I bought one six years ago - the first one I've ever owned - watched it for two days. That reminded me why I kept putting off buying one, and its been out in the shed (unplugged) ever since.

When I hear or see the words "critically-
acclaimed" or "legendary" I shift gears
and move on.

We have our TV, get only BCTV out here and couldn't be bothered with a dish, but we like our movies and only watch VCR tapes and CDs. We look at the 6'oclock news that's 90% garbage, but still has the odd minute of something in the 40 we watch.

Commercial programs are designed to brainwash people into the acceptance of "competitive lifestyles", like those idiotic survival programs and the disgusting face of Donald Trump, we see for a minute or two, when we put on the machine to watch a movie. All designed to impress people into the acceptance of the "survival of the fittest", where they can be eliminated either by luck, or on somebody's word and left to walk away and rot.
Which incidentally, has nothing to do with Darwin, as he never advocated any such garbage as the "survival of the fittest", which is a lie anyway, because there's no such thing as the "fittest".

Also, people have to remember that TV and radio commercials are not selling soap, or cars, but the ideology of "no escape", from corporate clutches.

I have seen the nazi and communist propaganda machines at work, but they couldn't hold a candle to the American brainwashing machine.

Ed Deak, Big Lake.

Can we get some articles on what is good out there for TV and Movies? Everytime I come here, it's always "this sucks", "this is terrible", "this is carboard". This is one of the biggest whine-fests I've encountered. I don't mind reviews and if there is absolutely nothing good out there, so be it. I just don't think that's the case. There is far too much enjoyment being had here on what is terrible in movies and entertainment and it's stopping me from enjoying what is a generally informative and entertaining site.

I just find it curious when people who don't own tvs-and are proud of this fact and wish to shout it to all-feel the need to comment about tv, if only to tell us how they don't watch it.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to sign up for a scuba discussion board to tell everyone there how I don't scuba-dive.

Sorry, Tylerkent, point taken. I've been trying to wean myself from doing so for years.

The best offensive is studied indifference, of course, but Gawd, it's hard to practice.

scylla

Key word `offensive`

No TV program, broken up with strings of repeated commercials every five minutes, is worth watching. It is the most barbaric manifestation of our brainwashing system. Anybody who buys anything from a TV, or radio commercial must be nuts. Obviously, we can't avoid the products completely, but buying them because we saw them on TV is utterly stupid.

The "mute" button on my remote control is the most polished one, only from the daily 40 mins. of BCTV news. Ed Deak, Big Lake.

Yes, Ed, those commercials drive me bonkers too. I rarely get through an 8-o-clock movie without having to switch off before the end.

One could almost believe that some of the ads are meant to be offensive. Many certainly come on louder - though I've heard that denied. I think the MacDonald's "Don't forget the ears." ad is funny and clever, but all those ads for shampoos.....

I thought All in the Family was a great series. It broke new ground and made it worthwhile owning a set. Becker is in a similar vein. He's a doctor in the Bronx with a dry humor and that New York wit (that I know to exist) A young boy who comes to him complaining of an almost permanent erection - a malady, Becker notes, that many men would die for.

Among the ton of garbage there have been classics such as The Singing Detective out uf the U.K. - plus excellent documentaries from all over.

I find that the characters in video games have more depth than those on TV series. I like the joke some actor said: “Thank god for commercials, real actors with a real script”

History channel was a hopeful, but they obviously lack of attention to detail is frustrating, they will talk about France in 1940 and show footage of Russia in 1945

Discovery have a few good shows, and I must admit I have enjoyed some of the mythbusters and Holmes on homes shows. Also that show that has scientists forced to perform experiments or build something in a small fishing village in Africa or someplace.

I love Sci-fi, but it has been a little thin on the ground lately

Before this thread is mercifully euthanised, Ed, I've a quibble:

As I understand it, Darwin did advocate "survival of the fittest", the means by which those creatures with the best survival mechanisms for competition with other species as well as within its own kind, passed on their genes.

The argument the anti-environmental "Wise Users" then erroneously interpreted from that was of a "Nature Red in Tooth and Claw" which hypothesised that wild animals engage in a constant orgy of happily ripping apart each other and anything else they could find just for the pure savage joy of it.

With this argument they could justify our savage treatment of our own kind, and fellow creatures as well, as being "natural".

Thus they were able to ignore that within species, most aggression is limited to threat displays and actual combat rarely resukts in death. Homo sapiens is the only species that carelessly kills, that can and does totally destroy its environment and food supply. All those others that did are, no doubt, extinct.

Perhaps that's also our destiny as a species, proving that perhaps we're not so "fit" after all.

Before this thread is mercifully euthanised, Ed, I've a quibble:

As I understand it, Darwin did advocate "survival of the fittest", the means by which those creatures with the best survival mechanisms for competition with other species as well as within their own kind, passed on their genes.

The argument the anti-environmental "Wise Users" then erroneously interpreted from that was of a "Nature Red in Tooth and Claw" which hypothesised that wild animals engage in a constant orgy of happily ripping apart each other and anything else they could find just for the pure savage joy of it.

With this argument they could justify our savage treatment of our own kind, and fellow creatures as well, as being "natural".

Thus they were able to ignore that within species, most aggression is limited to threat displays and actual combat rarely resukts in death. Homo sapiens is the only species that carelessly kills, that can and does totally destroy its environment and food supply. All those others that did are, no doubt, extinct.

Perhaps that's also our destiny as a species, proving that perhaps we're not so "fit" after all.