Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mel O&amp;#039;Drama" data-source="post: 285157" data-attributes="member: 23">It&#039;s hard to know how it was scripted as well. Did the script say &quot;And he does a terrible Jack Nicholson impression&quot; or was that him. Whatever the case, I think I could have done without most of the poker ensemble.That&#039;s my understanding as well. It does seem hard to get a definite consensus on where the specials begin though.Agreed. I commented on his mahogany barnet at some point in the last couple of seasons. Grey would be my preference as well.Ha ha. I think you mentioned this earlier in the thread somewhere as well.I must confess I thought it sounded like an expression he&#039;d use occasionally. But not this much!Interesting observation. I&#039;ll keep an eye out for this.Same here.I don&#039;t think many would disagree that understated is more effective, that the original series has more rewatch value nor that Falk hammed it up greatly in the revival.The quote you posted above was part of a broader conversation about there being a separation between the old series and the new. Yes, the ideal would be for the quality of all aspects of the newer series to match that of the original, but we&#039;re in agreement that it isn&#039;t. And since the original run is superior in just about every way, having that separation - and viewing the new series is a different animal - is a good thing. In my book at least.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mel O'Drama, post: 285157, member: 23"] It's hard to know how it was scripted as well. Did the script say "And he does a terrible Jack Nicholson impression" or was that him. Whatever the case, I think I could have done without most of the poker ensemble. That's my understanding as well. It does seem hard to get a definite consensus on where the specials begin though. Agreed. I commented on his mahogany barnet at some point in the last couple of seasons. Grey would be my preference as well. Ha ha. I think you mentioned this earlier in the thread somewhere as well. I must confess I thought it sounded like an expression he'd use occasionally. But not [U][I]this[/I][/U] much! Interesting observation. I'll keep an eye out for this. Same here. I don't think many would disagree that understated is more effective, that the original series has more rewatch value nor that Falk hammed it up greatly in the revival. The quote you posted above was part of a broader conversation about there being a separation between the old series and the new. Yes, the ideal would be for the quality of all aspects of the newer series to match that of the original, but we're in agreement that it isn't. And since the original run is superior in just about every way, having that separation - and viewing the new series is a different animal - is a good thing. In my book at least. [/QUOTE]

Verification

What month follows July?