I'd say 3005.

Posted by Fall Guy from pool0522.cvx22-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net (209.179.200.12) on Tuesday, April 23, 2002 at 10:36pm :

In Reply to: Re: I'd say 2005. posted by Indiana Eastwood from ? (65.164.239.2) on Tuesday, April 23, 2002 at 10:12pm :

Well, yeah that's one of the problems, isn't it? People want to see something fresh and new, but at the same time they have certain expectations. And yet, what makes a recurring character so attractive is familiarity with the concept and the characters. It's like slipping in a comfy pair of old slippers (Sorry for the exruciating mental image). It's probably impossible to overcome these expectations, and I'm sure the film makers themselves are plagued by that sort of thing. They have to find a balance between something creative and new without disappointing common expectations.
FG

PS: Pardon any typos, I fell in my drink. ;)
:
:

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

Name:

E-Mail: ( default )

Subject:

Message:
: Well, yeah that's one of the problems, isn't it? People want to see something fresh and new, but at the same time they have certain expectations. And yet, what makes a recurring character so attractive is familiarity with the concept and the characters. It's like slipping in a comfy pair of old slippers (Sorry for the exruciating mental image). It's probably impossible to overcome these expectations, and I'm sure the film makers themselves are plagued by that sort of thing. They have to find a balance between something creative and new without disappointing common expectations. : FG : PS: Pardon any typos, I fell in my drink. ;) : : : :

Optional Link ( default )

URL:

Title:

Optional Image Link ( default )

URL:

This board is powered by the Mr. Fong Device from Cyberarmy.com