Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Blame Atlantis/Tribune – they have already destroyed a show riffe with great potential, and it looks like its going to be E:FC all over again.
LOL Aleck
He’s obviously young and insular – we shouldn’t pull rank so instinctively: live and learn (from elder statesmen like ourselves)
So how many times did you vote for Blade Runner on the IMDB? I can claim the 315 votes as mine
[ 22-02-2002: Message edited by: bonnee ]
The list was compiled from things either i had seen or were popular or famous. I didn’t consider The Adjustor notable because it is not well known in the United States, whereas Def-Con 4 has a significant cult following. I wouldn’t think that or Blade Runner qualify as remarkable films, since very few people have seen Blade Runner and I think significantly fewer enjoyed it.
——————————————–
I have to assume that you are joking Lee about what constitutes a remarkable film (peer consent, widest possible recognition, etc).: Egoyan has a huge cult following within film circles and cultural study departments across the world – Adjustor is often celebrated as a definitive film, and helped herald ‘special issue’ dedications in journals. As for Rutger – LMAO. Bladerunner and the Hitcher are justly celebrated films, and enjoy followings that Lexx can only hope to emulate in its wildest dreams. I was saddened by his presence in Eating Pattern, an indication of a wonderful career in marked decline. Bladerunner – for the record – was recently voted the no 4 film in the top 100 films ever made by Time Out readers. its “readers wrote to us from all parts of the world, including the Uk, Canada, United States, Irelsand, denmark, Spain, France, Italy, Norway, Honk Kong..”, etc. Time Out sperately polled “an international host of directors, producers, actors, programmers and critics”, and the film came in at number 60. Bladerunner is – by common consent – one of the few film “masterpieces” that sci can claim to have produced, and Hauer’s performance is amongst the finest to grace genre cimema in over one hundred years of film making. His Hitcher is also note worthy amongst people who are presumably older than you or your circle of friends (no insult intended).Sorry to hear you no longer watch Oz, although I understand if the second season might have deterred you (if it looked misconceived out, it was – Fontana didn’t expect another season, and admits to being caught off guard by Hbo’s desire for more episodes. the third and fourth seasons were much better, although Oz is hardly a patch on Fontana’s other series Homicide: Life on the Street, which – as I’m sure you know – inspired it via its Prison Riot episode).
As for our little exchange regarding Maury Chaykin – I expect that the resulting agreement would be an example of what you might call the result of its descriptive features, and our ‘disagreement’ about his performance a subjective evaluation. I stil would like to describe his perfomance as one that would open up a New York delicatesson
but I won’t start that conversation again – and apologise for letting it get out of hand in the first place.
thanks Aleck, although I suspect that this might be a mistake I’ve (just)encountered on the Net, and has somehow found its way into SOME filmographies. Your recollection might be a retrospective false memory accordingly – he is supposed to have played Head Biker as a recurring role, but this is the role played by Evan Seinfeld of Biohazzard fame who is later given a more rounded role as Hoyt. I’ve also checked hbo’s Oz site and his name does not appear in its exhaustive roll call of guest and regular cast members – nor does it feature in any of the episodes in epguides.com usually meticulous cast details. I also do not recall him from the show at all – and would expect to have recognised him in either a role or resulting credits (like you, I note these things carefully). my suspicion, then, is that this is simply a mistake that we wouldn’t also want to re/produce on the Net – but I could be wrong (as well as an annoying pedant).
I’d agree with you entirely Aleck – I edited my post to include his work on Sweet Hereafter prior to your reference to it, but I’m not so sure he’s as great there (or anywhere else)as he was in the Adjustor. I wouldn’t want to say he was great in Lexx though
As for referring to his generally stellar work elsewhere, yes – definitely. I don’t recall seeing him in HBO’s Oz though. Is this the current (5th) season? (yet to be screened downunder) Does he last for more than one episode or does he become a regular?A great list Lee, although I would want to insist that Maury Chaykin should be more noted for his work with Atom Egoyan than Paul Donovan. Both he and MM have worked with one of Canada’s great directors in so called art films – Speaking Parts (MM of course), The Adjustor and Sweet Hereafter(MC). Its hard to believe, for example, that the actor who played Pa and Vinnie could be so great and unsettling in the Adjustor: one of the few Egoyan films where you mostly feel troubled by the performance of the actor. (Egoyan also wanted him for Exotica, but he was unavailable at the time). He steals the Adjustor, and towers over everyone else on this list in an already remarkable and disquieting film (excepting Hauer in Bladerunner, perhaps).
