or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › 'Revolution' on NBC
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

'Revolution' on NBC - Page 15

post #421 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

Of course she's alive.
That would be the "big twist" at some point.
Scene 26A: Daytime.
Our fearless characters are pinned down in a grimy alley by several dudes up to no good. Just when all seems lost, a shadowy figure leaps from out of nowhere, helping to defeat them with several flashes of a well-honed blade borrowed from the set of "Xena: Warrior Princess".
Charlie, who finds herself injured on the ground with what is likely a non-lethal shoulder wound, sees the shadowy figure move toward her. She moves to grab her bow that she obtained in the Hunger Games, but it's out of reach. Suddenly, the figure steps into a well placed shaft of theater lighting and a look of recognition comes over her face.
"Mom?"
***black screen with the Revolution logo pops up***


Come on man! I think that needed spoiler tags.........biggrin.gif
post #422 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by humbug2 View Post

Another season of Firefly or TSSC would have been far better than recent offerings.
+1 for both shows!

Falling Skies is likeable enough- but with these short 10 episode seasons it just gets up to speed and the season's over....
post #423 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

Serious Sci-Fi is an endangered species....frown.gif

Well, you know, if Joss Wheden was not making the major money these days .. wink.gif ..

and I have to say, What is Serious Science Fiction .. ??

Battlestar Galactica respected the genre, but was still Space Opera .. same can be said for my favorite Firefly ..
post #424 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgkdragn View Post


What is Serious Science Fiction .. ??
The movie that always leaps to mind, when the subject is brought up, is 2001.
Although none are better, there has been others.
Recently, there was Moon and Sunshine (didn't care for either).

Quote:
Battlestar Galactica respected the genre, but was still Space Opera .. same can be said for my favorite Firefly ..
True.
post #425 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgkdragn View Post

Well, you know, if Joss Wheden was not making the major money these days .. wink.gif ..
and I have to say, What is Serious Science Fiction .. ??
Battlestar Galactica respected the genre, but was still Space Opera .. same can be said for my favorite Firefly ..

For TV, serious science fiction would be something along the lines of literary SF's Heinlein, Asimov, Clarke and others like them. Something rare in TV-land. Certain episodes of The Twilight Zone, Outer Limits and Star Trek were like that. Definitely becoming extinct (as also with literary SF, the SF sections of the big bookstores are a sad sight indeed).

Early on, Lost seemed like it would be good hard SF. Certainly the various theories put forth--micro black holes, wormholes, nano tech and such--were far more interesting than what the show itself ended up being.
post #426 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin_Wadsworth View Post

BTW, anyone betting that the mom is still alive?

Yep. It was quite convenient that our only "explanation" of her "death" was from the father's vague account of her supposed demise. She's going to be showing up in flashbacks for a while, but I fully expect her to appear again in the present, especially in a season or mid-season finale.
post #427 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by jakestir View Post

Come on man! I think that needed spoiler tags.........biggrin.gif
Well, if that ends up being how it goes down, I'll be two for two on predictions on new shows after calling the Pinkerton Police in "Copper" - though I wasn't really intending to predict anything on that one. That one was more of a "historically likely scenerio" kind of thing that happened to end up in the very next episode.
post #428 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by IceAgeTom View Post

For TV, serious science fiction would be something along the lines of literary SF's Heinlein, Asimov, Clarke and others like them. Something rare in TV-land. Certain episodes of The Twilight Zone, Outer Limits and Star Trek were like that. Definitely becoming extinct (as also with literary SF, the SF sections of the big bookstores are a sad sight indeed).
Early on, Lost seemed like it would be good hard SF. Certainly the various theories put forth--micro black holes, wormholes, nano tech and such--were far more interesting than what the show itself ended up being.

I've been a Sci Fi fan since the early 1960's .. and my question was related to TV shows .. I don't recall any Zone / OL / or Trek that did not have something that could be picked apart ..

My point is, for all the whining on the thread about this and that .. name me one show / one episode that would stand the test that deals with what some call Hard Sci Fi ..
post #429 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

Even if you disregard the ability to send a message over a computer network without the use of routers, signal amps and other devices that do need power to relay the message, I have to wonder where the power is coming from that she used in the room. There didn't seem to be any power generating means anywhere on site and I would think someone in the band of bad guys would have noticed solar cells or a windmill - after all, he's the self-claimed great observer we know as the insurance salesman.

Perhaps the device itself is generating the power? Its a stretch, but hey, gotta stretch when you are talking about sci-fi shows, that is the whole purpose.
post #430 of 1851
I'm kind of curious how this Sergeant Monroe guy rises to the rank of General in only 15 years. That's quite an accomplishment. There are likely many other (more experienced) officers who would rather have the job, so unless he went on a killing spree it's unlikely he would eventually be in charge of the entire militia.

