# NBC's new fall show "Revolution"



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=JwfCRAtkYEI#!

Looks kinda interesting, but I assume it's going to die a fate like Flash Forward.


----------



## Fleegle (Jan 15, 2002)

I love post-apocalyptic stuff, so I'll be recording this one. I'm hoping it's good, but a few of the clips I've seen remind of of teh teen melodrama that ruined Fox's Terra Nova.


----------



## gossamer88 (Jul 27, 2005)

Wow this looks incredible. Thanks for the heads up!


----------



## Craigbob (Dec 2, 2006)

I've seen this before. It was a bad adaptation of a great David Brin novel called "The Postman". It had the same feel to me.

I'll give it a chance, but don't expect it to last more than a single season.


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

Oh my God.  Just the fact that they use VAST music for that trailer forces me to give it a chance.


----------



## WhiskeyTango (Sep 20, 2006)

This is the new show I'm most excited about. But I also, like others, fear it will not last. It will either be epic or an epic failure.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Directed by Jon Favreau...with Giancarlo...in Chicago? I'm there, even though JJ could mean it's another Alcatraz.

You know it's a fantasy if they have the Cubs in the 2012 World Series.


----------



## ElJay (Apr 6, 2005)

Looks like it would make an interesting miniseries. I too love post-apocalyptic stuff but in recent years it typically hasn't made for good TV shows. Glad to see "Gus" has another job though.


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

This looks great. This could make NBC a viable network again.......


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

The setup reminds me of the early-1980s fantasy novel "Ariel" by Steven R. Boyett (and its more recent sequel "Elegy Beach") -- although in that case, although modern technology suddenly stops working, magic suddenly _starts_ working, and fantasy creatures such as unicorns and dragons suddenly exist on Earth as well.

So maybe that'll be Season 2 of "Revolution."


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

It reminds me of Jericho


----------



## Zevida (Nov 8, 2003)

I feel like I can skip the pilot now. Man, they gave away everything in that trailer!

It looks like something I'd love, but that just means I expect to be disappointed. I also get a Terra Nova type feel from it.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I'll definitely be watching the pilot, but I sure hope they take lessons from some of the failed serialized dramas of the past several years and try to fix those problems.


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

It feels and awful lot like Terra Nova and The Event. I was very excited about both of those shows and didn't make it past the pilot in either one. I hope this one is better.


----------



## Jeeters (Feb 25, 2003)

Zevida said:


> I feel like I can skip the pilot now. Man, they gave away everything in that trailer!


Especially the last 15 seconds. That was something they should have kept under wraps and then just let it be revealed as a surprise at the end of the first episode's airing.


----------



## jeepair (Apr 22, 2004)

Girl with a bow. 

Muskets? Come on now, maybe ammo wouldn't be a prevalent as now but muskets.


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

jeepair said:


> Girl with a bow.


That seems to be required this year. Just look at the new Pixar movie Brave.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

I'll watch, as it's in my wheelhouse, but I bet it doesn't last a season. It's not a cop, medical or law show. It's doomed to fail. (and I hope I am wrong!!!!)


----------



## billypritchard (May 7, 2001)

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA. Annoying teenage son? Check!

What is with these shows? We. Don't. Like. Annoying. Teenage. Sons!


----------



## sieglinde (Aug 11, 2002)

Amish will rule the world with warlords from medieval and mountain men recreation societies.  

When the tablet went blank but still on it should have gone black because aren't batteries destroyed also? 

At least I have a place, I would be come an ale wench. (women were the main brewers during the Middle Ages)


----------



## plateau10 (Dec 11, 2007)

Steveknj said:


> I'll watch, as it's in my wheelhouse,


What's the deal with this word all of a sudden? I'm hearing it a couple of times per episode on Celebrity Apprentice this season, and now here. Sure, I "get" the definition from the context (though I'm not quite sure it's exactly right in this context), but if you look it up in any legit dictionary, it just doesn't mean anything other than the shelter you stand under when you pilot a boat.


----------



## Queue (Apr 7, 2009)

Looking forward to this show. The trailer looks great.


