Shannara coming to television

[Apache]

Originally Posted by HarryT

What's the big deal? Advertising breaks are the time to catch up on reading .

I too enjoy reading during commercials.
Apache

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Apache

I too enjoy reading during commercials.
Apache

Yabbut, doesn't it interrupt your flow? I can pick up something I'm reading, say a reference book, sure, especially were I stuck with Network commercial breaks (4+ minutes) but on freaking "Hulu Plus" (the name just SLAYS me), they're 30 seconds. Or 60. Maybe 90, if it's a hot show and they're going wild, but they're usually 30 seconds. Hell, it takes me nearly that long to pick up my Kindle or Nook or whatever and wake it up, figure out where on the page I'm on, etc.

I realize that bitching about 30-second long commercials sounds daft, but it's the bloody principal of the thing. This is crap that was on, OTA, for naught, sometime previous. On PUBLICLY-owned airwaves, that the networks get for FREEBS. Our bandwidth, mind you, for which they pay NOTHING. Then, the show: it's a RERUN. Not "encore presentations," or whatever idiotic spin word they'll use next. They're not even giving us the courtesy of showing it in advance of when it will air for FREEBS. And when it WAS aired, the then-commercials were easily skipped when recorded. AND, we're PAYING for this.

URGHGHGHGHGHGHGHGHG. Yes, yes, I know it's a mere $8. But it simply pisses me off that we've become such sheeples that we just meekly go along with whatever the great opiate-dealers will hand out--"here, take our commercial content and you'll bloody well watch it." IT makes me think I should subscribe to that whatsits...Playon, or...? (Diap, you have that, don'tcha?) One of those Roku channels, that has a recorder, effectively. JUST for the privilege of whacking the Hulu-mercials.

Of course, happily, I'll be done with that BBC show I'm watching, and then I can just take the damn thing off the ROKU, so I'll stop being aggravated about it. I like some of the shows that I've found on it...but between their cavalier attitude about closed-captioning to the commercials...yoish.

Back to the actual topic: I've never watched anything on MTV, after the mid-80's or so. Yes, I know, I'm practically antiquated or something. Is it likely to be awful? My theory is, any network that's promoted those people--the Kardashians, right? Isn't that where those folks are?--can't be good.

Hitch

[DiapDealer]

Just for the record: I don't "meekly" go along with anything. I just don't hate commercials. In fact, I quite often appreciate the break. I watched the commercials when the shows were first broadcast free OTA, and I watch the commercials now. Even before my last DVR conked out, I found fast-forwarding through commercials and trying to stop at the right spot much more tedious and hectic than just watching the commercials or tuning them out.

I'm really not trying to be difficult, I just honestly don't get the "inalienable right to watch advertising-free televison" mentality (first-run, or rerun) that seems so prevalent in today's culture. I watch little enough TV that I could easily go commercial-free if I wanted to. I just don't care enough about them to bother. I've got bigger fish to fry.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Just for the record: I don't "meekly" go along with anything. I just don't hate commercials. In fact, I quite often appreciate the break. I watched the commercials when the shows were first broadcast free OTA, and I watch the commercials now. Even before my last DVR conked out, I found fast-forwarding through commercials and trying to stop at the right spot much more tedious and hectic than just watching the commercials or tuning them out.

Oh, c'mon, you know I wasn't talking about YOU. Now you're just being obstreperous.

I'm really not trying to be difficult, I just honestly don't get the "inalienable right to watch advertising-free televison" mentality (first-run, or rerun) that seems so prevalent in today's culture.

See? Obstreperous. (Are too! Are Not! Are Too!...)

I watch little enough TV that I could easily go commercial-free if I wanted to. I just don't care enough about them to bother. I've got bigger fish to fry.

I guess my perspective is partly formed by having a spouse that vehemently hates them. Must run in the family; my sister's spouse is the same way. As Mr. Hitch has very severe tinnitus, we don't get a lot of "quiet time" here at the house, as he needs some type of sound to help drown it out. It was one of the big compromises for me, when we decided to live together, because I never even had the damn thing on before we met, and he needs background sound nearly all the time. Having it going most of the day, even if it's tuned to news, just because we need the sound--yes, I get pissy about commercials, I guess.

HOWEVER, I do feel that once you start paying for telly, there ought to be rhyme or reason to it. And I do think that there's something inherently wrong with recycled shows being charged for, as well as the robo-mercials. I would hazard a guess that that's the genesis of the "inalienable non-commercial TV" mindset, whether it's me or anyone else; if a network or whatever wants to make the content "free" to me, and slap commercials in there, fine. But once you start paying for it, (I mean, isn't this how the Cable stations got started? The whole IDEA of commercial-free TV?), you oughtn't have to suffer through commercials, paid announcements or anything else other than the content.

Just my $.02, FWIW. And yes, it's just one of my hot-buttons. (And, how many people are already paying for it once, through cable, or DirecTV, or Hughes, or whatever, and then paying for it AGAIN via Hulu? When's enough enough, for stations that are already not paying for the bloody bandwidth?)

Sorry, and back to the actual topic again: MTV?? Do they have any non-reality TV shows, in the first place?


Hitch

[conan50]

Is MTV the network with the naked people dating thing? I think MTV will be one of the first cable channels to disappear as more people cut the cord, many channels have lost viewers, that's why they keep increasing commercials. Shannara might make or break them.
Some TV shows are intolerable with commercials, they can take you right out of the story. For instance, I doubt I could watch the Walking Dead with commercial breaks, too much drama to keep getting interrupted over and over again.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by conan50

Is MTV the network with the naked people dating thing? I think MTV will be one of the first cable channels to disappear as more people cut the cord, many channels have lost viewers, that's why they keep increasing commercials. Shannara might make or break them.
Some TV shows are intolerable with commercials, they can take you right out of the story. For instance, I doubt I could watch the Walking Dead with commercial breaks, too much drama to keep getting interrupted over and over again.

