Discussion:
What Did You Watch? 2019-08-07 (Wednesday)
Add Reply
Ubiquitous
2019-08-08 08:30:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Before "D&D night" at Burrito Boarder, I watched:

SUPERNATURAL:
Several eps.

CHIPS:
"In the Best of Families". They are definitely running out of story
ideas at this point and becoming ridiculous. A bickering family
consisting of a very manly-looking mother and her two sons decided to
celebrate(?) their father getting out of jail by robbing an armored
truck by having the sons pose as cops to detour the truck to a remote
location where they make it pull over so the mother could dump bees
into the air vent on the roof and the sons unload the truck during the
confusion. Hey, it's the Patridge Family bus!

CHIPS:
"Silent Partner". A deaf man files a complaint against Jon when he is
mistaken for a drunken driver, so Ponch starts to date the man's
daughter. Meanwhile, Grossman, who had his mouth wired shut because of
the accident the deaf man caused, is cruely tormented by his coworkers,
so he predictibly binges at the deaf dance buffett. Because he's FAT.

CHARLIE'S ANGELS:
"Angels on Campus". Cute sorority bimbo Jennifer Thomas is the second coed at
Whitley College to get kidnapped. Was it her boyfriend Richard (who has been
a student since the 1960s)? Her Literature teacher Fairgate? The tight end
football star Steve? His little sister Nikki? Tiffany was president of Kappa
Omega Psi (same sorority as Jennifer) when she was at Whitley College. "Kappa
Omega Psi was always known for beautiful women... until Tiffany showed up."
Ouch! While Tiffany hangs around the sorority house, Kris poses as a student
and Kelly poses as a football scout. The kidnapped girls are being sold for a
million dollars apiece by Professor Fairgate and the Kappa house mother to
some Sheikh. Willi the librarian (hey, it's the Russian chick from HOGAN'S
HEROES!) falls for Bosley (who is posing as a writer, then a football
scout).

CHIPS:
"Flare Up". A bitter young man charges Ponch with police brutality.
There's a weird wind blowing in those Santa Anna winds! Apparently this
week's word is "synergy", as some spilt strawberry soda causes a
woman's station wagon to fill with Cholrine gas and later some spilt
hydroaciteic(?) acid mixes with water runoff to form huge purple
clouds.

What did you watch?

--
Watching Democrats come up with schemes to "catch Trump" is like
watching Wile E. Coyote trying to catch Road Runner.
Arthur Lipscomb
2019-08-08 14:04:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
I watched:


Krypton - "Blood Moon" - Zod sends Doomsday to crush the resistance.
Doomsday pretty much does that with more decapitations and blood spatter
than you'd expect for a basic cable show.


Grand Hotel - Already covered.


Doctor Who - "The End of Time" Theatrical release of the 2009 David
Tennant Christmas episode in honor of the 10 year anniversary. This was
Tennant's last episode and featured the return of The Master who comes
up with a convoluted plot to turn every human on Earth into a copy of
himself. It also features the return of The Time Lords, lead by Timothy
Dalton who plots to end all time so they can finally win the time war.

I remembered this episode being a *lot* better! All I could think of
while watching most of it was why couldn't they have shown one of the
better more action packed season finale episodes instead. This one was
full of shots of The Master eating, jumping and generally hamming it up.
And plot holes, oh so many plot holes. It did have a pretty cool
ending where Tennant who knows he's going to regenerate goes back and
revisits past companions.

After the episode ended there was an interview with Tennant discussing
the 10th anniversary. About half way through the sound cut off along
with other technical issues. This lead to a bunch of angry Doctor Who
nerds (myself included) storming the theater lobby to complain to the
manager. They never did fix it, so we missed out on the interview. At
least we got free passes.
anim8rfsk
2019-08-08 14:47:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Krypton - "Blood Moon" - Zod sends Doomsday to crush the resistance.
Doomsday pretty much does that with more decapitations and blood spatter
than you'd expect for a basic cable show.
Grand Hotel - Already covered.
Doctor Who - "The End of Time" Theatrical release of the 2009 David
Tennant Christmas episode in honor of the 10 year anniversary. This was
Tennant's last episode and featured the return of The Master who comes
up with a convoluted plot to turn every human on Earth into a copy of
himself. It also features the return of The Time Lords, lead by Timothy
Dalton who plots to end all time so they can finally win the time war.
I remembered this episode being a *lot* better! All I could think of
while watching most of it was why couldn't they have shown one of the
better more action packed season finale episodes instead. This one was
full of shots of The Master eating, jumping and generally hamming it up.
And plot holes, oh so many plot holes. It did have a pretty cool
ending where Tennant who knows he's going to regenerate goes back and
revisits past companions.
Been better had he visited future companions.
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
After the episode ended there was an interview with Tennant discussing
the 10th anniversary. About half way through the sound cut off along
with other technical issues. This lead to a bunch of angry Doctor Who
nerds (myself included) storming the theater lobby to complain to the
manager. They never did fix it, so we missed out on the interview. At
least we got free passes.
I see the digital era hasn't improved the theatrical experience any.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Adam H. Kerman
2019-08-08 17:37:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by anim8rfsk
. . .
I see the digital era hasn't improved the theatrical experience any.
Remember: Digital projection was supposed to do nothing to improve the
theater experience for the audience. It was supposed to make more for Sony
to sell those hideously expensive projectors, and to save the expense of
distributing reels of film for the DISTRIBUTOR by shifting the massive
cost of re-equipping his theater onto the EXHIBITOR.

The exhibitors were complete morons for falling for it.

Unless I'm attending a revival in which I know that there's going to be
film projection, I've almost entirely stopped attending theater since
the digital projection era. Mostly I wait till I can watch the new movie
on home video or it comes to HBO or Showtime.

I'm just not motivated to attend theater for digital projection.
anim8rfsk
2019-08-08 17:47:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by anim8rfsk
. . .
I see the digital era hasn't improved the theatrical experience any.
Remember: Digital projection was supposed to do nothing to improve the
theater experience for the audience. It was supposed to make more for Sony
to sell those hideously expensive projectors, and to save the expense of
distributing reels of film for the DISTRIBUTOR by shifting the massive
cost of re-equipping his theater onto the EXHIBITOR.
The exhibitors were complete morons for falling for it.
Unless I'm attending a revival in which I know that there's going to be
film projection, I've almost entirely stopped attending theater since
the digital projection era. Mostly I wait till I can watch the new movie
on home video or it comes to HBO or Showtime.
I'm just not motivated to attend theater for digital projection.
Nope. There may be good examples of it, but I've never seen one.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Adam H. Kerman
2019-08-08 18:22:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by anim8rfsk
. . .
I see the digital era hasn't improved the theatrical experience any.
Remember: Digital projection was supposed to do nothing to improve the
theater experience for the audience. It was supposed to make more for Sony
to sell those hideously expensive projectors, and to save the expense of
distributing reels of film for the DISTRIBUTOR by shifting the massive
cost of re-equipping his theater onto the EXHIBITOR.
The exhibitors were complete morons for falling for it.
Unless I'm attending a revival in which I know that there's going to be
film projection, I've almost entirely stopped attending theater since
the digital projection era. Mostly I wait till I can watch the new movie
on home video or it comes to HBO or Showtime.
I'm just not motivated to attend theater for digital projection.
Nope. There may be good examples of it, but I've never seen one.
I used to love those newly-built AMC megaplexes from the 1990s. They had
curved screens which meant that even sitting on the sidelines,
everything was in focus and there wasn't a bad seat in the house.

Digital projection looks better on flat screens.

Of course, IMAX has been murdered. What the hell is the point of digital
projection onto an IMAX screen?