----------



## Jebberwocky! (Apr 16, 2005)

plateau10 said:


> What's the deal with this word all of a sudden? I'm hearing it a couple of times per episode on Celebrity Apprentice this season, and now here. Sure, I "get" the definition from the context (though I'm not quite sure it's exactly right in this context), but if you look it up in any legit dictionary, it just doesn't mean anything other than the shelter you stand under when you pilot a boat.


my wife and I also grew tired of hearing Wheelhouse - on Apprentice we thought it would make a good drinking game.


----------



## dtle (Dec 12, 2001)

I really need to have JJ Abrams (or the head writer) to come out and state "I have an explanation and an ending planned!" before I give it more than a couple of episodes.


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

I'm scared that I won't be able to suspend disbelief enough. I mean, every form of electricity is gone...what about human internal brain circuitry? What about dynamos? The energy created there has to go somewhere.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

plateau10 said:


> What's the deal with this word all of a sudden? I'm hearing it a couple of times per episode on Celebrity Apprentice this season, and now here. Sure, I "get" the definition from the context (though I'm not quite sure it's exactly right in this context), but if you look it up in any legit dictionary, it just doesn't mean anything other than the shelter you stand under when you pilot a boat.


I don't watch Apprentice, so not sure about that. I've been using it for years. I've heard baseball announcers use it quite often, usually referring to a pitch that is in the zone a better usually can make good contact on. But I have heard friends and colleagues say it too.

Funny how certain words and expressions kind of bother us  If I hear one more kid say whatev.......


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

dtle said:


> I really need to have JJ Abrams (or the head writer) to come out and state "I have an explanation and an ending planned!" before I give it more than a couple of episodes.


I think it's more of a case that they will actually MAKE it to the planned ending than whether they have one!!


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

DavidTigerFan said:


> I'm scared that I won't be able to suspend disbelief enough. I mean, every form of electricity is gone...what about human internal brain circuitry? What about dynamos? The energy created there has to go somewhere.


And, if we have the knowledge on how to create electricity, and the natural resources still exist, then how hard would it be to create it again?


----------



## WhiskeyTango (Sep 20, 2006)

DavidTigerFan said:


> I'm scared that I won't be able to suspend disbelief enough. I mean, every form of electricity is gone...what about human internal brain circuitry? What about dynamos? The energy created there has to go somewhere.





Steveknj said:


> And, if we have the knowledge on how to create electricity, and the natural resources still exist, then how hard would it be to create it again?


Think of it this way. I've heard that if a section of the electrical grid were taken out, it would take years to get it back online because the components neccessary to repair it aren't readily available, especially on a larger scale. So take out the whole grid. Grocery stores will be empty within 3 days. Society will quickly devolve into gangs trying to survive. Who's going to worry about restoring power 5-10 years from now, if at all possible, when they now need to find a way to simply survive.


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

WhiskeyTango said:


> Think of it this way. I've heard that if a section of the electrical grid were taken out, it would take years to get it back online because the components neccessary to repair it aren't readily available, especially on a larger scale. So take out the whole grid. Grocery stores will be empty within 3 days. Society will quickly devolve into gangs trying to survive. Who's going to worry about restoring power 5-10 years from now, if at all possible, when they now need to find a way to simply survive.


But the preview said that not even batteries worked. So there must be a pseudo-science or semi-supernatural explanation.


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

The only think I can think of is that there is some sort of dampening field that sucks out the electricity that is generated/stored. Conservation of energy is a high school concept so they better explain where all the energy went.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

WhiskeyTango said:


> Think of it this way. I've heard that if a section of the electrical grid were taken out, it would take years to get it back online because the components neccessary to repair it aren't readily available, especially on a larger scale. So take out the whole grid. Grocery stores will be empty within 3 days. Society will quickly devolve into gangs trying to survive. Who's going to worry about restoring power 5-10 years from now, if at all possible, when they now need to find a way to simply survive.


I mean, even on a smaller scale. Built local generators things like that. I'm sure the country can't link up right away, but small sections can. Perhaps that's how they will do this.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I don't think it's that the electrical grid was taken down. I think it's that electricity doesn't work any more.


----------



## mwhip (Jul 22, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I don't think it's that the electrical grid was taken down. I think it's that electricity doesn't work any more.


