Week-end time!

[silveradept]

The LJ Threat Level spiked a bit today... and apparently continues to do so. Apparently, while having no grasp of tactics nor of the countermeasures that are deployable to halt his advance and defeat his purpose, someone has been causing Drama. Drama is bad, harmful, and may invite someone to give you an enema with a rusty claw hammer if you do it long enough. (Isn't that a wonderful image?)

Tomorrow promises to be a busy day. Weddings and parties and such. Lots of celebration to be done. Which is good.

In other news, space shuttle orbiter grounding is in the cards. Apparently, the falling foam bit happening again has the brains at NASA saying "Nuh-uh. We're not risking a blast like that again." Details to follow as to whether the one up in space is going to get to come back down and risk getting shredded again. Some other stuff, too. But since I mostly stayed inside and played games and wrote and such, I have very little idea of what went on out in Consensus Reality. I do remember some jabs at politics and economic systems coming in over an e-mail list, mixed with mathematic class queries and the all-important discussion of single and available celebrities. Personally, I still think more than a few of them are still chasing Natalie Portman in their dreams. Although with the way Episode III went, her stock may have been tarnished considerably. She might not be an object worth pursuing in the geek crowd anymore. Who's the hot item now? Jessica Alba again, for Fantastic Four? She was hot to a lot of people for Dark Angel (which had promise to it, from what I saw of it. Shame that it disappeared from Fox's lineup), so maybe she's getting back into the eyes of the fanboys again.

That leads to another potentially distressing note - the lack of good science-fiction on network television. According to at least some of the group in FLEET, the Stargate television series (both of them) hold promise, but as far as I know, they're not getting play on network television. There may be other offerings that have promise on the science-fiction cable channels. But network television appears not to have done well. Unless Enterprise was much more of a hit than its reviews turned out to be.

Dammit, I miss Babylon 5. I also miss Star Trek that was not in syndication. There is a positive dearth of good science fiction on network television. (Admittedly, I also miss the fluff that was Kevin Sorbo's Hercules and Lucy Lawless's Xena. Although in that case, Renee O'Connor's Gabrielle was more interesting to me. That's another part about me that's odd - I tend to pay attention to secondary characters, finding them more interesting than the main ones a lot of the time.) I'm not much for talk shows, reality television, or situation comedies (unless they're really funny - and that means they're probably British or animated). Science fiction programming and cartoons were about the only things that I would watch regularly as a child. I didn't watch much of the Twilight Zone and Outer Limits remixes - they were on after bedtime, and I don't know if Sci-fi actually carries them. Sliders on network TV - didn't watch much of it then, but would want to now. I watch sports a lot of the time because they're the best thing on. How sad is that. Hollywood, I demand, decree, and proclaim that you must create good science-fiction shows and place them in your primetime/weekend viewing spots. Thus Speaks Norton II, Second Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico.

Perhaps my television watching will increase again if I don't have broadband. But that would indicate a lack of cable as well... so I'd be stuck watching network television. Fugeddaboutit. Unless, of course, something good were to appear...

Comments

[fred-smith.livejournal.com]

You know, Norton II should just be everyone. Also, thank God for Dr Who when that was on. Christopher Eccleston flying around space in a phone booth with a bisexual American time travellor and Billy Piper giving her best ever performance. Bliss.

Sit Coms are okay in England. So says Joe.

[silveradept]

Is this older Who or new Who?

Because over here, neither Who gets much for airtime, and none of it on the networks.

As for your sitcoms (Britcoms, as they are often referred to), for some reason, I find them to be funnier than American sitcoms. Perhaps it's because Britcoms don't need nearly as much fantastic situations and they utilize actual humore rather than snappy one-liners. But that's just me.

[fred-smith.livejournal.com]

New Who, and of course you don't have it yet, its very new.

Britcoms rely on the British way of thinking more, I think. More jokes about embatrrassment and such. And maybe not everyone's wildly attractive and sexy. Or they play aging office workers in Slough rather than upper-class New Yorkers. I like that.

[silveradept]

Yes, but I don't expect anyone in America to pick up the Who and broadcast it. Which is a shame, from all the good things I've heard people writing about it.

Perhaps the British willingness to utilize all sorts of humors rather than slapstick and one-liners makes their situation comedies better. I dunno. We just don't get good television anymore.

[greyweirdo.livejournal.com]

I think CBC showed Dr. Who, if you get that channel. I know some Canadian station showed it, I just don't remember which one.

The Britcoms also come in smaller doses. The Average show has only 6 episodes per series. Blackadder only has like 26 episodes if you add in the Christmas Special and the Back and Forth special.

[greyweirdo.livejournal.com]

Dammit! Hit post too quickly. I think because they don't have to fill 13 or 22 episodes a season they can condence all the funny into 6 shows and thus even if they only have one or two jokes they don't use it up before you're sick of it.

[silveradept]

YTV picked up Who, but that's not CBC, which about the only Canadian station that appears down here. And short shows may just be better, then.

[greyweirdo.livejournal.com]

YTV picked up Who, but that's not CBC
BAH! Download it then!

[greyweirdo.livejournal.com]

Understanding that I'm comming from an American perspective and thus only watched a handfull of Brit shows. I think the difference goes deeper than just wildly attractive people who have wacky probems. All the Britcom charecters have a personality. I've noticed that in America the sit-com charecters hacve problems based on thoughtlessness, they just don't think about the damage their going to cause. In the Brit shows though it seems that they are perfectly aware of the trouble they are about to cause and do it anyway. There is a certian nastyness that we don't get on our TV here. (Admitting that my first exposure to British Comedy was Chef!, Blackadder, the Young Ones and Monty Python is probably an important point)

Even when they're a nice show like Are You Being Served there is still an underpinning of petty differences and trying to get at one another.

[fred-smith.livejournal.com]

That sounds about right. But there's more to British Comedy than the stereotypical mean guy.

Take "The Smoking Room". Classic formula, bunch of guys sit in a room talking, one of them is a closet homosexual. Not in a camp way, he's just a normal bloke who doesn't hide his orientation too well from a group thats somewhat small-minded.

No-one's really nasty, though there's a few annoying people. Its good because its kind of innovative, its not afraid to be subtle and its highly observational. Shows seem to take more risks over here, maybe. At least with sit-coms.

[greyweirdo.livejournal.com]

I've never heard of the Smoking Room, but it sounds neat.

It's not that they are all mean or nasty, but those people are at least there. The Britcoms at least admit they exist. We don't have any nasty people in any sitcoms I've seen, save for possibly Cartman in South Park.

[(Anonymous)]

It is neat, I like how the characters in shows like that are in dead-end jobs, lack social skills, don't have much of a love life, etc. But that doesn't make them especially nerdy or the comic relief. Its just how people are.