or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › 'Bones' on FOX HD
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

'Bones' on FOX HD

post #1 of 649
Thread Starter 
Hi,

I tried to watch Bones tonight OTA from KMSB in Tucson.

Twice the audio dropped out for at least 15 seconds before I switched to analog cable to keep up with the show. After the second time I didn't try HD again.

Did anyone else have this problem? I didn't lose the video and had a fairly strong signal. Maybe it was local or a reception issue.

Thanks
post #2 of 649
No problems noticed in LA either OTA or DirecTV Ch 88 (switched back and forth).
post #3 of 649
Did not have this issue on Time Warner Cable.
post #4 of 649
I'm surprised that I haven't seen a thread on this yet, so allow me. I enjoyed the season opener. Great picture, and killer 5.1 sound. I will admit that the 3D imaging system seemed a bit of a stretch, but maybe not. Anybody else?
post #5 of 649
It was a nice picture, but I don't think this one is going to make it and given Fox's itchy trigger finger it may be gone by mid-season...hopefully they will give it a chance..
post #6 of 649
They can kill it now for what I saw. Just one look at the atrium she examined the bones at and you have to ask yourself where in the world could that be true.

The scene at the airport where her assistant is trying to get the airline employee's attention was just ridiculous. The whole scene with the security agent was another farce.

I guess I was looking for a more serious series.
post #7 of 649
I guess that is why I am shopping for a new 1080p DLP! You guys must have yours already?

On my CRT feed from Comcast, I thought the picture was shot through a pair of old pantyhose. The closeups were so soft in some cases that I wondered outloud if this was photographed by the same people bringing us The King of Queens!
post #8 of 649
I tried to give this one a fair shot as well, but was pretty disappointed. Didn't seem too original. I'll give it 5 episodes. No wait, Fox only cancels good shows, so it will probably last the season!
post #9 of 649
I have to agree that the show is silly. Its just another CSI-like show with uninteresting characters. I'll watch another episode or two, but so far I am not impressed.
post #10 of 649
I thought the show was pretty weak personally. (The picture was decent to my eyes though)
I feel bad for middle-aged actors whenever a show about a "specialist" in their field is portrayed by some 25 year old (and I'm only 27). In this case we have about 4 or 5 of them. I just couldn't suspend belief long enough to take the characters seriously. I'd have to say the holographic program thing was the ultimate kicker: ;"patent pending"

CFC
post #11 of 649
To be entirely fair, it is based on a real-life person. I don't know how closely it's based, but don't dismiss it all out of hand. After all, some of those forensic pathologists are WEIRD. Like the people who run the death farm, where they just leave bodies lying around in different conditions to watch how they decompose. Ick.

Anyway, I liked it for what it was but I'll agree with Fox's itchy finger it won't last. Pity.
post #12 of 649
Quote:
Originally Posted by madpoet View Post

To be entirely fair, it is based on a real-life person. I don't know how closely it's based, but don't dismiss it all out of hand. After all, some of those forensic pathologists are WEIRD. Like the people who run the death farm, where they just leave bodies lying around in different conditions to watch how they decompose. Ick.

Anyway, I liked it for what it was but I'll agree with Fox's itchy finger it won't last. Pity.

Not quite from what I can tell.
Kathy Reichs the actual person and author of books with the character of Temperance Brennan is much older. She got a Ph.D in 1975 and wrote her first novel in 1997. It's semi-biographical though.
Be that as it may, I do realize it's a show and don't take it too seriously, but in this case it just went a little beyond what I typically accept

CFC
post #13 of 649
I rather liked it. And that was in spite of having to kill & restart my F3Q viewer software at every FOX commercial for some reason.