How is that possible? Only thing I can think of is an EMP. But worldwide? That would have be one of those catastrophic events from the sun they talk about.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

dtle said:


> I really need to have JJ Abrams (or the head writer) to come out and state "I have an explanation and an ending planned!" before I give it more than a couple of episodes.


_*THANK YOU!*_

That was exactly my thought when I saw the trailer: Does he already know exactly what's going on behind the core mystery and where everything is going (like, say, _Babylon 5_), or is he just starting with a premise and then just making crap up as he goes along (like, say, _Alias _or anything else he's ever done)?


----------



## Mr. Soze (Nov 2, 2002)

busyba said:


> _*THANK YOU!*_
> 
> That was exactly my thought when I saw the trailer: Does he already know exactly what's going on behind the core mystery and where everything is going (like, say, _Babylon 5_), or is he just starting with a premise and then just *making crap up as he goes along* (like, say, _Alias _or anything else he's ever done)?


My thought too. This will be one I pile up on the DVR for at least six episodes before watching. If it's not scratched by then, I will invest. Fool me n times, shame on me.

ETA: Second bolding in busyba's quote was mine.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

mwhip said:


> How is that possible? Only thing I can think of is an EMP. But worldwide? That would have be one of those catastrophic events from the sun they talk about.


An EMP wouldn't stop electricity from working...it would just disrupt unshielded, currently-operating circuitry.

This seems to be some magical kind of sci-fi gimmick. S. M. Stirling did a series of books based on this premise (two series, actually); he never explains what happened, just describes the results.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

The problem is, it's EXTREMELY rare when a TV series is planned out in advance. It just doesn't happen. Unless it's some guy's passion project that he's been working on for years and someone finally gives him a chance, it's just like any other TV show where someone comes up with the idea for a pilot and then if it gets picked up, they'll worry about the details later.


----------



## mwhip (Jul 22, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> An EMP wouldn't stop electricity from working...it would just disrupt unshielded, currently-operating circuitry.
> 
> This seems to be some magical kind of sci-fi gimmick. S. M. Stirling did a series of books based on this premise (two series, actually); he never explains what happened, just describes the results.


Oh man that would drive me crazy because I need to know the cause.


----------



## Squeak (May 12, 2000)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I don't think it's that the electrical grid was taken down. I think it's that electricity doesn't work any more.


Not just electricity, but also mechanical motors.

Airplanes fell out of the sky (because their engines stopped spinning) and cars stopped on the freeways.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

In Stirling's books, part of the effect is that things like gasoline and gunpowder don't burn (or rather, don't burn fast enough to be useful).


----------



## Waldorf (Oct 4, 2002)

This reminds me... isn't Falling Skies coming back soon?

I'll also take the opportunity to plug Showtime's "Jeremiah" if you like shows such as this or Jericho.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

My high school chemistry teacher spoke of how he hoped one day one of his students would write a screenplay called "The Day Water Behaved" that would be a similar disaster movie about what would happen if suddenly water began exhibiting the "correct" properties that other substances had.

For instance.... the only property I can recall is where every substance decreases in volume as it gets colder, but water increases in volume. Maybe that was the only property he was talking about, but if that were suddenly to start happening, there would be all kinds of ramifications.


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

plateau10 said:


> What's the deal with this word all of a sudden? I'm hearing it a couple of times per episode on Celebrity Apprentice this season, and now here. Sure, I "get" the definition from the context (though I'm not quite sure it's exactly right in this context), but if you look it up in any legit dictionary, it just doesn't mean anything other than the shelter you stand under when you pilot a boat.





Steveknj said:


> I don't watch Apprentice, so not sure about that. I've been using it for years. I've heard baseball announcers use it quite often, usually referring to a pitch that is in the zone a better usually can make good contact on. But I have heard friends and colleagues say it too.


It's slang. Urban dictionary shows it a few different ways:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=wheelhouse



dtle said:


> I really need to have JJ Abrams (or the head writer) to come out and state "I have an explanation and an ending planned!" before I give it more than a couple of episodes.


Yes, but he won't. Or even if he does that doesn't mean it won't change. (aka his season 1 interview of Lost saying everything happening would be explained with a scientific reason...... uh........)



