Whats the verdict on this around here? The new one I mean..
turdtastic
America said: Hollywood - please quit tossing history in the microwave and cramming it down our throats. -Thanks *Everyone*
America said: Hollywood - please quit tossing history in the microwave and cramming it down our throats. -Thanks *Everyone*
There's a really simple, really effective way to stop that.
Don't watch it.
Can it be any worse than the original? It was a pretty bad show.
IMO there has been a lot of TV that was wrong the first time.
There has never been a serious re-make that should have ever been made.
Satire and spoofs sometimes make me laugh.
Also, if a show has a laugh track - I will not watch it. Period.
That is all.
Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: Also, if a show has a laugh track - I will not watch it. Period. That is all.
Not that I watch a lot of TV, but this is a sore point with me.
It completely ruins what might otherwise be some OK shows.
Bobzilla wrote: I was pleasantly suprised.
As was I. At least the 'original' Steve McGarrett (sp?) didn't turn out to be this iteration's father. That would have carried the whole continuity idea just a weeee bit too far. The new show's 'Kono' is bad enough...
The original had two good points: The theme song and depictions of "the computer" that solved all their cases. I actually learned how database queries work by watching that computer go through punch cards, with whoever picking up the 3 cards in the last stack, one of which was always the bad guy. And today, 40 years later, databases buy me Lotus parts. For that, I'm very grateful.
I like James Caan, and also whats his face who played Gin on Lost. But thats not enough for me - its just another meh cop show with stuff blowing up and poor excuses for cop lingo/tactical maneuvers to be comically executed for overly dramatic entertainment purposes...sprinkle in some bikinis (it is Hawaii ferchrysakes) and you have a recipe for a mediocre canceled-halfway-thru-season-3 tv filler.
zomby woof wrote:America said: Hollywood - please quit tossing history in the microwave and cramming it down our throats. -Thanks *Everyone*There's a really simple, really effective way to stop that. Don't watch it.
I plan to follow your advice!
I was impressed with the remake of the opening credits, I laughed when "Steve" uncovered the huge black Merc in his dads garage, and the rest of the show showed a bit of promise.
It does have the same problem that has pissed me off ever since .........What was the cop shop with the red head guy and the fat guy from Hill Street Blues- the first one where they removed the steady-cam stuff and went to handheld......anyway, I HATE the modern "actiony bouncy camera" E36 M3 they insist on. Makes me ill.
Streetwiseguy wrote: What was the cop shop with the red head guy and the fat guy from Hill Street Blues- the first one where they removed the steady-cam stuff and went to handheld......anyway, I HATE the modern "actiony bouncy camera" E36 M3 they insist on. Makes me ill.
NYPD Blue. Of course, David Caruso is dramatically taking off his sunglasses on CSI:Miami these days.
I watched the new 5-0 the other night and it was okay, but other than the opening credits it didn't have a lot to do with the original show, which is one of my all time favorites. I suppose they were trying to start the show off with a bang (no pun intended) but there was way too much machine gun fire - it was like watching a video game. The original show spent a lot more time developing the story, on this one they just drive around and blow stuff up.
CBS is remaking 5-0 and the Defenders, Since both date back to the 60s and neither show is aimed at the old shows fans....why did they feel the need to use the "old" names?
BTW, not to (necessarily) hi-jack the thread, but I watched Detroit 1-8-7 last night. Fairly decent show, tho I was surprised they killed off a character so quickly.
And compared to 5-0, I was REALLY surprised when they had a car crash on 1-8-7, and even tho it caught fire....it DIDN'T blow up in a huge ball of flames. Finally, one show where producers realize not every burning car explodes with enough force to be mistaken for an earthquake.
integraguy wrote: CBS is remaking 5-0 and the Defenders, Since both date back to the 60s and neither show is aimed at the old shows fans....why did they feel the need to use the "old" names?
Disclosure: I work at a CBS TV station.
We're really excited 'cause 5-O did really, really well. Looks like it's going to be a hit.
I'm a local TV commercial hack, so I have no official voice in anything, but I believe I can answer the question above.
We spent months promoting the show before it launched. The hardest part of getting a hit is getting people to actually sample the show. So, you do "Hawaii 5-O" and people talk about it. People write articles about it. People start threads on internet forums about it. People say "hey, did you hear they're making a new Hawaii 5-O?" Then when it goes on the air, it feels like one of those things you have to watch. Everyone is going to talk about it the next day and if you miss it you won't be "in on the new thing".
But the thing is, as TV shows go, it's pretty good. Look at the big hits on CBS- which is the highest rated network right now. Loads of CSI and NCIS. Cop/crime shows are working pretty well. And they're all pretty much along the lines of shows from the 60s and 70s with some modern twists. CSI is a huge, huge, mega hit franchise, but really, it's a modern version of Quincy M.E.
Okay, so you have crime shows doing great. You want to launch a new one. You're affraid to over-play the CSI thing with another one. So you do Hawaii 5-O. People talk, it get's sampled, bingo! You have a hit.
But the show really is good. If you do all that and make a crappy show it won't go over. This one feels like a hit that will be around for a while. But who knows?
DukeOfUndersteer wrote: Can i vote for an updated Magnum P.I., but have Tom Selleck back and still driving the 308?
They'd need to time-travel back to get the '80s-era Selleck, so he'd still look good in those shorts. And then they'd need to make sure they got the shorts, too.
Margie
Ugh I hate cop shows, especially the one with the douchnozzle that talks in what seems like a completely fake, low pitched voice, like a 12 yr old who hasn't gone through puberty.
I tried watching one, one time, I blame those shows for the unrealistic expectations people have of Law Enforcement.
However, CBS does have a few GREAT comedies right now. I just wish they'd let me watch "The Big Bang Theory" on CBS.com. All they are doing is missing out on more ad revenue as I find it on some obscure website that someone up loaded it to.
/tangent
I'm not watching TV until somebody does a remake of Perfect strangers, or at very least Bosom buddies.
One of the best shows from the 60's or at least 70's, IMO, was Banacek (sp?). I could see a viable remake there.
81gtv6 wrote: We watched it last night and it isn't bad, not the greatest show but not bad.
When my wife and I have been watching telly and seeing the 5-0 ads, we've wondered how the producers would approach the thing, given the original was fairly 'large' in the day. We'd figured it would mainly be a vehicle for bikinis and car chases (bingo!), but I'm a little hurt they didn't introduce Wo-Fat. How're we gonna know who the badguys are, anyway?
Part of the coolness of the original series was McGarrett and Danno in suits and ties, driving around Honolulu in big shiny black Mercuries. The guys in the new show look like they need a shave and a shower.
stuart in mn wrote: Part of the coolness of the original series was McGarrett and Danno in suits and ties, driving around Honolulu in big shiny black Mercuries. The guys in the new show look like they need a shave and a shower.
Suits, ties and Merc's were cool, then. Scruff, sweat and (insert your corporate sponsor here) are cool, now.
The new H50 isn't bad and (at least) they resurrected the main character's name. C'mon, how many shows have a protagonist named Steve?
My name is Steve and I approve this name. But the show isn't on my "must watch" list.
You'll need to log in to post.