm watching the whole thing again before embarking on The Lost Tales. However, my rate is no more than a disc per week because I just don't have the time. Seasons 3 and 4 are the best, then there's a depressing crapness to the first half of season 5, until Byron sods off, and then the second half of season 5 is also excellent. We've been putting off watching Crusade (which I've seen once before and just can't bring myself to like), but that's all that's left now - we watched The Lost Tales (the first two) for the first time last night - damn good stories, well made, well acted. Worth waiting for - ESPECIALLY after that Crusade nonsense. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #105500, posted by VincceH at 13:46, 29/11/2007, in reply to message #105499 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
Seasons 3 and 4 are the best, Season 3 in particular, I think, being the season in which the Shadows finally get brought to the fore. The biggest weakness for me was the final resolution to all of that - "Get the hell out of our galaxy" didn't really cut the mustard! Although, it made a refreshing change from some goody goody federation twit moralising into making them leave out of shame, or finding some technobabble way to defeat them.
then there's a depressing crapness to the first half of season 5, until Byron sods off, Damn it! You've gone and reminded me of the singing telepaths!
and then the second half of season 5 is also excellent. We've been putting off watching Crusade (which I've seen once before and just can't bring myself to like), but that's all that's left now Crusade suffered from interference at the hands of, err.. TNT wasn't it? It had a lot of potential and some of this could be seen in the unproduced scripts that JMS made available shortly after the show was cancelled. Had it been allowed to continue, and the interference reduced, I think it could have been very good.
Especially because they were flying around in The Liberator, which is always good to see.
The worst, for me, was Legend of the Rangers - which I've only seen once and in no hurry to see again. I think it was the weapons system that really killed it (which is actually about all I can remember about it!)
we watched The Lost Tales (the first two) for the first time last night - damn good stories, well made, well acted. Worth waiting for - ESPECIALLY after that Crusade nonsense. Well at this rate, I'll probably get around to watching that in the latter half of 2008...  |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
keith dunlop |
Message #105501, posted by epistaxsis at 17:35, 29/11/2007, in reply to message #105500 |
Posts: 159
|
Well I've just started my B5 mission...
Started with the gathering.
1/2 way through S1 atm
will keep going right to The Lost Tales
Er spot the fact that I got the complete universe box set... :-$ |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #105502, posted by filecore at 17:58, 29/11/2007, in reply to message #105501 |
Posts: 3868
|
Er spot the fact that I got the complete universe box set... :-$ Heh. I have them all on VHS (including Crusade, and the films) from the 1990s, although my parents have them now as DVD sets and I have them all ripped as AVIs on my little 3.5" USB drive/media player thingy.
Any takers for a complete VHS set of B5 videos? Going cheap... |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Richard Goodwin |
Message #105505, posted by rich at 20:46, 29/11/2007, in reply to message #105485 |
 Dictator for life
Posts: 6828
|
Yes, I recommend Jericho, not because it's the best thing on TV - it isn't Out of interest, what would you say is better than Jericho? Because, despite its flaws[1], I seem to be enjoying it more than I've enjoyed most other recent TV drama-things
Er, pretty much everything? It's decidedly middling. It's fairly well acted, but nothing great; the plots are fairly predictable; it's not even visually different.
I could just say "Firefly" and walk away - because it had great acting, great scripts, and some groundbreaking FX shots that later ended up colouring the almost equally compelling Battlestar Galactica reboot. But it's not on any more, so you're probably looking for something more contemporary. Um, but BSG is, sort-of.
You knock Heroes, and it's not perfect; certainly the start of the second season is so slow I almost knocked it on the head. However, the framing of shots is often beautifully done, and there's at least the possibility that any character can die at any time. Plus, the last couple of episodes shown in the UK were directed by John Badham, who... well, look him up.
I like me some House or CSI (LV or NY), which at least try to do something different once in a while (contrasting with, e.g., NCIS who rip off movies to the point where they need to namecheck them every episode ). Dexter's pretty good also, sort of like CSI in a way, but from the point of view of a serial killer - who just happens to be one of the CSIs. If you want something different, try Pushing Daisies. I guess I like detective shows then.
Jericho is predicatble comfort food; or to put it another way, like watching a sports movie where you know exactly how it's going to play out but watch it anyway.
I watched that, but it only served to remind me that I'm yet to enjoy watching a black & white movie. You are kidding me, right? This is probably why I have to explain to you why Jericho isn't that great. YOU HAVE NO FUCKING TASTE!!!111!1
Maltese Falcon? Big Sleep? Seven Samurai? Yojimbo? The Hustler? Any of these ringing a bell?