I haven't looked in a long time. Have they entirely stopped printing
those IMAX prints on enormous film? Have IMAX film cameras been
eliminated? I've assumed that IMAX is now yet another dead format.
anim8rfsk
2019-08-08 18:49:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by anim8rfsk
. . .
I see the digital era hasn't improved the theatrical experience any.
Remember: Digital projection was supposed to do nothing to improve the
theater experience for the audience. It was supposed to make more for Sony
to sell those hideously expensive projectors, and to save the expense of
distributing reels of film for the DISTRIBUTOR by shifting the massive
cost of re-equipping his theater onto the EXHIBITOR.
The exhibitors were complete morons for falling for it.
Unless I'm attending a revival in which I know that there's going to be
film projection, I've almost entirely stopped attending theater since
the digital projection era. Mostly I wait till I can watch the new movie
on home video or it comes to HBO or Showtime.
I'm just not motivated to attend theater for digital projection.
Nope. There may be good examples of it, but I've never seen one.
I used to love those newly-built AMC megaplexes from the 1990s. They had
curved screens which meant that even sitting on the sidelines,
everything was in focus and there wasn't a bad seat in the house.
We had the exact opposite here. The Cine Crappy had a Cinerama screen and
couldn't hold focus on it. One projector had the middle in focus and the
sides out. The other projector had the sides in focus and the middle out.
This is widely considered to have been the best theater in town.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Digital projection looks better on flat screens.
Of course, IMAX has been murdered. What the hell is the point of digital
projection onto an IMAX screen?
I've never been in an IMAX. They wouldn't sell us tickets.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
I haven't looked in a long time. Have they entirely stopped printing
those IMAX prints on enormous film? Have IMAX film cameras been
eliminated? I've assumed that IMAX is now yet another dead format.
Well, the IMAX near me closed, possibly as a side effect of them REFUSING TO
SELL US TICKETS.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Adam H. Kerman
2019-08-08 18:58:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by anim8rfsk
. . .
I see the digital era hasn't improved the theatrical experience any.
Remember: Digital projection was supposed to do nothing to improve the
theater experience for the audience. It was supposed to make more for Sony
to sell those hideously expensive projectors, and to save the expense of
distributing reels of film for the DISTRIBUTOR by shifting the massive
cost of re-equipping his theater onto the EXHIBITOR.
The exhibitors were complete morons for falling for it.
Unless I'm attending a revival in which I know that there's going to be
film projection, I've almost entirely stopped attending theater since
the digital projection era. Mostly I wait till I can watch the new movie
on home video or it comes to HBO or Showtime.
I'm just not motivated to attend theater for digital projection.
Nope. There may be good examples of it, but I've never seen one.
I used to love those newly-built AMC megaplexes from the 1990s. They had
curved screens which meant that even sitting on the sidelines,
everything was in focus and there wasn't a bad seat in the house.
We had the exact opposite here. The Cine Crappy had a Cinerama screen and
couldn't hold focus on it. One projector had the middle in focus and the
sides out. The other projector had the sides in focus and the middle out.
This is widely considered to have been the best theater in town.
Wow. I never ever got to see Cinerama in theater. There was one
remaining Cinerama theater in the area till it was demolished 10 years
ago, but it was in a distant suburb and I never got to it, not that it
would have been meaningful for regular projection.
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Adam H. Kerman
. . .
anim8rfsk
2019-08-08 19:39:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by anim8rfsk
. . .
I see the digital era hasn't improved the theatrical experience any.
Remember: Digital projection was supposed to do nothing to improve the
theater experience for the audience. It was supposed to make more for Sony
to sell those hideously expensive projectors, and to save the expense of
distributing reels of film for the DISTRIBUTOR by shifting the massive
cost of re-equipping his theater onto the EXHIBITOR.
The exhibitors were complete morons for falling for it.
Unless I'm attending a revival in which I know that there's going to be
film projection, I've almost entirely stopped attending theater since
the digital projection era. Mostly I wait till I can watch the new movie
on home video or it comes to HBO or Showtime.
I'm just not motivated to attend theater for digital projection.
Nope. There may be good examples of it, but I've never seen one.
I used to love those newly-built AMC megaplexes from the 1990s. They had
curved screens which meant that even sitting on the sidelines,
everything was in focus and there wasn't a bad seat in the house.
We had the exact opposite here. The Cine Crappy had a Cinerama screen and
couldn't hold focus on it. One projector had the middle in focus and the
sides out. The other projector had the sides in focus and the middle out.
This is widely considered to have been the best theater in town.
Wow. I never ever got to see Cinerama in theater. There was one
remaining Cinerama theater in the area till it was demolished 10 years
ago, but it was in a distant suburb and I never got to it, not that it
would have been meaningful for regular projection.
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Adam H. Kerman
. . .
I never saw Cinerama at the Cine Crappy. But we had the Kachina in
Scottsdale, and it was a lot better. I saw How the West Was Won there, and
2001, and I must have seen HATARI!. I saw The Wonderful World of the Brothers
Grimm in a theater, likely the Kachina. Oh, yeah, It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad
World! I saw Krakatoa East of Java in a theater, but I'm sure that was over
at the Bethany Home on the west side, flat screen. I saw Grand Prix ...
somewhere. And I'm sure I saw some of those featurettes like THIS IS CINERAMA
as openers for other movies at the Kachina.

Hey, cool! Somebody else remembers:
http://www.incinerama.com/Kachina.htm
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Arthur Lipscomb
2019-08-09 04:51:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by anim8rfsk
. . .
I see the digital era hasn't improved the theatrical experience any.
Remember: Digital projection was supposed to do nothing to improve the
theater experience for the audience. It was supposed to make more for Sony
to sell those hideously expensive projectors, and to save the expense of
distributing reels of film for the DISTRIBUTOR by shifting the massive
cost of re-equipping his theater onto the EXHIBITOR.
The lack of an actual human in the projector room is a major annoyance
and would fix somewhere between 99% and 100% of the problems that pop up.

snip
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Digital projection looks better on flat screens.
Of course, IMAX has been murdered. What the hell is the point of digital
projection onto an IMAX screen?
I've never been in an IMAX. They wouldn't sell us tickets.
IMAX used to be my favorite film format. Now it's Dolby Cinema.
Although since Dolby Cinema can't do 3D, I still prefer IMAX 3D.

