SCREEN-L Archives

October 1993


Options: Use Proportional Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Stephen Hart <[log in to unmask]>
Wed, 6 Oct 1993 08:49:00 EST
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
text/plain (28 lines)
                      E L E C T R O N I C   M E S S A G E
                                        Date:     06-Oct-1993 08:40am EDT
                                        From:     Stephen Hart
                                        Level:    Post-secondary/University
                                        Tel No:   904-644-4839
TO:  Remote Addressee                     ( _jnet%screen-l@ua1vm )
Subject: re: SeaQuest
What Michael said in his post of SeaQuest ("... all that money heading down
the drain") reminded me of ABC's big budget flop _Battlestar Galactica_.
They reportedly spent big bucks on the series, resulting in some okay FX,
but the story lines were standard and run-of-the-mill.  That was okay for
me in 1978, when I was still overwhelmed by _Star Wars_, but not later on
when my tastes for good stories developed!  I hope too that _SeaQuest_
develops into a better series than it is now, just because I want Steven
Speilberg to have a success with TV.  To me, _Star Trek TNG and DS9_ had
pretty weak premieres, but developed into good series by the end of the
first season.  Does anyone konw if _SeaQuest_ has managed to hold on to its
67 million viewers it had since the premiere?
Stephen Hart, Florida State University (5-0, 4 days to Armageddon!)