________
 Cheers,
Rich.
|
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jeffrey Lee |
Message #105509, posted by Phlamethrower at 23:00, 29/11/2007, in reply to message #105505 |
Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff
Posts: 15100
|
I could just say "Firefly" and walk away And be absolutely wrong, because the last new episode of Firefly was on TV over 4 years ago
Plus, the last couple of episodes shown in the UK were directed by John Badham, who... well, look him up. *looks him up*
What exactly am I meant to be finding impressive about him?
I like me some House or CSI (LV or NY), which at least try to do something different once in a while Are you saying a post-apocalyptic setting isn't different? Because I can't think of any other TV series in recent memory that have had such a setting.
And how are detective shows "doing something different"? A typical episode will involve someone commiting a crime, the detectives investigating it, and then the criminal being caught and killed/arrested. So different! So groundbreaking!
Jericho is predicatble comfort food; or to put it another way, like watching a sports movie where you know exactly how it's going to play out but watch it anyway. Except I don't know how it's going to play out, because I've never seen it before. The way they're playing it, things could get worse, or things could get better. OK, so I may be able to predict what's going to happen in each episode, but the overall story arc? I haven't a clue.
And who the fuck watches sports movies? 
I watched that, but it only served to remind me that I'm yet to enjoy watching a black & white movie. You are kidding me, right? This is probably why I have to explain to you why Jericho isn't that great. YOU HAVE NO FUCKING TASTE!!!111!1
Maltese Falcon? Big Sleep? Seven Samurai? Yojimbo? The Hustler? Any of these ringing a bell?
Never seen/heard of any of them. Are they black & white? |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #105513, posted by filecore at 05:32, 30/11/2007, in reply to message #105509 |
Posts: 3868
|
Maltese Falcon? Big Sleep? Seven Samurai? Yojimbo? The Hustler? Any of these ringing a bell?
You forget, I think, what generation you're talking to when mentioning films like those. Besides, you missed Citizen Kane.
it only served to remind me that I'm yet to enjoy watching a black & white movie.
...
Never seen/heard of any of them. Are they black & white? Perhaps something more well-known in modern times: The Day the Earth Stood Still, Village of the Damned, Invasion of the Body Snatchers, Psycho, It's A Wonderful Life, or to get quite recent, Schindler's List. Then there's all the classic British war films that you must have grown up with: The Dam Busters, 633 Squadron, stuff like that. There were also some excellent movies from the last few years, including Good Night, and Good Luck (from 2005). And a nerd like you must surely have seen Clerks or Pi...?
So you've never seen or heard of any of the above?
EDIT: And as an addendum, what about recent and relatively-recent films which are mostly in black-and-white, or use only a limited set of coloured elements? Examples would include Sin City, Memento, American History X, Pleasantville... and this isn't going back much further than the early '90s.
[Edited by filecore at 06:11, 30/11/2007] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jeffrey Lee |
Message #105514, posted by Phlamethrower at 08:06, 30/11/2007, in reply to message #105513 |
Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff
Posts: 15100
|
Besides, you missed Citizen Kane. I've heard of that one.
Perhaps something more well-known in modern times: The Day the Earth Stood Still, Village of the Damned, Invasion of the Body Snatchers, Psycho, It's A Wonderful Life, I've heard of those as well.
or to get quite recent, Schindler's List. Doesn't count - it's not the fact that it's black & white that I don't like, it's more to do with the filmmaking style in the time period when black & white was the only way to make films.
Then there's all the classic British war films that you must have grown up with: The Dam Busters, 633 Squadron, stuff like that. I've heard of The Dam Busters, obviously, but don't think I've seen either of those two you mention. Perhaps the problem then is that I didn't grow up watching classic British war films.
There were also some excellent movies from the last few years, including Good Night, and Good Luck (from 2005). And a nerd like you must surely have seen Clerks or Pi...? Clerks was black and white? Didn't know that. I've seen Pi, though. And as I said above, films which deliberately use black & white are OK - it's more to do with the time period where black & white was the only option available. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #105515, posted by filecore at 08:16, 30/11/2007, in reply to message #105514 |
Posts: 3868
|
Clerks was black and white? Didn't know that. Yup. Even though it was filmed in 1994, it had a low low budget (something around $30,000 apparently) and was filmed at night in the store where the director actually worked. The black and white, as well as being cheaper, also concealed the fact of it being night-time and discarded the necessity of using daylight lights or whatever. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jeffrey Lee |
Message #105592, posted by Phlamethrower at 12:09, 8/12/2007, in reply to message #104217 |
Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff
Posts: 15100
|
More confusion: Apparently around November last year, Film Four showed Deep Red. Except that I seem to have recorded Deep Red by mistake. So either their listings were wrong again or I didn't pay enough attention to spot that I was recording the wrong film. Queue 2 hours of confusion wondering when the alien nanotechnology was going to come into the film Ah-ha!