I highly recommend seeing a movie in IMAX / Dolby Cinema if the
opportunity ever presents itself.
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Adam H. Kerman
I haven't looked in a long time. Have they entirely stopped printing
those IMAX prints on enormous film? Have IMAX film cameras been
eliminated? I've assumed that IMAX is now yet another dead format.
Well, the IMAX near me closed, possibly as a side effect of them REFUSING TO
SELL US TICKETS.
anim8rfsk
2019-08-09 05:50:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by anim8rfsk
. . .
I see the digital era hasn't improved the theatrical experience any.
Remember: Digital projection was supposed to do nothing to improve the
theater experience for the audience. It was supposed to make more for Sony
to sell those hideously expensive projectors, and to save the expense of
distributing reels of film for the DISTRIBUTOR by shifting the massive
cost of re-equipping his theater onto the EXHIBITOR.
The lack of an actual human in the projector room is a major annoyance
and would fix somewhere between 99% and 100% of the problems that pop up.
The set-ups here are unfixable. Off center, crooked, keystoned, and raster
lines that look like you're a foot away from an old CRT tv.
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
snip
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Digital projection looks better on flat screens.
Of course, IMAX has been murdered. What the hell is the point of digital
projection onto an IMAX screen?
I've never been in an IMAX. They wouldn't sell us tickets.
IMAX used to be my favorite film format. Now it's Dolby Cinema.
Although since Dolby Cinema can't do 3D, I still prefer IMAX 3D.
I highly recommend seeing a movie in IMAX / Dolby Cinema if the
opportunity ever presents itself.
I've seen OmniMax at the Reuben Fleet in Sandy Eggo
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Adam H. Kerman
I haven't looked in a long time. Have they entirely stopped printing
those IMAX prints on enormous film? Have IMAX film cameras been
eliminated? I've assumed that IMAX is now yet another dead format.
Well, the IMAX near me closed, possibly as a side effect of them REFUSING TO
SELL US TICKETS.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Adam H. Kerman
2019-08-09 06:52:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by anim8rfsk
. . .
I see the digital era hasn't improved the theatrical experience any.
Remember: Digital projection was supposed to do nothing to improve the
theater experience for the audience. It was supposed to make more for
Sony
to sell those hideously expensive projectors, and to save the
expense of
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Adam H. Kerman
distributing reels of film for the DISTRIBUTOR by shifting the massive
cost of re-equipping his theater onto the EXHIBITOR.
The lack of an actual human in the projector room is a major annoyance
and would fix somewhere between 99% and 100% of the problems that pop up.
The set-ups here are unfixable. Off center, crooked, keystoned, and raster
lines that look like you're a foot away from an old CRT tv.
Well, the projectors have to be re-mounted.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
snip
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Digital projection looks better on flat screens.
Of course, IMAX has been murdered. What the hell is the point of digital
projection onto an IMAX screen?
I've never been in an IMAX. They wouldn't sell us tickets.
IMAX used to be my favorite film format. Now it's Dolby Cinema.
Although since Dolby Cinema can't do 3D, I still prefer IMAX 3D.
I highly recommend seeing a movie in IMAX / Dolby Cinema if the
opportunity ever presents itself.
I've seen OmniMax at the Reuben Fleet in Sandy Eggo
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by Adam H. Kerman
I haven't looked in a long time. Have they entirely stopped printing
those IMAX prints on enormous film? Have IMAX film cameras been
eliminated? I've assumed that IMAX is now yet another dead format.
Well, the IMAX near me closed, possibly as a side effect of them REFUSING TO
SELL US TICKETS.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
anim8rfsk
2019-08-09 14:44:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
What Did You Watch? 2019-08-07 (Wednesday)
August 8, 2019 at 11:52:10 PM MST
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by anim8rfsk
. . .
I see the digital era hasn't improved the theatrical experience any.
Remember: Digital projection was supposed to do nothing to improve the
theater experience for the audience. It was supposed to make more for
Sony
to sell those hideously expensive projectors, and to save the
expense of
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by Adam H. Kerman
distributing reels of film for the DISTRIBUTOR by shifting the massive
cost of re-equipping his theater onto the EXHIBITOR.
The lack of an actual human in the projector room is a major annoyance
and would fix somewhere between 99% and 100% of the problems that pop up.
The set-ups here are unfixable. Off center, crooked, keystoned, and raster
lines that look like you're a foot away from an old CRT tv.
Well, the projectors have to be re-mounted.
If that's even possible. They might need to change the projection window
itself.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Arthur Lipscomb
2019-08-09 16:03:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by anim8rfsk
What Did You Watch? 2019-08-07 (Wednesday)
August 8, 2019 at 11:52:10 PM MST
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by anim8rfsk
. . .
I see the digital era hasn't improved the theatrical experience any.
Remember: Digital projection was supposed to do nothing to improve the
theater experience for the audience. It was supposed to make more for Sony
to sell those hideously expensive projectors, and to save the
expense of
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by Adam H. Kerman
distributing reels of film for the DISTRIBUTOR by shifting the massive
cost of re-equipping his theater onto the EXHIBITOR.
The lack of an actual human in the projector room is a major annoyance
and would fix somewhere between 99% and 100% of the problems that pop up.
The set-ups here are unfixable. Off center, crooked, keystoned, and raster
lines that look like you're a foot away from an old CRT tv.
Well, the projectors have to be re-mounted.
If that's even possible. They might need to change the projection window
itself.
Most of the time I think I'm the only one who even notices when there's
a problem with the framing. I'm like seriously people can't you *see*
the image is misframed?!?! But I'm always the only one who gets up to
complain. It might get fixed, it might not. A couple of years ago they
actually had a movie showing at the wrong aspect ratio. The manager was
shocked I noticed, then had to admit they couldn't fix it for some
technical reason.

But as far as people noticing, it's not just movies. People at home
watch stuff horribly stretched, washed out and everything else,
seemingly oblivious to it all. I'll walk into a house and look in
horror at the TV image that people just don't notice is wrong. Even
when I specifically point it out to them, it's just a head shrug and
well fix it then. And after I fix it, it's still a head shrug and not
seeing the difference or why are there black bars on the TV now. :-/

One of the things I like about IMAX and Dolby Cinema is in addition to
the better picture and sound is there are almost never any problems with
the framing or presentation. I've seen fewer movies by comparison, but
so far I have never had any problems with a Dolby Digital movie and IMAX
issues could be counted on one hand.

Although I do have to admit, the last time there was a problem with IMAX
was with the Lion King when the kid (and I mean that literally, he
looked pre-teen) taking tickets was handing out the wrong type of 3D
glasses. I immediately noticed and told him, but he incorrectly claimed
all 3D was the same. I didn't even bother to argue. I just went to the
manager and swapped out the glasses. But sure enough when the movie
started there were lots of audible "What's wrong with the 3D" and people
leaving while the manager sorted it out. Then people kept shouting to
restart the movie, but they never did. But that wasn't a problem with
the IMAX presentation, that was pure human error before even getting
into the screening room.
anim8rfsk
2019-08-09 17:36:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by anim8rfsk
What Did You Watch? 2019-08-07 (Wednesday)
August 8, 2019 at 11:52:10 PM MST
Thu, 08 Aug 2019 21:51:25 -0700 Arthur
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by anim8rfsk
. . .
I see the digital era hasn't improved the theatrical experience any.
Remember: Digital projection was supposed to do nothing to improve
the
theater experience for the audience. It was supposed to make more for
Sony
to sell those hideously expensive projectors, and to save the
expense of
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by Adam H. Kerman
distributing reels of film for the DISTRIBUTOR by shifting the
massive
cost of re-equipping his theater onto the EXHIBITOR.
The lack of an actual human in the projector room is a major annoyance
and would fix somewhere between 99% and 100% of the problems that pop up.
The set-ups here are unfixable. Off center, crooked, keystoned, and raster
lines that look like you're a foot away from an old CRT tv.
Well, the projectors have to be re-mounted.
If that's even possible. They might need to change the projection window
itself.
Most of the time I think I'm the only one who even notices when there's
a problem with the framing. I'm like seriously people can't you *see*
the image is misframed?!?! But I'm always the only one who gets up to
complain. It might get fixed, it might not. A couple of years ago they
actually had a movie showing at the wrong aspect ratio. The manager was
shocked I noticed, then had to admit they couldn't fix it for some
technical reason.
I think the *only* time I got them to fix the aspect ratio was in the
Langella DRACULA, and even then it took my convincing the popcorn vendor to
get the only projectionist to do it when he finished making his rounds of the
other 11 projection booths.