THE ADJUSTER
“The Adjuster was one of my favourite film experiences. (Director Atom Egoyan) and I had such a wonderful collaboration with that character. One of the amazing things about Atom is that he inhabits his characters. He also lives inside of them the way an actor would so that when he speaks to you about the character, whispers something, it’s almost as if his voice is inside of you as the character as opposed to less-inspired directors who whisper things that completely throw you off right before you do the take.
“One of my favourite scenes that I’ve ever done on camera is in that film. The character I’m playing poses as a (film) locations manager and he’s taking pictures (in the main characters’ home) and they want to know what the film is about, so he sits down and tries to be extremely cordial and polite but he’s actually someone who’s planning his own suicide and the demise of his sister.
“It’s very much my sensibility.”
*****
LEXX: THE SERIES
Chaykin played a cannibalistic, oversexed hillbilly called Pa and his sadistic twin called Daddy. “Ironically, I found that Susannah was pregnant and I was going to be a pa (of a now toddler daughter, Rose) right when I was doing that show.”
The Halifax-made show’s cartoonish characters and excessive sexual innuendo make it pretty silly. Having grown accustomed to seeing him in quality, independent films and strong supporting roles in Hollywood movies, I tell Chaykin I was surprised he bothered to appear in it, especially as such an over-the-top character.
“I don’t have any dignity. It’s too much to hold dignity. …. You know we’re not always dignified. I think that as an actor and as a person … I’m happy that I did it and I had fun doing it. … If I can have fun doing something, that’s more important than preserving the dignity that I feel Maury Chaykin should always have with his roles. I think in fact that dignity is not something that serves an actor. There are actors that I watch and they are always very dignified and they always play dignified roles and they always keep their cool and I don’t find that particularly interesting.”
Paul Donovan, the executive producer, “is an old friend of mine from Halifax who I started doing independent films in the early `80s with in Nova Scotia, which is how I was introduced to Nova Scotia, that beautiful province.
“The role got me to Nova Scotia. It has nostalgic value for me to go back and work with Paul and work in Halifax and to work on something light, silly.”
[ 21-02-2002: Message edited by: bonnee ]
thanx Headgehog – you are (as always) too kind for words. probably won’t be able to manage now though: that’s when I’m off to bed after doing the night shift with my newborn.
I’ll try and be there FX – there are lots of questions I’d like to ask him, but your recent interview suggests that he would only be interested in taking the **** out of everything, including himself of course. I’ll just have to work out when that time will be in Australian hours and do my best to get a proper answer out of him (I think I’ll try and bond with him by way of also being a recent father – we can share filled nappy stories as a way into discussing our thoughts on season 4
)Yes, certain forums do have a tendency to be hermetically sealed environments or self replicating beings, but I would query the use of term ‘odd’ to describe any Lexx fan perjoratively. surely that is the appeal of Lexx and each of its fans to begin with. Its almost as if you want to claim that this is the place to be normal – in which case, no self respecting Lexx fan would want to belong here.
I share your laments dgrequeen – one of the strangest things about sci-fi is the tendency for mainstream audiences (whatver that might be these days in the era of niche demographics) is the refusal to take quality sci fi seriously. Its almost as if the better the show, the worst the reputation and/or chances for survival. there are parallel’s in other genre’s of course: the fact that (say) NYPD is still on air and Homicide:Life on the Street died a death says a great deal about television audiences everywhere. (Interestingly, when NYPD debuted on television it was unfavorably compared to Homicide by a critic thus: NYPD is just like Homicide: Life On the Street, but for television). Make of that whatever you will.
[ 21-02-2002: Message edited by: bonnee ]
Cant see why 10 has to miss out. 7 has SG1, 9 has Enterprise, surely 10 will want to grab a little of the ‘late-night’ pie ?
Saw the first Enterprise show last night. Not bad. Still very ‘trekky’ but hey, it has space ships and ray guns, I’ll watch it. Don’t think much of the theme song though. What’s with the Boring Adams style song ?
——————————————–
i think the drop in ratings for the x files has dissuaded them – the move in the entrenched timeslot is an indication of their general lack of faith.i found the premiere of enterprise barely tolerable. having a theme song suggesting bad fm rock from the eighties was not as off putting as a lead character who was all bravado and posturing . i thought the female vulcan was wonderful though – not because she was beautiful, but because she will have to ground everyone’s flights of fancy. having an arab sounding enemy was disquieting post september 11 – but the actress playing her seems to be able to really act. just watching her passive Vulcan face register hurt and confusion deserves some kind of award against Bakula taking out his d*** and measuring it every five seconds (oh look how big it is now!)