I'm OK with the ages of Uncle Miles and General Monroe... 15 years ago, in order for them to be Sergeants, they were probably in their mid-twenties. Billy Burke is 45 and David Lyons is 36.
post #431 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by tighr View Post

I'm kind of curious how this Sergeant Monroe guy rises to the rank of General in only 15 years. That's quite an accomplishment. There are likely many other (more experienced) officers who would rather have the job, so unless he went on a killing spree it's unlikely he would eventually be in charge of the entire militia.

Probably the same way most brutal warlords (or Klingons) rise through the ranks of power - assassination and/or just being more ruthless than their adversaries. We'll probably get a fairly complete backstory on Monroe as the show goes on.
post #432 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by tighr View Post

I'm kind of curious how this Sergeant Monroe guy rises to the rank of General in only 15 years. That's quite an accomplishment. There are likely many other (more experienced) officers who would rather have the job, so unless he went on a killing spree it's unlikely he would eventually be in charge of the entire militia.
I'm OK with the ages of Uncle Miles and General Monroe... 15 years ago, in order for them to be Sergeants, they were probably in their mid-twenties. Billy Burke is 45 and David Lyons is 36.

I'm willing to bet Monroe has something to do with the outage.

Him not having ID when arriving at the base and the way he was looking around just didn't sit well.
post #433 of 1851
Hey, I haven't seen one guy take on and defeat so many better armed attackers since Bruce Lee. That sequence was purely fiction, if not science fiction. Yeah, I know, we were told that he was very good at fighting, or killing, but really, THAT good? And... he appeared to be drunk, or getting there, at the time!eek.gif
post #434 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacAlert View Post

I'm willing to bet Monroe has something to do with the outage.
Him not having ID when arriving at the base and the way he was looking around just didn't sit well.
They made that way more obvious than needed. I'm surprised he didn't do the "shifty eyes" thing with a "duh, duh duh" sound bed under it.
post #435 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacAlert View Post

I'm willing to bet Monroe has something to do with the outage.
Him not having ID when arriving at the base and the way he was looking around just didn't sit well.
Perhaps he has something to do with the outage, but its obvious he doesn't have all the details. Otherwise, he wouldn't want Uncle Miles and Katniss' dad. He wants them because he wants electricity... if he already had access to the electricity this whole time, they are worthless to him.
post #436 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgkdragn View Post

I've been a Sci Fi fan since the early 1960's .. and my question was related to TV shows .. I don't recall any Zone / OL / or Trek that did not have something that could be picked apart ..
My point is, for all the whining on the thread about this and that .. name me one show / one episode that would stand the test that deals with what some call Hard Sci Fi ..
In my case, I'm not looking for hard SciFi so much as credible SciFi. In other words, SciFi that appears plausible enough you don't need an explainer - just a term for the thing.

So, things like faster than light interstellar travel, time travel and alien species I'm good with, as long as they fit the reality of the time period they take place in. So, human interstellar space travel has to take place in the future. We don't have it now. Time travel can be at any time, since someone could always take it back in time to our present. Aliens are mostly fair game.

The thing is, certain technologies have to play by the rules. The odds of everyone zooming around in flying cars is slim - even in the future. People suck at driving, maintaining their vehicles and following the rules on the ground. Imagine if they could fail at all that hundreds of feet in the air. We'd have cars raining down on us after what - on the ground - would have been a minor fender bender. While I can certainly see the future of personal commuter aircraft, you're gonna certainly need an aircraft certification to fly them.

Likewise, I doubt we'll be walking around in Star Trek style jumpsuits. While certain articles of clothing might be the trendy styles, we'll certainly see variety in clothing with plenty of people wearing their own style.

Finally, the best SciFi holds up well. For example, while the date didn't quite work out well, a lot of what you see in 2001 still looks futuristic and is still plausible. Sure, a few of the company names we see didn't quite stick around, but overall, Kubrick pulled it off.

As for the modern versions of Star Trek, we'll have to wait until the 24th century to find out how they fare.
post #437 of 1851
With cars coming that drive themselves not that far from fruition, I don't think the flying car is out of the realm of possibility .. same concept, only it flies ..

http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/18/tech/innovation/ieee-2040-cars/index.html
post #438 of 1851
Not to knock FIREFLY but "serious SF" with 6 shooters in space?

(and lest we forget the writers did not know the difference between a solar system and a galaxy. This gaffe was fixed later in the run tho)
post #439 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgkdragn View Post

With cars coming that drive themselves not that far from fruition, I don't think the flying car is out of the realm of possibility .. same concept, only it flies ..
http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/18/tech/innovation/ieee-2040-cars/index.html
The stakes are 1000 times higher once you're off the ground. If your car breaks down on the ground, you cause a traffic jam. If it breaks down in the sky, you kill yourself and anyone it lands on.

Flying cars for the average soccer Mom, teenage boy with a lead foot, texting teenage girl or yuppie with a cell phone - never, ever going to happen.