Last night, I distinctly remember them advertising Profondo Rosso during Ghostbusters (in fact, I even have screengrabs to prove it). But checking bleb.org today, they clearly list the 1994 version. And checking the film4 site, they clearly show the 1994 version as being the one on tonight.
Only time will tell which one they actually decide to show...
[edit]
EPG says it's Profondo Rosso. Wah!
[Edited by Phlamethrower at 12:17, 8/12/2007] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #105594, posted by VincceH at 14:21, 8/12/2007, in reply to message #105592 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
Deep Red...
Only time will tell which one they actually decide to show... IIRC the Deep Red you want to see is one of the very few films I've ever tried watching where my inate stubborn-ness hasn't defeated my boredom.
As a general rule, no matter how little I'm enjoying a film, my stubborn nature means I will persist and watch to the end. I didn't watch Deep Red to the end. I don't think it was a conscious decision - but something distracted me and I considered it a welcome distraction/excuse not to continue. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jeffrey Lee |
Message #105602, posted by Phlamethrower at 22:48, 8/12/2007, in reply to message #105594 |
Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff
Posts: 15100
|
It's Profondo Rosso again. Wah! |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Matthew Somerville |
Message #106044, posted by Matthew at 22:47, 16/1/2008, in reply to message #105509 |
Posts: 520
|
Plus, the last couple of episodes shown in the UK were directed by John Badham, who... well, look him up. *looks him up*
What exactly am I meant to be finding impressive about him?
You have seen WarGames, haven't you? |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Matthew Somerville |
Message #106045, posted by Matthew at 22:49, 16/1/2008, in reply to message #105488 |
Posts: 520
|
It's a pity you didn't watch season 5, because I thought that was the best ever season since the first one. Giving up after a few episodes of series 2, but then deciding to watch series 5 as Sky One came free with Telewest - I was lucky Only Kim dying could have improved my luck further. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jeffrey Lee |
Message #106048, posted by Phlamethrower at 23:04, 16/1/2008, in reply to message #106044 |
Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff
Posts: 15100
|
Plus, the last couple of episodes shown in the UK were directed by John Badham, who... well, look him up. *looks him up*
What exactly am I meant to be finding impressive about him?
You have seen WarGames, haven't you?
Yes, a long time ago. But I still don't know how that's meant to impress me!
Shock news: Directors direct! |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Matthew Somerville |
Message #106054, posted by Matthew at 09:45, 17/1/2008, in reply to message #106048 |
Posts: 520
|
What exactly am I meant to be finding impressive about him?
You have seen WarGames, haven't you?
Yes, a long time ago. But I still don't know how that's meant to impress me!
Shock news: Directors direct!
But some of them direct very well and some of them direct very poorly. So the great direction of WarGames would be the obvious thing to impress you. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Simon Willcocks |
Message #106214, posted by Stoppers at 18:28, 25/1/2008, in reply to message #102190 |
Member
Posts: 302
|
Tomorrow, BBC Three 9:35 pm
Man on Fire
Jaded ex-CIA man, John Creasy (Denzel Washington) is hired as a bodyguard to the young daughter of a wealthy industrialist, following a wave of kidnappings. Strong language. [2004][S] Then 60 Seconds.
[Edited by Stoppers at 18:28, 25/1/2008] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jeffrey Lee |
Message #106216, posted by Phlamethrower at 19:16, 25/1/2008, in reply to message #106214 |
Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff
Posts: 15100
|
I managed to get that recorded a few months ago - but thanks anyway! |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jeffrey Lee |
Message #106276, posted by Phlamethrower at 19:31, 30/1/2008, in reply to message #102810 |
Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff
Posts: 15100
|
* The Running Man - Arnie? Really? It was fun at the time, but I think it'd look a bit dated. I'm trying to remember whether I have seen this film already or not. But I don't think I have, and thus it remains on the list.
It's on tonight, so I guess I'll find out! |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
| Pages (4): |< <
3
> >|
|