[ 21-02-2002: Message edited by: mary beth ]
Cant see why 10 has to miss out. 7 has SG1, 9 has Enterprise, surely 10 will want to grab a little of the ‘late-night’ pie ?
Saw the first Enterprise show last night. Not bad. Still very ‘trekky’ but hey, it has space ships and ray guns, I’ll watch it. Don’t think much of the theme song though. What’s with the Boring Adams style song ?
——————————————–
i think the drop in ratings for the x files has dissuaded them – the move in the entrenched timeslot is an indication of their general lack of faith.i found the premiere of enterprise barely tolerable. having a theme song suggesting bad fm rock from the eighties was not as off putting as a lead character who was all bravado and posturing . i thought the female vulcan was wonderful though – not because she was beautiful, but because she will have to ground everyone’s flights of fancy. having an arab sounding enemy was disquieting post september 11 – but the actress playing her seems to be able to really act. just watching her passive Vulcan face register hurt and confusion deserves some kind of award against Bakula taking out his d*** and measuring it every five seconds (oh look how big it is now!)
[ 21-02-2002: Message edited by: mary beth ]
laraqq, channel 10 had the rights to screen the show, but have decided against it. they currently feel that sci fi is not a lucrative genre – an attitude that appears to be replicated around the world at the moment. the usual proceedure is that the networks get first option of screening new series, whether they do or not is another question. If they chose to exercise their right/option, cable has to wait until the networks complete their first run. if the show begins on cable, that is an indication that it has decided against showing the series, and will be repeated continually there (usually). to illustrate the situation in reverse. for me – the best show ever made is homicide:life on the street. channel 7 has the rights to the final season, and I keep ringing them to ask when its going to be on. ‘soon’ has been the reply for the last three years. foxtel wants to be able screen it, but can’t until 7 lets go of its ‘option’.
laraqq, channel 10 had the rights to screen the show, but have decided against it. they currently feel that sci fi is not a lucrative genre – an attitude that appears to be replicated around the world at the moment. the usual proceedure is that the networks get first option of screening new series, whether they do or not is another question. If they chose to exercise their right/option, cable has to wait until the networks complete their first run. if the show begins on cable, that is an indication that it has decided against showing the series, and will be repeated continually there (usually). to illustrate the situation in reverse. for me – the best show ever made is homicide:life on the street. channel 7 has the rights to the final season, and I keep ringing them to ask when its going to be on. ‘soon’ has been the reply for the last three years. foxtel wants to be able screen it, but can’t until 7 lets go of its ‘option’.
Sad, the backlash is not against quality scifi, but unwatched scifi. Sadly, few/er people chose to watch shows that are often more expensive to produce and/or only appeal to a niche market. even sadder is that this often coincides with quality shows. don’t blame the television networks – blame the television audience, or rather, lack of. each of the shows you cited have rated appallingly recently: previous audiences have deserted these shows. futurama, for example, debuted as a top 10 show – it is now in the bottom rung of the top 100 watched shows. the tick flopped. x files has witnessed the erasure of its audience over the last three years, culminating in a decline from (say) no. 15 to the current no. 70. for the record though: futurama will still be on air for at least two more seasons (including the current season). apparently the network initialy ordered more than it would have now liked, and its ‘cancellation’ is more of a ‘no thanks’ to another season beyond one still sitting in the (toilet) can.
