Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mel O&amp;#039;Drama" data-source="post: 289793" data-attributes="member: 23">Ghosts is proving to be overall more watchable as it goes along. I&#039;ve enjoyed getting to know the ghosts and their various quirks. My tolerance for the contemporary rhythms is increasing. Ironically, the series&#039; nadir - the ghosts binge-watching Friends, discussing the various characters and even quoting dialogue from the series - has proven a little helpful in this regard. Using Friends as a frame of reference is passé anyway but building half an episode around it seems terribly lazy (if it doubt, get the audience on-side by referencing something nostalgic and popular). But it&#039;s since this episode that I&#039;ve questioned the contemporary speech patterns less, since it&#039;s entirely feasible the ghosts have been influenced by recent decades&#039; pop culture almost as much as the living characters. The &quot;origin&quot; type flashbacks to the ghosts&#039; past lives and deaths have been nicely done. I&#039;ve found myself surprisingly interested in knowing more from the titbits we&#039;ve been given. There&#039;s certainly a lot of scope for this series to take any number of paths, many of which have been utilised. The episode with the burglars took the now-established setup and shook it up nicely to create a sense of sitcom style jeopardy by removing Alison from the house, leaving the ghosts with no way to easily let Mike know what was going on downstairs. In fact most episodes of Series Two have been really well structured. My enjoyment of the series stems from the previously-mentioned fact that it&#039;s essentially a pastiche of Seventies and Eighties kiddies telly. And on this level it really works.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mel O'Drama, post: 289793, member: 23"] [I]Ghosts[/I] is proving to be overall more watchable as it goes along. I've enjoyed getting to know the ghosts and their various quirks. My tolerance for the contemporary rhythms is increasing. Ironically, the series' nadir - the ghosts binge-watching [I]Friends[/I], discussing the various characters and even quoting dialogue from the series - has proven a little helpful in this regard. Using [I]Friends[/I] as a frame of reference is passé[I] [/I]anyway but building half an episode around it seems terribly lazy (if it doubt, get the audience on-side by referencing something nostalgic and popular). But it's since this episode that I've questioned the contemporary speech patterns less, since it's entirely feasible the ghosts have been influenced by recent decades' pop culture almost as much as the living characters. The "origin" type flashbacks to the ghosts' past lives and deaths have been nicely done. I've found myself surprisingly interested in knowing more from the titbits we've been given. There's certainly a lot of scope for this series to take any number of paths, many of which have been utilised. The episode with the burglars took the now-established setup and shook it up nicely to create a sense of sitcom style jeopardy by removing Alison from the house, leaving the ghosts with no way to easily let Mike know what was going on downstairs. In fact most episodes of Series Two have been really well structured. My enjoyment of the series stems from the previously-mentioned fact that it's essentially a pastiche of Seventies and Eighties kiddies telly. And on this level it really works. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Who played JR Ewing?