Flying is taken very seriously by those involved and with how much work it takes to keep certified to fly a plane, there's no way those who fly or control who does will let just any moron up there in a flying Mercedes.
post #440 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by Church AV Guy View Post

Hey, I haven't seen one guy take on and defeat so many better armed attackers since Bruce Lee. That sequence was purely fiction, if not science fiction. Yeah, I know, we were told that he was very good at fighting, or killing, but really, THAT good? And... he appeared to be drunk, or getting there, at the time!eek.gif

Must have been trained by Chuck Norris and his wife, in fact the Norris's recently said we're headed towards 1000 years of darkness so it makes sense they'd train the people on this particular show.wink.gif
post #441 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by Argee View Post

Not to knock FIREFLY but "serious SF" with 6 shooters in space?
(and lest we forget the writers did not know the difference between a solar system and a galaxy. This gaffe was fixed later in the run tho)
It should be pointed out, that most of the "cowboy" stuff kind of melted away after the first couple of episodes.

However, what made Firefly a great show were the characters and the dialog. The ship was merely the means to bring them together. Great writing is great writing, whether it takes place on a farm or in a future world in some distant solar system....er...galaxy... wink.gif
post #442 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

The stakes are 1000 times higher once you're off the ground. If your car breaks down on the ground, you cause a traffic jam. If it breaks down in the sky, you kill yourself and anyone it lands on.
Flying cars for the average soccer Mom, teenage boy with a lead foot, texting teenage girl or yuppie with a cell phone - never, ever going to happen.
Flying is taken very seriously by those involved and with how much work it takes to keep certified to fly a plane, there's no way those who fly or control who does will let just any moron up there in a flying Mercedes.

That's not my point .. the human is simply the passenger .. we're not flying the car ..

I'm not saying I'll live to see it with my limited time left, but it certainly not out of the realm of possibility ..
post #443 of 1851
One on one, I'll take a blade over a black powder gun every time.

But with those odds, he should have just taken off. In fact, with any sense, he wouldn't have hung out there waiting for the militia to show up. Look at what direction the scout leaves and take off in the opposite direction. By the time he comes back with reinforcements and search the entire hotel for one person, you can be miles away.
post #444 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by CPanther95 View Post

One on one, I'll take a blade over a black powder gun every time.
But with those odds, he should have just taken off. In fact, with any sense, he wouldn't have hung out there waiting for the militia to show up. Look at what direction the scout leaves and take off in the opposite direction. By the time he comes back with reinforcements and search the entire hotel for one person, you can be miles away.

Black powder doesn't necessarily mean single-shot. Black powder revolvers were quite common in the 1840's through 60's.
post #445 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by lobosrul View Post

Black powder doesn't necessarily mean single-shot. Black powder revolvers were quite common in the 1840's through 60's.
The muskets they were firing were single shot in the fight scene.

However, black powder revolvers weren't exactly quick to load and fire, either. While you didn't have to reload every shot, it took several minutes to do so when you had to load the powder, wadding and shot - then grease over the front of the chambers to avoid chain firing - for all 6 (or whatever amount that particular model had - I believe some had 7 or more) shots you wanted to have ready.

Honestly, I'm not sure why they were using that stuff anyway. It would have been almost as much trouble to cast shot as it would to cast and assemble modern bullets and brass.

I know I wouldn't want to be caught with my ramrod in my barrel when someone is trying to kill me. When going up against muskets, you really are better off bringing a knife to a gunfight.
post #446 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by lobosrul View Post

Black powder doesn't necessarily mean single-shot. Black powder revolvers were quite common in the 1840's through 60's.

You can tell those weren't revolvers because when they put the butt of the gun on the floor, the muzzle was at nipple height. Revolvers are generally shorter. wink.gif
post #447 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

When going up against muskets, you really are better off bringing a knife to a gunfight.

If you've seen people performing the Tueller Drill, most would be better off being the guy charging from 21 feet away with a knife, than the guy with a holstered semi-auto pistol..
post #448 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by CPanther95 View Post

If you've seen people performing the Tueller Drill, most would be better off being the guy charging from 21 feet away with a knife, than the guy with a holstered semi-auto pistol..
More than that, most people don't know just how really hard it is to hit someone you're shooting at in a panic firing situation.

Even well training pros miss far more than they hit when a target is on the attack. Plus, the odds that you'll put a determined target down with one shot are very long indeed.

Of course, you can have the same issue with arrows, too - plus you need to recover them or you'll run out really, really quickly.
post #449 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aleron Ives View Post

Yep. It was quite convenient that our only "explanation" of her "death" was from the father's vague account of her supposed demise. She's going to be showing up in flashbacks for a while, but I fully expect her to appear again in the present, especially in a season or mid-season finale.

 She's in deep freeze. All the electricity is being used to keep her alive. smile.gif

post #450 of 1851
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garrett Adams View Post

 She's in deep freeze. All the electricity is being used to keep her alive. smile.gif
Her and Walt Disney... wink.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HDTV Programming
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › 'Revolution' on NBC