I’m watching season 1 in repeats three times a week on cable in Australia , channel 9 screwed us over with season 2 by showing episodes out of order, in different time slots (day and night), and even skipped a couple of key episodes along the way. Luckilly, they’ll be repeating season 2 on cable soon. As for season 3 , channel 9 had no intention of showing it, but has relented. (apparently 9 thought they were buying a kids show, and didn’t know what to do it when scifi channel asked for Henson/9 to make it more adult towards the middle of season 1. ) keep your eyes out for the non ratings period in Sepetember, 2002. As for episode info/reviews etc, visit
http://www.farscapefantasy.com/farscape2000/index.htmlAgree with everything you say Squish. I’m not really sure that Lexx should be taken as my cue to sprout analytic philosophy though – if there is one show that discourages such an approach, its Lexx. sorry about that. i just got on my high horse because i found myself on the receiving end of an instance of Subjectivism 101 and all the complications that usually entails. I’d rather not be acting like a show pony, although I certainly appreciated someone meeting me on my home turf, so to speak. The interesting thing about philosophy is that it is full of intelligent people trying to convince each other they’re idiots, and that’s just idiotic. They’re is actually little difference between (say) disputes between Farscape and Lexx fans and Derrida and Habermas fanatics – everyone wants to be proven ‘right’, and resents the one encroaching on the others ‘territority’ For me, the interesting thing/s are the disputes themselves – the ground covered, lost, fought over, etc. I’m actually grateful for being reminded by what is ‘great’ about Lexx, even when its ‘bad’. thanks for that. I suppose my concern is how hermetically sealed fandom can become, allowing itself to tolerate things that it wouldn’t otherwise allow, and resist/resent dissent from ‘within’. I certainly look forward to chasing my tail like a dog though – although my dog (bonnee, an alaskan malamute) has never chasen a thing in her life. so, I’ll probably need a demonstration of some sort
[ 30-01-2002: Message edited by: bonnee ]
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE-HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE- HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
s/he confuses me too
[ 30-01-2002: Message edited by: bonnee ]
____________________________________________
You’re asking, nay, begging for disappointment! Don’t you see what you have been doing and are now doing? You’ve built up theories and expectations about episodes to come and you deny yourself the ability to enjoy any new episode. So as each new episode of the 4th season appears, the divergence from your expectations becomes greater and greater! And then you pass off your disappointment as some sort of failing on the part of the makers of Lexx!
____________________________________________I reread your response Flamegrape, and decided it merits further comment. I’ll let you decide whether I’m being half serious or half joking.
I’m not sure whether it is appropriate to read into my remarks particular expectations from Lexx. As I’ve indicated elsewhere, the show’s appeal lies in its ability to second guess its audience, including me. I’m not convinced that’s the situation here. As I’ve noted, many season 4 episodes resemble the kind of tv fodder that lafftrack so ably ‘critiqued’ – not to mention the pavlonian expectations of audiences. I don’t expect the show to be ‘exciting’, ‘adventorous’, ‘scifi’ (whatever that means) ‘sexy’, ‘effects laden’ ‘etc’. (although I know many people do – as evident by the original post). All I expect from Lexx is for it to be its inimitable self (read: ‘interesting’). That is where my interest and disappointment interesect. As far as I’m concerned it hasn’t been interesting yet, and that has been what is MOST interesting.
All the fodder has managed to do is create food for thought. I remain interested and entertained of course (more or less, more less than more), but I’m not going to mistake my ongoing love for the show as a measure of its sustained merit. Unlike some smart alecs want to maintain, I do not mistake my response to something as the thing being responded to. There are many things I like that I recognise as crap, and there are some things that I dislike that I recognise as praise worthy. Thankfully, this is not usually the case. Some people might examine the entrails of a chicken to determine the meaning or value of something, I’ve been suddenly reduced to trying to make sense of monkey chunks. In my instance, then, it is the disparity between my own interest in the show and the show’s lack of interest that is the issue – not my expectations, but its in/ability to bring them into focus or question. 
[ 29-01-2002: Message edited by: bonnee ]
Squishy
you really should follow Aleck’s example and not allow yourself to be provoked by me. I’m just teasing – btw, monkey’s chunks is actually his paraphrase of my account, and I’m just taking the **** by including it within a desciption of our philosophical differences. its all in fun.
Flamegrape, I was half joking. appreciate the help though. Its obvious that with more episodes being made this season than the last, Salter Street can only afford cardboard cut out characters and sets. but please don’t take ANY of my posts too literally (as opposed to too seriously)- I’m just playing, even when I’m being serious. Conversation is a form of play – that is why wittgenstein called it a language game. God, I wonder what you’ll make of my oberon post below.
[ 28-01-2002: Message edited by: bonnee ]
the following might prove to be useful in some way – then again, maybe not. As far as I can tell, Lexx might be underlining one of the season’s themes and indirectly referring to your anus (uranus) by way of the fairies
http://www.seds.org/nineplanets/nineplanets/oberon.html[ 28-01-2002: Message edited by: bonnee ]
PS: Heh, yeah I can see Liam coming back and exclaiming “What the hell have you done to this show!?!”
actually lurker, that would be Boone’s question
When I tell them about criticism posted here at SadBoard, they’re all mystified’.
Really Flame? In the spirit of an open ended and open minded conversation, I’d just like to say – I’m left speechless.
your a real smart Aleck, you know that?
Seriously,That being said, the concept of 1000 marbles is, since it’s been agreed upon and is “known” (to refer to the Meno/Socrates dialogue) is not as important.