The Cine Crappy had a canned response "the movie is not out of focus, sir,
you're simply reacting to the curvature of the screen"
Of course, they were wrong.
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
But as far as people noticing, it's not just movies. People at home
watch stuff horribly stretched, washed out and everything else,
seemingly oblivious to it all. I'll walk into a house and look in
horror at the TV image that people just don't notice is wrong. Even
when I specifically point it out to them, it's just a head shrug and
well fix it then. And after I fix it, it's still a head shrug and not
seeing the difference or why are there black bars on the TV now. :-/
God, I helped a friend set up his shiny new TV and Direct or Dish or
whatever, and we had it all to perfection, when his wife walked in. She
didn't like the little white line at the top of the screen (only affecting
that one channel) so she picked up the remote and changed the master settings
to ALWAYS ZOOM IN AT THE WORNG ASPECT RATIO. She said she liked that better
than a tiny flicking white line on one game show channel they'd have never
watched anyway.
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
One of the things I like about IMAX and Dolby Cinema is in addition to
the better picture and sound is there are almost never any problems with
the framing or presentation. I've seen fewer movies by comparison, but
so far I have never had any problems with a Dolby Digital movie and IMAX
issues could be counted on one hand.
Although I do have to admit, the last time there was a problem with IMAX
was with the Lion King when the kid (and I mean that literally, he
looked pre-teen) taking tickets was handing out the wrong type of 3D
glasses. I immediately noticed and told him, but he incorrectly claimed
all 3D was the same. I didn't even bother to argue. I just went to the
manager and swapped out the glasses. But sure enough when the movie
started there were lots of audible "What's wrong with the 3D" and people
leaving while the manager sorted it out. Then people kept shouting to
restart the movie, but they never did. But that wasn't a problem with
the IMAX presentation, that was pure human error before even getting
into the screening room.
Sigh
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Adam H. Kerman
2019-08-09 18:00:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by anim8rfsk
What Did You Watch? 2019-08-07 (Wednesday)
August 8, 2019 at 11:52:10 PM MST
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Thu, 08 Aug 2019 10:37:42 -0700 Adam H.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by anim8rfsk
. . .
I see the digital era hasn't improved the theatrical
experience any.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Remember: Digital projection was supposed to do nothing to
improve the
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by Adam H. Kerman
theater experience for the audience. It was supposed to
make more for
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Sony
to sell those hideously expensive projectors, and to save the
expense of
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by Adam H. Kerman
distributing reels of film for the DISTRIBUTOR by shifting
the massive
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by Adam H. Kerman
cost of re-equipping his theater onto the EXHIBITOR.
The lack of an actual human in the projector room is a major annoyance
and would fix somewhere between 99% and 100% of the problems that pop up.
The set-ups here are unfixable. Off center, crooked, keystoned, and raster
lines that look like you're a foot away from an old CRT tv.
Well, the projectors have to be re-mounted.
If that's even possible. They might need to change the projection window
itself.
It's like the movie theater was equipped by a handyman and nothing was
supervised by an engineer.
anim8rfsk
2019-08-09 18:18:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by anim8rfsk
What Did You Watch? 2019-08-07 (Wednesday)
August 8, 2019 at 11:52:10 PM MST
Thu, 08 Aug 2019 21:51:25 -0700 Arthur
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Thu, 08 Aug 2019 10:37:42 -0700 Adam H.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by anim8rfsk
. . .
I see the digital era hasn't improved the theatrical
experience any.
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Remember: Digital projection was supposed to do nothing to
improve the
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by Adam H. Kerman
theater experience for the audience. It was supposed to
make more for
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Sony
to sell those hideously expensive projectors, and to save the
expense of
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by Adam H. Kerman
distributing reels of film for the DISTRIBUTOR by shifting
the massive
Post by Arthur Lipscomb
Post by Adam H. Kerman
cost of re-equipping his theater onto the EXHIBITOR.
The lack of an actual human in the projector room is a major annoyance
and would fix somewhere between 99% and 100% of the problems that pop up.
The set-ups here are unfixable. Off center, crooked, keystoned, and raster
lines that look like you're a foot away from an old CRT tv.
Well, the projectors have to be re-mounted.
If that's even possible. They might need to change the projection window
itself.
It's like the movie theater was equipped by a handyman and nothing was
supervised by an engineer.
Yep
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Ian J. Ball
2019-08-08 18:21:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
What did you watch?
The InBetween (recorded) - "Let Me in Your Window" (ep. #7). Finally
got around to watching the episode in which Molly C. Quinn ("Castle")
guest-starred...
The 'A' storyline, in which Tom and Damien investigate a series of
deadly arson attacks didn't make a lick of sense (esp. the "resolution"
to the case)!
But the 'B' storyline with Quinn was pretty good - Cassie's new
co-worker (Quinn) is being stalked by the spirit of the creep who
stalked her in real life (and whom Quinn's character had accidentally
killed by pushing him over a cliff!!), and of course Ed Roven's spirit
shows up to offer Cassie "assistance" (she stupidly takes him up on it,
which I'm sure she'll regret...). In the 'C' storyline, Damien's
comatose "fiancee" finally kicks the bucket, but not without getting a
very important message to Cassie first.

soaps: Hope is an idiot (what else is new?!!). Kate is informed that
Ted has been murdered "by Stefan" but she keeps her cards close to the
vest. In the continuing dumbest-storyline-in-all-of-soaps,
Kristen-as-Nicole successfully seduces Brady (but THEIR BODY TYPES ARE
TOTALLY DIFFERENT!!!). And Sarah finally wears ol' Eric down, and they
also "boff", so I guess they're "official" now.
GH - And speaking of stupid storylines! - Shiloh has kidnapped
Cameron the teen, in order to plant "Drew's" memories into him, but
Franco comes across this and interrupts(?) the process... Also, they
didn't forget that Cassandra Pierce "poisoned" Sasha, as she's starting
to get sick in this episode, and looks to be having a medical emergency
in the promo for the next episode.

Blood & Treasure (recorded) - "The Revenge of Farouk" (ep. #12, the
season finale).
This finale was hard to parse... On the plus side, all of the season
#1 storylines *were* resolved, so if they wish to "start fresh" with an
entirely new storyline in season #2, they can (and I *really* hope they
do!!). However, on the "minus" side, both "Farouk" and Reece are left
"in play" at the end of this finale (in that they aren't dead, just "in
custody"), so if they want to fail to learn from the mistakes of TV
shows from summers past, they can just "reboot" this and have season #1
be a tedious rehash of season #1. (I really hope the DON'T do that!!)
Anyway, there was one good "twist" left at the end (that should have
been obvious before this - I just missed it! :| ). And I did enjoy
Lexi beating the stuffing out of Anna Silk!!
But it looks like all of our "Heroes"(tm) (sans Dr. Castillo) make
it to the final frame, so they can have any of Father Chuck, Agent
Gwen, or "Shaw" back in season #2, if they want to...
As for me, whether I'm back for season #2 depends on what they do
with it - if it's a whole new storyline in season #2, I'm in!! :) But
if it's more tedium with Farouk and/or Reece, I'm out!!

Betch (recorded) - Another "earlier" episode, this one guest hosted by
JennXPenn (nee Jenn McAllister). Actually, I finally figure out that
these "earlier" episodes are actually two 15-minute "webisodes" spliced
into one 30-minute TV episode, as McAllister only appeared in the first
"segment" of this one, but disappeared from the final 15-minutes of the
"episode". Also, this one was early enough that Jessica Marie Garcia
wasn't even credited for this episode (at all!)... In terms of comedy,
this episode was so-so.

Guidance (recorded) - I'm a little confused on which episodes I watched
- it was either #2.7 & #2.8, or #2.8 and #2.9... Anyway, in these
episodes, the rest of the students start finding out that Mr. Ridley is
pond scum, and begin acting out against him. Ridley knows the walls are
closing in, and tries to break things off with Brianna the Cheerleader
when she starts being indiscreet, but she won't take "no" for an answer.
In the second of these episode, "time" finally catches up to the
dance, and at the end we see who shot Mr. Ridley (and how, and who
brought the gun, etc.). The "flash-forward" events of the previous
episodes are starting to make a little more sense here, but only
somewhat.
Just two more episodes of season #2 to go - I'll get to those tonight.

Zac & Mia (TeenNick) - I finally saw the "season #1" finale, which
shows how Mia lost part of her leg to cancer. That was actually a
pretty good plot development (and Anne Winter was good in this) - if
this were a serious drama, instead of a sappy teen romance, this would
have made for some good fictional drama.
Maybe somebody more serious minded will take elements of this series
and get a better TV show out of it.


Recorded for later: Suits, and The InBetween.
--
"Three light sabers? Is that overkill? Or just the right amount
of "kill"?" - M-OC, "A Perilous Rescue" (ep. #2.9), LSW:TFA (08-10-2017)
anim8rfsk
2019-08-08 18:45:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Blood & Treasure (recorded) - "The Revenge of Farouk" (ep. #12, the
season finale).
This finale was hard to parse... On the plus side, all of the season
#1 storylines *were* resolved, so if they wish to "start fresh" with an
entirely new storyline in season #2, they can (and I *really* hope they
do!!). However, on the "minus" side, both "Farouk" and Reece are left
"in play" at the end of this finale (in that they aren't dead, just "in
custody"),
with no evidence against either of them
so if they want to fail to learn from the mistakes of TV
shows from summers past, they can just "reboot" this and have season #1
be a tedious rehash of season #1. (I really hope the DON'T do that!!)
Anyway, there was one good "twist" left at the end (that should have
been obvious before this - I just missed it! :| ).
What was that?
And I did enjoy
Lexi beating the stuffing out of Anna Silk!!
To me, she'll always be Cute Shorts Girl.
But it looks like all of our "Heroes"(tm) (sans Dr. Castillo) make
it to the final frame, so they can have any of Father Chuck, Agent
Gwen, or "Shaw" back in season #2, if they want to...
Yeah. Real subtle lining them up like that.
As for me, whether I'm back for season #2 depends on what they do
with it - if it's a whole new storyline in season #2, I'm in!! :) But
if it's more tedium with Farouk and/or Reece, I'm out!!
I've outlined ways they could make it watchable, but they killed at least one
of those off last night.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Ian J. Ball
2019-08-08 19:28:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by anim8rfsk
Blood & Treasure (recorded) - "The Revenge of Farouk" (ep. #12, the
season finale).
This finale was hard to parse... On the plus side, all of the season
#1 storylines *were* resolved, so if they wish to "start fresh" with an
entirely new storyline in season #2, they can (and I *really* hope they
do!!). However, on the "minus" side, both "Farouk" and Reece are left
"in play" at the end of this finale (in that they aren't dead, just "in
custody"),
with no evidence against either of them
Oh, they've got "Farouk" dead to rights, based on what happened at the opening.