DavidTigerFan said:


> I'm scared that I won't be able to suspend disbelief enough. I mean, every form of electricity is gone...what about human internal brain circuitry? What about dynamos? The energy created there has to go somewhere.


Geek to the nth degree right here. :up:
I'll be curious to see what explanation they have for all of it. Not just electricity but batteries, motors, etc. as others stated here. Not sure how that could make sense.



Mr. Soze said:


> My thought too. This will be one I pile up on the DVR for at least six episodes before watching. If it's not scratched by then, I will invest. Fool me n times, shame on me..


I will honestly probably wait a few episodes and read what people on here and reviews such as Sepinwell think before I even start recording/downloading them.


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

DavidTigerFan said:


> The only think I can think of is that there is some sort of dampening field that sucks out the electricity that is generated/stored. Conservation of energy is a high school concept so they better explain where all the energy went.


You really think that "creative" TV writer types took HS physics?

Besides it's a sci-fi concept that you either can or cannot live with.

I view the elimination of electricity as a racist abomination to the fine Scottish physicist James Clerk Maxwell, but that's just me. 

What I can't and won't live with is a teen angst sub plot. NFW.


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

philw1776 said:


> What I can't and won't live with is a teen angst sub plot. NFW.


I agree and feel like a moron because I just, for the first time, realized what NFW stands for.


----------



## Mr. Soze (Nov 2, 2002)

photoshopgrl said:


> I agree and feel like a moron because I just, for the first time, realized what NFW stands for.


NFW!!!


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

Heh, maybe they'll be able to start up the Edison vs. Tesla war again.


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

Mr. Soze said:


> NFW!!!


Ha! I think I always read it as NSFW before and that's why it confused me. I'm dumb. Don't mind me, nothing to see here!


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

busyba said:


> My high school chemistry teacher spoke of how he hoped one day one of his students would write a screenplay called "The Day Water Behaved" that would be a similar disaster movie about what would happen if suddenly water began exhibiting the "correct" properties that other substances had.
> 
> For instance.... the only property I can recall is where every substance decreases in volume as it gets colder, but water increases in volume. Maybe that was the only property he was talking about, but if that were suddenly to start happening, there would be all kinds of ramifications.


Not to mention, what would happen if Ice 9 gets out of the lab.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Where have we seen that premise?


----------



## Unbeliever (Feb 3, 2001)

busyba said:


> For instance.... the only property I can recall is where every substance decreases in volume as it gets colder, but water increases in volume.


Only in the range from 4C to frozen, and then back negative again at -200C.

Silicon, Cubic Zirconium, and a few others have ranges of negative expansion coefficient.

--Carlos V.


----------



## Queue (Apr 7, 2009)

Waldorf said:


> This reminds me... isn't Falling Skies coming back soon?
> 
> I'll also take the opportunity to plug Showtime's "Jeremiah" if you like shows such as this or Jericho.


I watched this a few years ago and loved it, then wanted to introduce the g/f to it because she loves post-apocolyptic shows. Only to find it isn't available on Netflix anymore!


----------



## Waldorf (Oct 4, 2002)

Not much more revealed here:

http://www.nbc.com/revolution/about/

Looks like a "Enforced Technology Level" trope with a little "Big Blackout" thrown in for good measure.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/discussion.php?id=6iwm1rs60v0jyh9whfy4ulz4

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BigBlackout


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

Come to think of it, I'm surprised the Wrigley Field sign is in such good shape. The "event" must have caused spray paint cans to stop working, too.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

I wanna see how they explain that steam engines and diesel engines and water wheels can't work, or how they can't burn wood, oil or natural gas (I know. Distribution and transportation requires power.) Top of my head, they could convert hydroelectric power plants to other power types, like spinning flywheels.

You can pry my generator from my dead hands...


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Squeak said:


> Not just electricity, but also mechanical motors.
> 
> Airplanes fell out of the sky (because their engines stopped spinning) and cars stopped on the freeways.


Cars cannot run if there is no sparks in the sparkplugs. Not sure about airplanes, but, hey, people were expecting them to fall out of the sky when we rolled over to 2000. If all electricity stopped in a plane you would get no navigation, not relays to make any adjustments and so on. Like I said, don't know about the engine itself, but assuming the fuel has to be pumped to the engine then I supposed that would bring it down in a hurry (you couldn't even adjust the flaps and what-not to try to glide).