Hmmm – you’ve just circumvented the important problem we’ve been talking about -namely, the problem of the criterion and its relation to the problem of demarcation . Meno’s question has haunted philosophy ever since it was asked, and Socates certainly found it difficult to provide a foundation of his own relationship to anything. Like Lexx, he raised the notion of futurepast (knowldege as re-collection) in order to ‘know’ certain things. The relation between inner and outer is what is fundamentally at issue (the relation between concept and object, content and referent, etc). Philosophers call this the intentional relation, and the fact that we can have a dis/agreement is what throws our relation into question. (intentionality is what individual minds are collectively ‘of’ our ‘about’). No one talks about the ‘subject’ or the ‘object’ anymore – the issue is intersubjectivity – of how something can be built up and held in being (say the concept of marbles) or broken down and thrown into question (like the reputation of Lexx). In other words, how something can come to be of or about ‘marbles’ or ‘lexx’. At the end of the day, you are talking about (different)qualities of the show, and I want to explicate the differences and relation between them. I respect and understand your desire to want to distinguish between primary and secondary qualities, but I cannot accept the fact that my approach precludes the possibility of intelligent discussion. Look what’s going on between us – it gave rise to the need to raise philosophical questions. We both refer to an object (lexx) in order to ‘qualify’ our ‘quantity’ (its properties). and that is because there is something ‘about’ Lexx itself that permits such ‘dis/agreement’. I have to confess, however, to being troubled by someone who want to distinguish between truths, and then attempt to impose a Truth upon my own ‘truth’ (its just your opinion, nothing is proven, truth is relative, facts and values differ, etc). Your evalution/response of my remarks is an argument in favor of them, revealing a desire to get something really truthful across to me ‘about’ them. Within pragmatics, this is called a ‘performative contradiction’ and is invariably impractical (self refuting, defeating, etc). You argue against yourself when arguing with me. But Aleck, can’t we just agree to dis/agree with each other so we can just dis/agree with each other?
[ 28-01-2002: Message edited by: bonnee ]
Meno: And how will you inquire, Socrates, into that which you do not know? What will you put forth as the subject of inquiry? And if do you find what you want, how will you know that this is the thing which you did not know?
Socrates: I know, Meno, what you mean; but see what a tiresome dispute you are introducing. You argue that a man cannot inquire either about that which he knows, or about that which he does not know; for if he knows, he has no need to inquire; and if not, he cannot; for he does not know the very subject about which he is to inquireI appreciate your response Aleck – it was very considered. I certainly acknowledge your open mindness – clearly you are tolerant of dissenting views. Although everything you say is certainly ‘true’ ,you seem want to distinguish between ‘fact’ and ‘value’ as if the distinction was itself factual (or rather, independent of values). I’m not really sure what you think a truth value is, but clearly you think a fact is something that can be dis/proven. However, proof is a normative term, which is just a round about way of saying that the status of facts emerge within the context of our evaluations. The one thing that concerns, me, however is what seems to be a thorogoing subjectivism -the notion that everyone is entitled to their knowledge claims, and such claims are no better or worse than others. except you want to say that nothing is proven by my (and others response) to the show. Given your own standards for evaluation, however, it proves just that: season 4 IS crap because i say so, and its NOT because someone else says its not. In other words, all this proves is our opinion (or rather, that we can all have one) about something particular – namely, certain ‘facts’ (considerations, evidence, etc). We may or may not agree, and that is the extent of it. That kind of logic is self refuting -or atleast, proven by the kind of responses that something can re/produce. The ‘fact’ is – people come together to want to dis/agree with each other, because we think such dis/agreements secure or determine the the status of the things we can (and want)to dis/agree on. In other words, the proof is to be found witin the dis/agreements. And all that proves is that we can have something to dis/agree on.