On Reece, I'm... less confident. ;)
Post by anim8rfsk
so if they want to fail to learn from the mistakes of TV
shows from summers past, they can just "reboot" this and have season #1
be a tedious rehash of season #1. (I really hope the DON'T do that!!)
Anyway, there was one good "twist" left at the end (that should have
been obvious before this - I just missed it! :| ).
What was that?
The "twist" re: Simon hardwick. ;)
Post by anim8rfsk
And I did enjoy
Lexi beating the stuffing out of Anna Silk!!
To me, she'll always be Cute Shorts Girl.
I was hoping they'd "keep her in play" for next season - I was really
hoping it would turn out that she was working for the Brotherhood, so
that could happen.
Post by anim8rfsk
But it looks like all of our "Heroes"(tm) (sans Dr. Castillo) make
it to the final frame, so they can have any of Father Chuck, Agent
Gwen, or "Shaw" back in season #2, if they want to...
Yeah. Real subtle lining them up like that.
Heh. Yeah.

Of those, I definitely think it makes sense to bring Shaw back, and it
would be cool to see Father Chuck again. But I don't think they need to
bring Gwen back - she doesn't add enough to the proceedings to justify
it.
Post by anim8rfsk
As for me, whether I'm back for season #2 depends on what they do
with it - if it's a whole new storyline in season #2, I'm in!! :) But
if it's more tedium with Farouk and/or Reece, I'm out!!
I've outlined ways they could make it watchable, but they killed at
least one of those off last night.
Yeah, I mentioned that in the followup to Adam in the other thread - I
too did not appreciate that development... >:/
--
"Three light sabers? Is that overkill? Or just the right amount
of "kill"?" - M-OC, "A Perilous Rescue" (ep. #2.9), LSW:TFA (08-10-2017)
anim8rfsk
2019-08-08 19:57:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ian J. Ball
Post by anim8rfsk
Blood & Treasure (recorded) - "The Revenge of Farouk" (ep. #12, the
season finale).
This finale was hard to parse... On the plus side, all of the season
#1 storylines *were* resolved, so if they wish to "start fresh" with an
entirely new storyline in season #2, they can (and I *really* hope they
do!!). However, on the "minus" side, both "Farouk" and Reece are left
"in play" at the end of this finale (in that they aren't dead, just "in
custody"),
with no evidence against either of them
Oh, they've got "Farouk" dead to rights, based on what happened at the opening.
Dead to rights for what? Hamming it up? I'm not sure anybody but Reese heard
him, and Reese ain't talking.
Post by Ian J. Ball
On Reece, I'm... less confident. ;)
He's got the money to buy his way out of it too.
Post by Ian J. Ball
Post by anim8rfsk
so if they want to fail to learn from the mistakes of TV
shows from summers past, they can just "reboot" this and have season #1
be a tedious rehash of season #1. (I really hope the DON'T do that!!)
Anyway, there was one good "twist" left at the end (that should have
been obvious before this - I just missed it! :| ).
What was that?
The "twist" re: Simon hardwick. ;)
You mean the name swap? If you'd predicted that you'd have needed to be
committed to an insane asylum.
I called Baltar as the villain right from the beginning - why the Hell would
you cast him otherwise?
Post by Ian J. Ball
Post by anim8rfsk
And I did enjoy
Lexi beating the stuffing out of Anna Silk!!
To me, she'll always be Cute Shorts Girl.
I was hoping they'd "keep her in play" for next season - I was really
hoping it would turn out that she was working for the Brotherhood, so
that could happen.
Well, if Reese walks, she will too. But I'm not even entirely sure what she
was doing at the opening, or why.
Post by Ian J. Ball
Post by anim8rfsk
But it looks like all of our "Heroes"(tm) (sans Dr. Castillo) make
it to the final frame, so they can have any of Father Chuck, Agent
Gwen, or "Shaw" back in season #2, if they want to...
Yeah. Real subtle lining them up like that.
Heh. Yeah.
Of those, I definitely think it makes sense to bring Shaw back, and it
would be cool to see Father Chuck again. But I don't think they need to
bring Gwen back - she doesn't add enough to the proceedings to justify
it.
She's like Danno on Hawai'i 5.1. They need an actual cop to arrest people.
Post by Ian J. Ball
Post by anim8rfsk
As for me, whether I'm back for season #2 depends on what they do
with it - if it's a whole new storyline in season #2, I'm in!! :) But
if it's more tedium with Farouk and/or Reece, I'm out!!
I've outlined ways they could make it watchable, but they killed at
least one of those off last night.
Yeah, I mentioned that in the followup to Adam in the other thread - I
too did not appreciate that development...>:/
I think the only pretty girl that survived was the smuggler's daughter.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
suzeeq
2019-08-08 19:33:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ian J. Ball
Post by Ubiquitous
What did you watch?
The InBetween (recorded) - "Let Me in Your Window" (ep. #7). Finally
got around to watching the episode in which Molly C. Quinn ("Castle")
guest-starred...
The 'A' storyline, in which Tom and Damien investigate a series of
deadly arson attacks didn't make a lick of sense (esp. the "resolution"
to the case)!
But the 'B' storyline with Quinn was pretty good - Cassie's new
co-worker (Quinn) is being stalked by the spirit of the creep who
stalked her in real life (and whom Quinn's character had accidentally
killed by pushing him over a cliff!!), and of course Ed Roven's spirit
shows up to offer Cassie "assistance" (she stupidly takes him up on it,
which I'm sure she'll regret...). In the 'C' storyline, Damien's
comatose "fiancee" finally kicks the bucket, but not without getting a
very important message to Cassie first.
soaps: Hope is an idiot (what else is new?!!). Kate is informed that
Ted has been murdered "by Stefan" but she keeps her cards close to the
vest. In the continuing dumbest-storyline-in-all-of-soaps,
Kristen-as-Nicole successfully seduces Brady (but THEIR BODY TYPES ARE
TOTALLY DIFFERENT!!!).
But she insisted on leaving her clothes on because of the 'scarring'.
Post by Ian J. Ball
And Sarah finally wears ol' Eric down, and they
also "boff", so I guess they're "official" now.
GH - And speaking of stupid storylines! - Shiloh has kidnapped
Cameron the teen, in order to plant "Drew's" memories into him, but
Franco comes across this and interrupts(?) the process... Also, they
didn't forget that Cassandra Pierce "poisoned" Sasha, as she's starting
to get sick in this episode, and looks to be having a medical emergency
in the promo for the next episode.
Blood & Treasure (recorded) - "The Revenge of Farouk" (ep. #12, the
season finale).
This finale was hard to parse... On the plus side, all of the season
#1 storylines *were* resolved, so if they wish to "start fresh" with an
entirely new storyline in season #2, they can (and I *really* hope they
do!!). However, on the "minus" side, both "Farouk" and Reece are left
"in play" at the end of this finale (in that they aren't dead, just "in
custody"), so if they want to fail to learn from the mistakes of TV
shows from summers past, they can just "reboot" this and have season #1
be a tedious rehash of season #1. (I really hope the DON'T do that!!)
Anyway, there was one good "twist" left at the end (that should have
been obvious before this - I just missed it! :| ). And I did enjoy
Lexi beating the stuffing out of Anna Silk!!
But it looks like all of our "Heroes"(tm) (sans Dr. Castillo) make
it to the final frame, so they can have any of Father Chuck, Agent
Gwen, or "Shaw" back in season #2, if they want to...
As for me, whether I'm back for season #2 depends on what they do
with it - if it's a whole new storyline in season #2, I'm in!! :) But
if it's more tedium with Farouk and/or Reece, I'm out!!
By this last episode, I was so totally confused on who was who and which
side they were on (except for Danny, Lexi, Chuck, and the interpol cop)
I couldn't follow it. I hope they do go for a new story next year and
maybe I won't get so muddled.
anim8rfsk
2019-08-08 20:01:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by suzeeq
Blood & Treasure (recorded) - "The Revenge of Farouk" (ep. #12, the
season finale).
This finale was hard to parse... On the plus side, all of the season
#1 storylines *were* resolved, so if they wish to "start fresh" with an
entirely new storyline in season #2, they can (and I *really* hope they
do!!). However, on the "minus" side, both "Farouk" and Reece are left
"in play" at the end of this finale (in that they aren't dead, just "in
custody"), so if they want to fail to learn from the mistakes of TV
shows from summers past, they can just "reboot" this and have season #1
be a tedious rehash of season #1. (I really hope the DON'T do that!!)
Anyway, there was one good "twist" left at the end (that should have
been obvious before this - I just missed it! :| ). And I did enjoy
Lexi beating the stuffing out of Anna Silk!!
But it looks like all of our "Heroes"(tm) (sans Dr. Castillo) make
it to the final frame, so they can have any of Father Chuck, Agent
Gwen, or "Shaw" back in season #2, if they want to...
As for me, whether I'm back for season #2 depends on what they do
with it - if it's a whole new storyline in season #2, I'm in!! :) But
if it's more tedium with Farouk and/or Reece, I'm out!!
By this last episode, I was so totally confused on who was who and which
side they were on (except for Danny, Lexi, Chuck, and the interpol cop)
I couldn't follow it. I hope they do go for a new story next year and
maybe I won't get so muddled.
Everybody is evil except those 4 and Shaw.

