"TV's Cheesiest Shows"... - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 4 Old 02-03-2007, 11:05 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
oldschool4life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 1,683
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
http://tv.msn.com/tv/tvcamp-1?GT1=7703


Quote:
Originally Posted by oink
Mr. Cialella is, without question, the AVS honorary MOST ADMIRED PERSON OF THE YEAR.:D
oldschool4life is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 4 Old 02-03-2007, 04:08 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
NetworkTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 15,564
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 420
What a steaming pile of dog poo that list was. It was obviously compiled by someone who simply didn't like the shows listed. The fact that the original Star Trek (which broke new ground in terms of cast diversity, predicted many technologies we take for granted and told stories that reflected our culture) was listed on there is proof of that.

Several of the shows on the list were current in their day, but are simply dated now.

On the other hand, the author picks on those shows, but ignores shows like CHiPs, the Love Boat, The A-Team, The Andy Griffith Show, Green Acres, the Time Tunnel, The Brady Bunch and many others over the years. If the author considers the shows on the list to be "cheesy", surely the ones I just listed would fall under that category, as well.

It sounds like someone needs to watch something other than USA, G4 and Sci-Fi channel in the afternoons....


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
NetworkTV is offline  
post #3 of 4 Old 02-03-2007, 08:00 PM
Senior Member
 
MatthewR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 398
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
where was "small wonder"?
MatthewR is offline  
post #4 of 4 Old 02-11-2007, 04:04 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Rammitinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Des Plaines, IL
Posts: 17,437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

.The fact that the original Star Trek (which broke new ground in terms of cast diversity, predicted many technologies we take for granted and told stories that reflected our culture) was listed on there is proof of that.

I would agree with those points to a large extent, but - and I know I'm probably opening a can of worms here - as someone who was not particularly a fan of Star Trek, but also did not necessarily dislike the show, I think everything he said was pretty true - except I never really felt that way about the special effects - they were no better or worse than anyone else's at the time.

I always found the show to be somewhat hokey, blatantly emotionally manipulative and maudlin much of the time. And sort of "Hollywood unhip" - similar to something like "Dragnet", although not nearly as bad or so unintentionally camp, where they were trying to be smart and hip, but very often succeeded in the opposite.

I remember when the show first came out, and I think that was the public's initial, general impression, and why it took awhile to build a following. I can remember literally laughing at Kirk/Shatner's portrayal and manner of delivering his lines many times. And just the general writing of them, and the other actor's lines, too. I don't think the general public knew exactly what to make of the show back then. I mean, if Shatner wasn't the way the reviewer says he was back then, then why is the guy (Shatner) so successful now just mocking himself in the manner that he exhibited on that show? He was never quite that hammy on any other show 'till recently. Why do stand-up comedians (like Kevin Pollak) and their audiences find that schtick so funny? There must've been some truth to it I would say, eh?

And just the idea that so many terrestial life forms could be so human-like and/or Earth-like was kind of a cheesy notion in itself, I would say. But I won't really knock that, because they wouldn't have had a show without it. (Plus, I'm a big Doctor Who fan, at least of the "Jon Pertwee/TomBaker eras, and they did that plenty enough, too.)

I'm not saying it was a "bad" show by any means. But, I don't think calling it "cheesy", at least some of the time, was far off at all. That's just my take, anyway.

In fact, the first time I can ever remember something being genuinely smart & hip, was when they went to modern day Earth, in the 4th movie.

And, as far as predicting future technologies - hell, even the Jetson's did a pretty good job of that before, and Sci-Fi movies in general had done it to some extent already, so it's not like they had any exclusive rights to it. They were not so much "groundbreaking" that way, so much as just adding to the pot, really.
Rammitinski is offline  
Reply Cable, Digital Cable - Non-HDTV

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off