Firefly: Immediate Assistance Update

POSTED BY: NewsAdmin
UPDATED: Sunday, February 9, 2003 20:50
VIEWED: 7397
PAGE 2 of 2

PREV PAGE 1 2

JYNK

Thursday, February 6, 2003 12:17 PM

We can always how the almighty Joss comes through with another syndicated show that won't get canceled. *sighs* I'm sure he's rather put-off by the treatment of what he put a lot of work into. He always wanted to do a Western and FOX crapped on it.

This sorta reminds me of the treatment Nickelodeon gave Invader Zim. Why are all the good shows crapped on, but the stupid shows are loved by networks?

-------------------
"Let's move this conversation in a not-Jayne's-fault direction." - Jayne

TALLGRRL

Thursday, February 6, 2003 6:58 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jynk:
Yeah. I just feel skooky watching tv these days. All intelligent tv is on late at night, all good sitcoms/syndicated series, are being canceled so more "reality" tv can come on. What the ruttin' hell is wrong with the majority of the American viewing public?

-------------------
"Let's move this conversation in a not-Jayne's-fault direction." - Jayne

Me? I'm feeling "skooky" as well. I've felt skooky about TV for quite some time now. Which is why I pretty much NEVER watch network TV 'cept for CSI (NOT the Miami one) and 24, which was apparently accidentally renewed in by Fox. (I'm so sure that this show won't be back next season that I'm preparing myself for Jack Bauer's death at the end of this season.)
Anyway...
The American viewing public is largely reflective of the person that got shoe-horned into the White House: Not so much dumb (except for Shrub who is truly a moron) but incurious. Not seeking anything mentally challenging or stimulating in their TV viewing habits. (Or record-buying habits, either...but don't get me started.)
No one wants to think. They just want someone to tell them what they should--or shouldn't--be watching.
And as far as I'm concerned "reality" tv is a sneaky attempt to make the idea of constant surveillance acceptable.
Who's gonna bitch about lack of privacy when everywhere you go there are cameras? (Supposedly for your 'protection'.)
Who's gonna bitch when the idea of being watched all the time is somehow made to seem appealing?

When the common answer to questions about privacy rights are "What do you have to hide?" then you know we've headed down a slippery slope.
Don't get me started.

TllGrrl
"Take me, Sir. Take me hard."

LIVINGIMPAIRED

Thursday, February 6, 2003 7:29 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Tallgrrl:
And as far as I'm concerned "reality" tv is a sneaky attempt to make the idea of constant surveillance acceptable.
Who's gonna bitch about lack of privacy when everywhere you go there are cameras? (Supposedly for your 'protection'.)
Who's gonna bitch when the idea of being watched all the time is somehow made to seem appealing?

When the common answer to questions about privacy rights are "What do you have to hide?" then you know we've headed down a slippery slope.

Hear, hear! Have any of these people ever even heard of 1984?.

Something I Don't Get: The US Supreme Court ruled that is was unconstitutional for police to randomly go around and demand to see someone's ID. If that's bad, then why is it legal to hook up face-recogination software to a video survelience program?

Big Brother is alive and well, sad to say.

________________

Oh yeah! It's great. I've heard about five different issues and I'm angry about each and every one of them.

TALLGRRL

Thursday, February 6, 2003 9:35 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by LivingImpaired:
Quote:
Originally posted by Tallgrrl:
And as far as I'm concerned "reality" tv is a sneaky attempt to make the idea of constant surveillance acceptable.
Who's gonna bitch about lack of privacy when everywhere you go there are cameras? (Supposedly for your 'protection'.)
Who's gonna bitch when the idea of being watched all the time is somehow made to seem appealing?

When the common answer to questions about privacy rights are "What do you have to hide?" then you know we've headed down a slippery slope.

Hear, hear! Have any of these people ever even heard of 1984?.

Something I Don't Get: The US Supreme Court ruled that is was unconstitutional for police to randomly go around and demand to see someone's ID. If that's bad, then why is it legal to hook up face-recogination software to a video survelience program?

Big Brother is alive and well, sad to say.

________________

Oh yeah! It's great. I've heard about five different issues and I'm angry about each and every one of them.

I'm afraid that with the decline of literacy, not as many young people today have read 1984 as did when I was a kid. I read it in High School. Anyone else read it before college?

TllGrrl
"Take me, Sir. Take me hard."

EARLVANDORN

Sunday, February 9, 2003 8:22 AM

Personally I'm in new territory here. I didn't think that "Buffy" would last beyond it's initial 6 episode run and I was pleasantly surprised. This is the 1st time that I have become really attached to a show that didn't make it. There has been much written about what a quality show "Firefly" is, so I won't go down that road, but it says something bad about American tv nation when it didn't succeed yet it appears that some half-a$$ed "Miami Vice" remake will.
Nathan Filion would be a fool to turn down an offer from NBC to star in a furture series in the faint hope that FX or somebody would pick up "Firefly". It would just be a shame to see him go from such a well written character as Captain Mal to some one dimensional jagoff in a crappy sitcom. Please Nathan, if the vehicle you're offered is titled something like "One guy, two girls, a rottweiler and a pizza place" run away. Even if it is scheduled to come on after "Friends", if it isn't well written and doesn't have a good supporting cast, run away. There's aways film.

Earl Van Dorn

LORA

Sunday, February 9, 2003 4:57 PM

Quote:
When the common answer to questions about privacy rights are "What do you have to hide?" then you know we've headed down a slippery slope.

-- Tallgrrl

My response is "What business is that of yours?"

Let's try to come up with some sort of spring volunteer effort to get Serenity and her fandom more good press. How about something to do with Earth Day, April 22? Maybe we could organize local park/beach clean-ups? This is February, so we'd have 2 months to get it going.

Just a thought. All of us here want to keep Firefly flying, so let us Browncoats get together and plan our next engagement.

I don't care, I'm still free. You can't take the sky from me.

TALLGRRL

Sunday, February 9, 2003 8:50 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by EarlVanDorn:
(snip}
Nathan Filion would be a fool to turn down an offer from NBC to star in a furture series in the faint hope that FX or somebody would pick up "Firefly". It would just be a shame to see him go from such a well written character as Captain Mal to some one dimensional jagoff in a crappy sitcom. Please Nathan, if the vehicle you're offered is titled something like "One guy, two girls, a rottweiler and a pizza place" run away. Even if it is scheduled to come on after "Friends", if it isn't well written and doesn't have a good supporting cast, run away. There's aways film.

Earl Van Dorn

As much as I hate to say it, Nathan, but if NBC is gonna PAY you SIX FIGURES to do "Two Guys, A Girl and a Rotweiller"...TAKE IT!!
Sure, "there's always film."
Just ask David ("Left-mega-hit-NYPD Blue-to-pursue-a-film-career-and-after-years-of-no-career-is-now-extremely-grateful-to-be-back-on-TV-in-a-series-and-ain't-thinkin'-about-quittin'-this-one, thank you") Caruso.

Tll Grrl
"Take me, Sir. Take me hard."

PREV PAGE 1 2