And, Jesus, Shaw, RUN and cash that reward check from Reese before they
freeze his accounts!!!
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
suzeeq
2019-08-09 00:28:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Blood & Treasure (recorded) - "The Revenge of Farouk" (ep. #12, the
season finale).
This finale was hard to parse... On the plus side, all of the season
#1 storylines *were* resolved, so if they wish to "start fresh" with an
entirely new storyline in season #2, they can (and I *really* hope they
do!!). However, on the "minus" side, both "Farouk" and Reece are left
"in play" at the end of this finale (in that they aren't dead, just "in
custody"), so if they want to fail to learn from the mistakes of TV
shows from summers past, they can just "reboot" this and have season #1
be a tedious rehash of season #1. (I really hope the DON'T do that!!)
Anyway, there was one good "twist" left at the end (that should have
been obvious before this - I just missed it! :| ). And I did enjoy
Lexi beating the stuffing out of Anna Silk!!
But it looks like all of our "Heroes"(tm) (sans Dr. Castillo) make
it to the final frame, so they can have any of Father Chuck, Agent
Gwen, or "Shaw" back in season #2, if they want to...
As for me, whether I'm back for season #2 depends on what they do
with it - if it's a whole new storyline in season #2, I'm in!! :) But
if it's more tedium with Farouk and/or Reece, I'm out!!
By this last episode, I was so totally confused on who was who and which
side they were on (except for Danny, Lexi, Chuck, and the interpol cop)
I couldn't follow it. I hope they do go for a new story next year and
maybe I won't get so muddled.
Everybody is evil except those 4 and Shaw.
Yeah, that's probably why I could isolate them. I just couldn't keep
track of the bad guys.
Post by anim8rfsk
And, Jesus, Shaw, RUN and cash that reward check from Reese before they
freeze his accounts!!!
shawn
2019-08-09 01:11:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Blood & Treasure (recorded) - "The Revenge of Farouk" (ep. #12, the
season finale).
This finale was hard to parse... On the plus side, all of the season
#1 storylines *were* resolved, so if they wish to "start fresh" with an
entirely new storyline in season #2, they can (and I *really* hope they
do!!). However, on the "minus" side, both "Farouk" and Reece are left
"in play" at the end of this finale (in that they aren't dead, just "in
custody"), so if they want to fail to learn from the mistakes of TV
shows from summers past, they can just "reboot" this and have season #1
be a tedious rehash of season #1. (I really hope the DON'T do that!!)
Anyway, there was one good "twist" left at the end (that should have
been obvious before this - I just missed it! :| ). And I did enjoy
Lexi beating the stuffing out of Anna Silk!!
But it looks like all of our "Heroes"(tm) (sans Dr. Castillo) make
it to the final frame, so they can have any of Father Chuck, Agent
Gwen, or "Shaw" back in season #2, if they want to...
As for me, whether I'm back for season #2 depends on what they do
with it - if it's a whole new storyline in season #2, I'm in!! :) But
if it's more tedium with Farouk and/or Reece, I'm out!!
By this last episode, I was so totally confused on who was who and which
side they were on (except for Danny, Lexi, Chuck, and the interpol cop)
I couldn't follow it. I hope they do go for a new story next year and
maybe I won't get so muddled.
Yes, I'm afraid they are going to bring Farouk back and this time
he'll be the clear bad guy from the beginning. I like how he tried to
pretend to be the good guy at the end while ignoring all the work he
did just to get a deadly toxin and put in place that would kill
everyone at the exhibition.
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Everybody is evil except those 4 and Shaw.
Yeah, that's probably why I could isolate them. I just couldn't keep
track of the bad guys.
Yeah, it was hard to be sure who was evil until this last episode
where they made it clear where the lines were drawn. I didn't know
that Anna Silk's character was working for Reece till the finale as
she could have been working for almost anyone. Simon was also one that
was left as a grey character till this episode. It seemed clear that
something was up with him killing 'Farouk' but we (or at least I)
didn't have enough information to know just what Simon/Farouk was up
to.
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
And, Jesus, Shaw, RUN and cash that reward check from Reese before they
freeze his accounts!!!
It depends on if it's a personal check or a business check. Given how
large the company seems to be they aren't going to be freezing those
accounts but they could certainly freeze Reece's personal accounts.