Naked dating? No s**t?

Dang. I miss the best stuff.

(Of course, having lived there, I've been on a variety of nude beaches in Europe, and, folks, it ain't all that. If MTV naked dating is like that, they ought to send out free blinders to anyone that watches. And an apology.)

Hitch

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Hitch

I guess my perspective is partly formed by having a spouse that vehemently hates them.

I encounter that hatred a lot myself. It did, does, and probably always will puzzle the poop out of me.

if a network or whatever wants to make the content "free" to me, and slap commercials in there, fine. But once you start paying for it, you oughtn't have to suffer through commercials, paid announcements or anything else other than the content.

YOU don't oughtn't have to. Nobody is required to pay for "premium services" that insert robo-ads. It's strictly voluntary. You seem to be saying, "no one oughtn't WANT to pay for such a thing," which of course, isn't really your call to make.

(I mean, isn't this how the Cable stations got started? The whole IDEA of commercial-free TV?)

That's not how I remember it. Cable TV was just as commercial-ly as OTA when it first came to my town. The draw for cable was getting more than the three channels you currently pulled in with your antenna (two of which were religious broadcasting). The draw was also a perfect (perfect then) picture, no rabbit-ears, no 40-foot tower attached to your house, and no using the antenna rotator to "dial the station in." Even when the likes of cable-only TNT, TBS, ESPN and Discovery came along, it wasn't about commercial-free. I think you're thinking of "premium" cable channels like HBO, Cinemax and Showtime that introduced the IDEA of commercial free television. You paid an extra fee (above and beyond the basic cable rate) for those premium commercial-free channels. And they were movies-only at that time. They had no (or very damn little) original programming. Many people (myself included) had cable for decades with no commercial-free channels. I willingly (and evenly) trade the "Aired just last night on NBC with commercials" feature offered by Hulu with the "commercial-free (but five years behind the times)" Netflix television catalog. Actually, I pay for both and think they're both "worth it."

No Commercials But Older Than Dirt == Aired Last Night But You Get Commercials (IMO)

Sorry, and back to the actual topic again: MTV?? Do they have any non-reality TV shows, in the first place?

I'll be honest... I haven't watched, or even thought about MTV in 25 years or so. I don't even know what channel it's on on my TV. But supposedly, they're trying to change the nature of their original programming. I have no idea if it will fly or not, but there's some very capable people's names attached to it (Jon Favreau as exec producer, for one) and they seem to have thrown a crap-ton of money at this thing. I HOPE it's good, but I'll just quietly change the channel if it's not.

[AnemicOak]

Originally Posted by Hitch

Sorry, and back to the actual topic again: MTV?? Do they have any non-reality TV shows, in the first place?

Scream
Teen Wolf
Finding Carter
Awkward

and probably more


Note: I had to look that up, because the last time I watched MTV was back when it was almost all music videos.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by AnemicOak

Scream
Teen Wolf
Finding Carter
Awkward

and probably more


Note: I had to look that up, because the last time I watched MTV was back when it was almost all music videos.

Yeah, me neither. I've seen Teen Wolf fly by my eyes on something--Netflix, maybe? Or Hulu? But I assumed it was pretty much what it sounds like. ;-)

Hitch

[murg]

I'm not going to quote anyone, but in Australia...

Went to a movie the other week. After paying a lot of money for the ticket (movies are very expensive down here), had to sit through half an hour of ads and trailers before the movie started. But mostly ads by a significant factor. And for some reason, ads designed to be shown in movie theatres are very long and very boring.

Cartoon Network is on the cable TV down here. They don't have ads, per se. But they do break the shows up with promos. And they don't break at good places to break, they break mid-sentence.

[leaston]

Ever so slightly ot...

It's been many, many years since I read any Shannara books and I'd quite like to revisit the series. As the Elfstones are the starting point for the series, is this a good book to begin reading too? Will I miss out on much by skipping to this book? I can't really remember that much about the stories.

[conan50]

Originally Posted by leaston

Ever so slightly ot...

It's been many, many years since I read any Shannara books and I'd quite like to revisit the series. As the Elfstones are the starting point for the series, is this a good book to begin reading too? Will I miss out on much by skipping to this book? I can't really remember that much about the stories.

To me all the books have a similar feel to them, I don't think you would go wrong starting with Elfstones, then maybe go to First King.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by conan50

To me all the books have a similar feel to them, I don't think you would go wrong starting with Elfstones, then maybe go to First King.

Isn't it Sword of, that's the first book? Or do you mean...chronologically, as opposed to order of writing? And if it's chrono, wouldn't that make Elfstones down the road apiece, as they say? Or am I mis-remembering?

Hitch

[conan50]

Originally Posted by Hitch

Isn't it Sword of, that's the first book? Or do you mean...chronologically, as opposed to order of writing? And if it's chrono, wouldn't that make Elfstones down the road apiece, as they say? Or am I mis-remembering?

Hitch

First King is a prequel to Swords. I think many people see Elfstones as one of the best early books.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by conan50

First King is a prequel to Swords. I think many people see Elfstones as one of the best early books.

Well, I'd agree; Elfstones is one of the better early books. But I thought that leaston asked (?) if that was the start of the series.

Guess not. I'll butt out now.

Hitch