[ 25-01-2002: Message edited by: bonnee ]
I have to agree with Squish Alec – if I can’t discuss the show in a ‘positive light’, then perhaps I should find another forum. Where I would disagree, however, is the equivocation been made between support and approval. Where I come from, a positive can often be a negative, and negatives can often be positive. It is called being ‘critical’, and it is an attempt to bounce ideas off each other. I was so hoping for people to tell me that I’m mistaken and remind me of its inherent worth, but everyone seems to want to complain about me daring to articulate and develop an unspoken (or barely whispered) truth. One of the most alarming things about fandom is the tendency to eschew critical thought in favor of our own or one another’s enthusiasms. It is almost as if mutual support involves wanting to surround ourselves with uniform and upbeat thoughts – and if that is not a version of the dystopia posited by the first Lexx movie, I don’t know what is. Consensus is not a criterion of truth, and dissent is one way of bringing out what we have already assented to. I have been trying to penetrate the public veneer of private disappointments in order to make better sense of the show’s recent failings – not to mention, rekindle an original love. As far as I am concerned, Lexx always used to provide a critique of conventional TV by virtue of its own existence. It encouraged a discriminating and devotional response. It helped put the cult back into popular culture. My problem has been watching the show start to resemble the kind of ‘stuff’ that was readilly parodied in Lafftrak, reducing its audience to a potentially mindless mass easily dis/pleased. However, I respect the desire that my ‘whinning’ has become ‘tiresome’, and shall not bore you anymore.
I do, however, want to take Alec to task for his own equivocations, and then disappear for good. You do not ‘get it’ – not by a long shot. By selling out, I meant Lexx’s willingness to deliver a 20 plus episode season when clearly 6 or eight episodes would have sufficed. not to mention the fact that they were prepared to deliver these episodes ‘on time’ so as not to disappoint the network – as opposed to themselves or their audience. They allowed commercical considerations to impact on the integrity of their vision – and by integrity, I mean how well certain themes or issues are integrated into the narrative. You claim that someone could argue that the limited use of (say) Lyetta is an indication of them selling out. Someone could, but I wouldn’t. Her introduction in Garden was faithful to both the character and the narrative – she literally grew out of it. The episode was god awful, but her presence was justified. Fifi could have been ANY character encountered in season 4 – the role he was required to play only resonates within our recollection – it barely registered within the story itself. he was included because it was good for ratings – not good for the show (an important difference raised within the episode itself). one thing i want to particular chastise you for is making an assumption about me – an assumption Salter Street is guilty of making itself. You have assumed that I am a woman – is it because of the ‘whinning’ or the ‘handle’? I am a male supporter of the show who intends to publicly support it elsewhere. Like Salter Street, I think you have made assumptions about my interest in the show and the extent of my engagement with it. my feeling is that once they discovered that a large part of their audience was female and/or gay, they decided to play into what they think such people liked about it in the first place. By playing into many lame misconception about females and gay people, they diluted it to the point of emptying it of its own content That is insulting on so many levels. The biggest insult is where the writers apparently asked fans for ideas – surely, the appeal of Lexx has always been to second guess its audience, not pander to a given or vocal ‘demographic’. As for you tiring of my recycled posts and running certain points into the ground – how can you presume to make such a remark without the remotest hint of irony? That has been one of my main objections about season 4 – redundancy due to a certain recyclying and dimininishing re-turns.
Now that I’ve got off my high horse, I think my timing has been appalling. And for that I apologise. Perhaps the tone of this would have been different if I also had been Lexx starved – we are watching all of the episodes in a row over 6 months (we are up to the ninth week) . it is proving to be an ordeal, and I was fearing the worst was to come if Tony’s reviews are any indication. you, however, are eagerly awaiting the arrival of the second half, and hopefully these episodes will make up for what has proved to be a very ‘tiresome’ and ‘groundless’ first half.
Enjoy the show, and bi for now.
[ 25-01-2002: Message edited by: bonnee ]
according to imdb, he was appearing in something called ‘suck my dick’. Seriously.
the fact that scheduling conflicts might have impacted on the writing/production, though, really sucks, and is another indication of salter street allowing the ‘soul’ of the show to be sold out to the shadow of its former self. watching what they did to fifi was really lame – he was so striking in 3 and incredibly wasted in 4. what was his excuse – appearing in a remake of def com 4?Thanks Headgehog – check your email!! I’m not sure I’ve understood what’s required of me or is actually involved, so please just let me know in your email response
possibly the best place to commiserate the protracted demise of efc is here
http://www.philosophysphere.com/%5B/url%5D (go to postings)this is a GR site who discuss his ‘philosophy’, and each week fans get to together to publicly mourn the show. by the way, liam returns in the last episode’s (apparently)
One of the things that concerns me about Season 4 is the higher than usual rate of bad episodes so early on – suggesting one of two things: the writers have over extended themselves by allowing themselves a 20 plus season or that they are getting the usual crappy ratio out of the way so they can leave the best to last. Hopefully – but doubtfully – its the latter. Either way, they are relying on a higher than usual good will ratio from its fan base, and run the risk of testing our patience. I’ve actually found myself apologising to people for reccommending it to them