On second thought is the money even coming from Reece or is it coming
from the Egyptian government?
anim8rfsk
2019-08-09 01:37:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Blood & Treasure (recorded) - "The Revenge of Farouk" (ep. #12, the
season finale).
This finale was hard to parse... On the plus side, all of the season
#1 storylines *were* resolved, so if they wish to "start fresh" with an
entirely new storyline in season #2, they can (and I *really* hope they
do!!). However, on the "minus" side, both "Farouk" and Reece are left
"in play" at the end of this finale (in that they aren't dead, just "in
custody"), so if they want to fail to learn from the mistakes of TV
shows from summers past, they can just "reboot" this and have season #1
be a tedious rehash of season #1. (I really hope the DON'T do that!!)
Anyway, there was one good "twist" left at the end (that should have
been obvious before this - I just missed it! :| ). And I did enjoy
Lexi beating the stuffing out of Anna Silk!!
But it looks like all of our "Heroes"(tm) (sans Dr. Castillo) make
it to the final frame, so they can have any of Father Chuck, Agent
Gwen, or "Shaw" back in season #2, if they want to...
As for me, whether I'm back for season #2 depends on what they do
with it - if it's a whole new storyline in season #2, I'm in!! :) But
if it's more tedium with Farouk and/or Reece, I'm out!!
By this last episode, I was so totally confused on who was who and which
side they were on (except for Danny, Lexi, Chuck, and the interpol cop)
I couldn't follow it. I hope they do go for a new story next year and
maybe I won't get so muddled.
Yes, I'm afraid they are going to bring Farouk back and this time
he'll be the clear bad guy from the beginning. I like how he tried to
pretend to be the good guy at the end while ignoring all the work he
did just to get a deadly toxin and put in place that would kill
everyone at the exhibition.
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Everybody is evil except those 4 and Shaw.
Yeah, that's probably why I could isolate them. I just couldn't keep
track of the bad guys.
Yeah, it was hard to be sure who was evil until this last episode
where they made it clear where the lines were drawn. I didn't know
that Anna Silk's character was working for Reece till the finale as
she could have been working for almost anyone. Simon was also one that
was left as a grey character till this episode. It seemed clear that
something was up with him killing 'Farouk' but we (or at least I)
didn't have enough information to know just what Simon/Farouk was up
to.
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
And, Jesus, Shaw, RUN and cash that reward check from Reese before they
freeze his accounts!!!
It depends on if it's a personal check or a business check. Given how
large the company seems to be they aren't going to be freezing those
accounts but they could certainly freeze Reece's personal accounts.
On second thought is the money even coming from Reece or is it coming
from the Egyptian government?
Hmm. Good question.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Adam H. Kerman
2019-08-09 01:49:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ian J. Ball
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Blood & Treasure (recorded) - "The Revenge of Farouk" (ep. #12, the
season finale).
This finale was hard to parse... On the plus side, all of the season
#1 storylines *were* resolved, so if they wish to "start
fresh" with an
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
entirely new storyline in season #2, they can (and I *really*
hope they
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
do!!). However, on the "minus" side, both "Farouk" and Reece are left
"in play" at the end of this finale (in that they aren't dead,
just "in
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
custody"), so if they want to fail to learn from the mistakes of TV
shows from summers past, they can just "reboot" this and have
season #1
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
be a tedious rehash of season #1. (I really hope the DON'T do that!!)
Anyway, there was one good "twist" left at the end (that should have
been obvious before this - I just missed it! :| ). And I did enjoy
Lexi beating the stuffing out of Anna Silk!!
But it looks like all of our "Heroes"(tm) (sans Dr. Castillo) make
it to the final frame, so they can have any of Father Chuck, Agent
Gwen, or "Shaw" back in season #2, if they want to...
As for me, whether I'm back for season #2 depends on what they do
with it - if it's a whole new storyline in season #2, I'm in!! :) But
if it's more tedium with Farouk and/or Reece, I'm out!!
By this last episode, I was so totally confused on who was who and which
side they were on (except for Danny, Lexi, Chuck, and the interpol cop)
I couldn't follow it. I hope they do go for a new story next year and
maybe I won't get so muddled.
Yes, I'm afraid they are going to bring Farouk back and this time
he'll be the clear bad guy from the beginning. I like how he tried to
pretend to be the good guy at the end while ignoring all the work he
did just to get a deadly toxin and put in place that would kill
everyone at the exhibition.
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Everybody is evil except those 4 and Shaw.
Yeah, that's probably why I could isolate them. I just couldn't keep
track of the bad guys.
Yeah, it was hard to be sure who was evil until this last episode
where they made it clear where the lines were drawn. I didn't know
that Anna Silk's character was working for Reece till the finale as
she could have been working for almost anyone. Simon was also one that
was left as a grey character till this episode. It seemed clear that
something was up with him killing 'Farouk' but we (or at least I)
didn't have enough information to know just what Simon/Farouk was up
to.
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
And, Jesus, Shaw, RUN and cash that reward check from Reese before they
freeze his accounts!!!
It depends on if it's a personal check or a business check. Given how
large the company seems to be they aren't going to be freezing those
accounts but they could certainly freeze Reece's personal accounts.
On second thought is the money even coming from Reece or is it coming
from the Egyptian government?
Hmm. Good question.
Not to mention Shaw, not his real name, has a check made out to an alias
and isn't in a position to open a bank account.
Ian J. Ball
2019-08-09 01:59:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Blood & Treasure (recorded) - "The Revenge of Farouk" (ep. #12, the
season finale).
This finale was hard to parse... [snip] As for me, whether I'm back for
season #2 depends on what they do
with it - if it's a whole new storyline in season #2, I'm in!! :) But
if it's more tedium with Farouk and/or Reece, I'm out!!
By this last episode, I was so totally confused on who was who and
which side they were on (except for Danny, Lexi, Chuck, and the
interpol cop) I couldn't follow it. I hope they do go for a new story
next year and maybe I won't get so muddled.
Yes, I'm afraid they are going to bring Farouk back and this time
he'll be the clear bad guy from the beginning. I like how he tried to
pretend to be the good guy at the end while ignoring all the work he
did just to get a deadly toxin and put in place that would kill
everyone at the exhibition.
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Everybody is evil except those 4 and Shaw.
Yeah, that's probably why I could isolate them. I just couldn't keep
track of the bad guys.
Yeah, it was hard to be sure who was evil until this last episode
where they made it clear where the lines were drawn. I didn't know
that Anna Silk's character was working for Reece till the finale as
she could have been working for almost anyone. Simon was also one that
was left as a grey character till this episode. It seemed clear that
something was up with him killing 'Farouk' but we (or at least I)
didn't have enough information to know just what Simon/Farouk was up
to.
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
And, Jesus, Shaw, RUN and cash that reward check from Reese before they
freeze his accounts!!!
It depends on if it's a personal check or a business check. Given how
large the company seems to be they aren't going to be freezing those
accounts but they could certainly freeze Reece's personal accounts.
On second thought is the money even coming from Reece or is it coming
from the Egyptian government?
Hmm. Good question.
Not to mention Shaw, not his real name, has a check made out to an alias
and isn't in a position to open a bank account.
Knowing Shaw, I'm sure he has bank accounts in that name already set up.
--
"Three light sabers? Is that overkill? Or just the right amount
of "kill"?" - M-OC, "A Perilous Rescue" (ep. #2.9), LSW:TFA (08-10-2017)
A Friend
2019-08-09 02:26:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Ian J. Ball
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Blood & Treasure (recorded) - "The Revenge of Farouk" (ep. #12, the
season finale).
This finale was hard to parse... On the plus side, all of the season
#1 storylines *were* resolved, so if they wish to "start
fresh" with an
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
entirely new storyline in season #2, they can (and I *really*
hope they
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
do!!). However, on the "minus" side, both "Farouk" and Reece are left
"in play" at the end of this finale (in that they aren't dead,
just "in
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
custody"), so if they want to fail to learn from the mistakes of TV
shows from summers past, they can just "reboot" this and have
season #1
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
be a tedious rehash of season #1. (I really hope the DON'T do that!!)
Anyway, there was one good "twist" left at the end (that should have
been obvious before this - I just missed it! :| ). And I did enjoy
Lexi beating the stuffing out of Anna Silk!!
But it looks like all of our "Heroes"(tm) (sans Dr. Castillo) make
it to the final frame, so they can have any of Father Chuck, Agent
Gwen, or "Shaw" back in season #2, if they want to...
As for me, whether I'm back for season #2 depends on what they do
with it - if it's a whole new storyline in season #2, I'm in!! :) But
if it's more tedium with Farouk and/or Reece, I'm out!!
By this last episode, I was so totally confused on who was who and which
side they were on (except for Danny, Lexi, Chuck, and the interpol cop)
I couldn't follow it. I hope they do go for a new story next year and
maybe I won't get so muddled.
Yes, I'm afraid they are going to bring Farouk back and this time
he'll be the clear bad guy from the beginning. I like how he tried to
pretend to be the good guy at the end while ignoring all the work he
did just to get a deadly toxin and put in place that would kill
everyone at the exhibition.
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Everybody is evil except those 4 and Shaw.
Yeah, that's probably why I could isolate them. I just couldn't keep
track of the bad guys.
Yeah, it was hard to be sure who was evil until this last episode
where they made it clear where the lines were drawn. I didn't know
that Anna Silk's character was working for Reece till the finale as
she could have been working for almost anyone. Simon was also one that
was left as a grey character till this episode. It seemed clear that
something was up with him killing 'Farouk' but we (or at least I)
didn't have enough information to know just what Simon/Farouk was up
to.
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
And, Jesus, Shaw, RUN and cash that reward check from Reese before they
freeze his accounts!!!
It depends on if it's a personal check or a business check. Given how
large the company seems to be they aren't going to be freezing those
accounts but they could certainly freeze Reece's personal accounts.
On second thought is the money even coming from Reece or is it coming
from the Egyptian government?
Hmm. Good question.
Not to mention Shaw, not his real name, has a check made out to an alias
and isn't in a position to open a bank account.
Oh, that's easy. Shaw sells the check to a launderer for maybe 60%,
70% of its face value and walks away with clean cash, tax free.