- Tom
post #14 of 649
Quote:
Originally Posted by jedi35 View Post

I'm surprised that I haven't seen a thread on this yet

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=580383
post #15 of 649
Picture and sound were good but the wife and I didn't much care for it. Too much CSI, nothing original. Never really liked the characters either. It's a dud.
post #16 of 649
Found the video quality quite good for 720p (sideconverted to 1080i by my system). They seemed to stage lots of bright, high-contrast scenes that aid sharpness even if limited by 720p's spatial resolution. Film telecines, it appears, don't differ that much resolution-wise between 720p/1080i if 720p is done right; (both limited on the 1080/24p master). Couldn't shake the CSI similarity either, and weary of U.S. criminal slaughter depictions, but liked the show. Hope it's not just enhanced-premiere image quality. Nice to see the good doctor back to his antics in the follow-on "House." -- John
post #17 of 649
One of the worst shows I've ever seen. Completely unsuccessful attempt to mix science and absurd comedic antics. After 20 minutes, off it went forever.
post #18 of 649
I saw it as a CSI meets NCIS merger. It had the seriousness of CSI and the fun byplay of NCIS. I agree it probably won't last.
post #19 of 649
No problems (other than the storyline, acting and script) OTA in ATL.

TPM
post #20 of 649
Quote:
Originally Posted by thepicman View Post

No problems (other than the storyline, acting and script)...

Amen!
post #21 of 649
I missed it as our area was without power from 6pm to ???????

Was this show any good?

Chad
post #22 of 649
Topics merged.
post #23 of 649
Quote:
Originally Posted by cburbs View Post

I missed it as our hole area was without power from 6pm to ???????

How tricky is it to get power to your "hole area" ?
post #24 of 649
Eat lots of beans, generate methane, apply match... never mind .
post #25 of 649
Quote:
Originally Posted by CFC View Post

I thought the show was pretty weak personally. (The picture was decent to my eyes though)
I feel bad for middle-aged actors whenever a show about a "specialist" in their field is portrayed by some 25 year old (and I'm only 27). In this case we have about 4 or 5 of them. I just couldn't suspend belief long enough to take the characters seriously. I'd have to say the holographic program thing was the ultimate kicker: ;"patent pending"

CFC

This was the most unrealistic aspect of the show. I don't know how old the character is supposed to be, but the actress that portrays her is only 27. In the real world she would still be in grad school or in a post-doc position, not one of the leading experts in her field. But I guess if they made her old, fat, and ugly it would be too boring.

The Inside was a much better show than this and it got cut. I doubt this one will make it.
post #26 of 649
My wife had her PhD in Genetics and Molecular Biology completed by 24, and was done with her post docs by 26. She also had 2 kids in the process.
post #27 of 649
I thought CSI was poorly acted and written when it first came on, but somehow it was still compelling and it got better. I didn't think it was very good, but the wife liked it (mostly because the guy from Angel is in it)

I find it interesting that the lead actress is only 27. During the show I mentioned to my wife that at times she seemed to be in her mid 30's but other times she appeared much younger than that. It was kind of weird, like in that Seinfeld episode where the woman was good looking sometimes and ugly other times. I agree though that they should of used an older actress, late 30's or early 40's.
post #28 of 649
Quote:
Originally Posted by madpoet View Post

My wife had her PhD in Genetics and Molecular Biology completed by 24, and was done with her post docs by 26. She also had 2 kids in the process.

That is certainly not normal in the US. So was she a leading expert in her field by 27? I guess we can cut her some slack on the black belt and writing a NY Times best seller since she had 2 kids and a husband.
post #29 of 649
Quote:
Originally Posted by sfb View Post

That is certainly not normal in the US.

Well, neither is being a forensic anthropologist.
post #30 of 649
(From Marc Berman's Programming Insider column of Wednesday, September 14, 2005 at Mediaweek.com)

Fox roared to the winning finish line last night, with the series-premiere of drama Bones at an 8.4/13 in the overnights, 10.48 million viewers and a 3.8/11 among adults 18-49 from 8-9 p.m. Bones was the highest rated Tuesday drama premiere on Fox since 24 on Nov. 6, 2001.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/newslett...ider/index.jsp
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HDTV Programming
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › 'Bones' on FOX HD