I liked this show better than some of you guys, but I wasn't paying
attention to the many lapses in logic. I thought the final sequence,
with everyone just sort of drifting away while the two heroes wound up
in an Antony & Cleopatra clinch, was just right.
Adam H. Kerman
2019-08-09 03:35:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by A Friend
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Ian J. Ball
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Blood & Treasure (recorded) - "The Revenge of Farouk" (ep. #12,
the
season finale).
This finale was hard to parse... On the plus side, all of the
season
#1 storylines *were* resolved, so if they wish to "start
fresh" with an
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
entirely new storyline in season #2, they can (and I *really*
hope they
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
do!!). However, on the "minus" side, both "Farouk" and Reece are
left
"in play" at the end of this finale (in that they aren't dead,
just "in
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
custody"), so if they want to fail to learn from the mistakes of TV
shows from summers past, they can just "reboot" this and have
season #1
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
be a tedious rehash of season #1. (I really hope the DON'T do
that!!)
Anyway, there was one good "twist" left at the end (that should
have
been obvious before this - I just missed it! :| ). And I did enjoy
Lexi beating the stuffing out of Anna Silk!!
But it looks like all of our "Heroes"(tm) (sans Dr. Castillo) make
it to the final frame, so they can have any of Father Chuck, Agent
Gwen, or "Shaw" back in season #2, if they want to...
As for me, whether I'm back for season #2 depends on what they do
with it - if it's a whole new storyline in season #2, I'm in!! :)
But
if it's more tedium with Farouk and/or Reece, I'm out!!
By this last episode, I was so totally confused on who was who and
which
side they were on (except for Danny, Lexi, Chuck, and the interpol cop)
I couldn't follow it. I hope they do go for a new story next year and
maybe I won't get so muddled.
Yes, I'm afraid they are going to bring Farouk back and this time
he'll be the clear bad guy from the beginning. I like how he tried to
pretend to be the good guy at the end while ignoring all the work he
did just to get a deadly toxin and put in place that would kill
everyone at the exhibition.
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Everybody is evil except those 4 and Shaw.
Yeah, that's probably why I could isolate them. I just couldn't keep
track of the bad guys.
Yeah, it was hard to be sure who was evil until this last episode
where they made it clear where the lines were drawn. I didn't know
that Anna Silk's character was working for Reece till the finale as
she could have been working for almost anyone. Simon was also one that
was left as a grey character till this episode. It seemed clear that
something was up with him killing 'Farouk' but we (or at least I)
didn't have enough information to know just what Simon/Farouk was up
to.
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
And, Jesus, Shaw, RUN and cash that reward check from Reese before they
freeze his accounts!!!
It depends on if it's a personal check or a business check. Given how
large the company seems to be they aren't going to be freezing those
accounts but they could certainly freeze Reece's personal accounts.
On second thought is the money even coming from Reece or is it coming
from the Egyptian government?
Hmm. Good question.
Not to mention Shaw, not his real name, has a check made out to an alias
and isn't in a position to open a bank account.
Oh, that's easy. Shaw sells the check to a launderer for maybe 60%,
70% of its face value and walks away with clean cash, tax free.
I liked this show better than some of you guys, but I wasn't paying
attention to the many lapses in logic. I thought the final sequence,
with everyone just sort of drifting away while the two heroes wound up
in an Antony & Cleopatra clinch, was just right.
The problem was less the plotting than killing off characters I liked
and turning Reece, another character I liked, into one of the villains.
anim8rfsk
2019-08-09 04:48:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Ian J. Ball
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Blood & Treasure (recorded) - "The Revenge of Farouk" (ep. #12,
the
season finale).
This finale was hard to parse... On the plus side, all of the
season
#1 storylines *were* resolved, so if they wish to "start
fresh" with an
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
entirely new storyline in season #2, they can (and I *really*
hope they
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
do!!). However, on the "minus" side, both "Farouk" and Reece are
left
"in play" at the end of this finale (in that they aren't dead,
just "in
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
custody"), so if they want to fail to learn from the mistakes of TV
shows from summers past, they can just "reboot" this and have
season #1
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
be a tedious rehash of season #1. (I really hope the DON'T do
that!!)
Anyway, there was one good "twist" left at the end (that should
have
been obvious before this - I just missed it! :| ). And I did enjoy
Lexi beating the stuffing out of Anna Silk!!
But it looks like all of our "Heroes"(tm) (sans Dr. Castillo) make
it to the final frame, so they can have any of Father Chuck, Agent
Gwen, or "Shaw" back in season #2, if they want to...
As for me, whether I'm back for season #2 depends on what they do
with it - if it's a whole new storyline in season #2, I'm in!! :)
But
if it's more tedium with Farouk and/or Reece, I'm out!!
By this last episode, I was so totally confused on who was who and
which
side they were on (except for Danny, Lexi, Chuck, and the interpol
cop)
I couldn't follow it. I hope they do go for a new story next year and
maybe I won't get so muddled.
Yes, I'm afraid they are going to bring Farouk back and this time
he'll be the clear bad guy from the beginning. I like how he tried to
pretend to be the good guy at the end while ignoring all the work he
did just to get a deadly toxin and put in place that would kill
everyone at the exhibition.
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Everybody is evil except those 4 and Shaw.
Yeah, that's probably why I could isolate them. I just couldn't keep
track of the bad guys.
Yeah, it was hard to be sure who was evil until this last episode
where they made it clear where the lines were drawn. I didn't know
that Anna Silk's character was working for Reece till the finale as
she could have been working for almost anyone. Simon was also one that
was left as a grey character till this episode. It seemed clear that
something was up with him killing 'Farouk' but we (or at least I)
didn't have enough information to know just what Simon/Farouk was up
to.
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
And, Jesus, Shaw, RUN and cash that reward check from Reese before they
freeze his accounts!!!
It depends on if it's a personal check or a business check. Given how
large the company seems to be they aren't going to be freezing those
accounts but they could certainly freeze Reece's personal accounts.
On second thought is the money even coming from Reece or is it coming
from the Egyptian government?
Hmm. Good question.
Not to mention Shaw, not his real name, has a check made out to an alias
and isn't in a position to open a bank account.
Oh, that's easy. Shaw sells the check to a launderer for maybe 60%,
70% of its face value and walks away with clean cash, tax free.
I liked this show better than some of you guys, but I wasn't paying
attention to the many lapses in logic. I thought the final sequence,
with everyone just sort of drifting away while the two heroes wound up
in an Antony & Cleopatra clinch, was just right.
The problem was less the plotting than killing off characters I liked
and turning Reece, another character I liked, into one of the villains.
Yeah, Reece is a serious problem for ongoing adventures. I liked the format,
these guys working for an eccentric billionaire who could fix stuff for them.
It paved over a lot of plotholes. Plus I like John Larroquette. Danny (ick)
and Lexi on their own, not so enticing. I suppose they're go to work for the
literally decimated Brotherhood.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
anim8rfsk
2019-08-09 02:52:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Ian J. Ball
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
Blood & Treasure (recorded) - "The Revenge of Farouk" (ep. #12, the
season finale).
This finale was hard to parse... On the plus side, all of the season
#1 storylines *were* resolved, so if they wish to "start
fresh" with an
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
entirely new storyline in season #2, they can (and I *really*
hope they
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
do!!). However, on the "minus" side, both "Farouk" and Reece are left
"in play" at the end of this finale (in that they aren't dead,
just "in
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
custody"), so if they want to fail to learn from the mistakes of TV
shows from summers past, they can just "reboot" this and have
season #1
Post by shawn
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by suzeeq
be a tedious rehash of season #1. (I really hope the DON'T do that!!)
Anyway, there was one good "twist" left at the end (that should have
been obvious before this - I just missed it! :| ). And I did enjoy
Lexi beating the stuffing out of Anna Silk!!
But it looks like all of our "Heroes"(tm) (sans Dr. Castillo) make
it to the final frame, so they can have any of Father Chuck, Agent
Gwen, or "Shaw" back in season #2, if they want to...
As for me, whether I'm back for season #2 depends on what they do
with it - if it's a whole new storyline in season #2, I'm in!! :) But
if it's more tedium with Farouk and/or Reece, I'm out!!
By this last episode, I was so totally confused on who was who and which
side they were on (except for Danny, Lexi, Chuck, and the interpol cop)
I couldn't follow it. I hope they do go for a new story next year and
maybe I won't get so muddled.
Yes, I'm afraid they are going to bring Farouk back and this time
he'll be the clear bad guy from the beginning. I like how he tried to
pretend to be the good guy at the end while ignoring all the work he
did just to get a deadly toxin and put in place that would kill
everyone at the exhibition.
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
Everybody is evil except those 4 and Shaw.
Yeah, that's probably why I could isolate them. I just couldn't keep
track of the bad guys.
Yeah, it was hard to be sure who was evil until this last episode
where they made it clear where the lines were drawn. I didn't know
that Anna Silk's character was working for Reece till the finale as
she could have been working for almost anyone. Simon was also one that
was left as a grey character till this episode. It seemed clear that
something was up with him killing 'Farouk' but we (or at least I)
didn't have enough information to know just what Simon/Farouk was up
to.
Post by suzeeq
Post by anim8rfsk
And, Jesus, Shaw, RUN and cash that reward check from Reese before they
freeze his accounts!!!
It depends on if it's a personal check or a business check. Given how
large the company seems to be they aren't going to be freezing those
accounts but they could certainly freeze Reece's personal accounts.
On second thought is the money even coming from Reece or is it coming
from the Egyptian government?
Hmm. Good question.
Not to mention Shaw, not his real name, has a check made out to an alias
and isn't in a position to open a bank account.
Hah!
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
Loading...