The event was not instantaneous, by the way. The long line of cars on the highway had their headlights go off as if there was some wave passing through.


----------



## Flop (Dec 2, 2005)

Waldorf said:


> This reminds me... isn't Falling Skies coming back soon?


June 17 I think


----------



## Flop (Dec 2, 2005)

wprager said:


> Cars cannot run if there is no sparks in the sparkplugs. Not sure about airplanes, but, hey, people were expecting them to fall out of the sky when we rolled over to 2000. If all electricity stopped in a plane you would get no navigation, not relays to make any adjustments and so on. Like I said, don't know about the engine itself, but assuming the fuel has to be pumped to the engine then I supposed that would bring it down in a hurry (you couldn't even adjust the flaps and what-not to try to glide).
> 
> The event was not instantaneous, by the way. The long line of cars on the highway had their headlights go off as if there was some wave passing through.


Basic Diesel engines do not require spark plugs or electricity. They use the heat from compression.

Turbines (jet engines) only use electric ignition to start the engine, Once running, they are not required.


----------



## Unbeliever (Feb 3, 2001)

Flop said:


> Basic Diesel engines do not require spark plugs or electricity. They use the heat from compression.
> 
> Turbines (jet engines) only use electric ignition to start the engine, Once running, they are not required.


But in both cases, if you lose electricity, you lose electric fuel pumps.

For Jet Engines, you lose FADEC, (full authority digital engine control), which controls throttle, fuel metering, etc. There's no longer a simple cable between the levers and the engine. It's a wire to a computer, and if the computer goes...

I doubt all airplanes/airliners will "fall out of the sky". Medium age and older ones (non fly-by-wire) will still be controllable. The RAT on turbojet airplanes will drop automatically at power loss, and some RATs drive hydraulic pumps for control surface boost.

But it's sci-fi. First let's see if they have a self-consistent explanation for the show's premise phenomenon.

--Carlos V.


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

I love you guys.


----------



## Barmat (Jun 1, 2001)

jeepair said:


> Girl with a bow.
> 
> Muskets? Come on now, maybe ammo wouldn't be a prevalent as now but muskets.


Try making brass casings and jacketed bullets without any kind of power. Now try mixing a few chemicals by hand and melting lead into a ball.

More importantly what about steam power?


----------



## sieglinde (Aug 11, 2002)

The Romans used lead. Reloaders don't need to use electricity.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

netringer said:


> I wanna see how they explain that steam engines and water wheels can't work, or how they can't burn wood, oil or natural gas (I know. Distribution needs power.) Top of my head, they could convert hydroelectric power plants to other power types, like spinning flywheels.
> 
> You can pry my generator from my dead hands...


That's exactly what I was thinking. Mankind now has the KNOWLEDGE how to make electricity, and with that knowledge they should be able to get SOME sort of power going, at least on a very localized scale.

But hey, it's TV, and I usually don't get too wrapped up in real scientific explanations of SciFi.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Steveknj said:


> That's exactly what I was thinking. Mankind now has the KNOWLEDGE how to make electricity, and with that knowledge they should be able to get SOME sort of power going, at least on a very localized scale.


You seem to be assuming that what happens is a disruption of electrical devices.

I am assuming that electricity no longer functions (and it probably isn't limited to that; I suspect combustion, etc., also no longer function). That there has been some kind of change in the way the fundamental forces of the universe work.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I am assuming that electricity no longer functions (and it probably isn't limited to that; I suspect combustion, etc., also no longer function). That there has been some kind of change in the way the fundamental forces of the universe work.


The problem though is that such a change should result in far more happening than what probably takes place in the show.

I'm not holding my breath for a rigorous scientific explanation.


----------



## Haps (Nov 30, 2001)

Fleegle said:


> I love post-apocalyptic stuff, so I'll be recording this one. I'm hoping it's good, but a few of the clips I've seen remind of of teh teen melodrama that ruined Fox's Terra Nova.


Yeah the terra nova trailers looked awesome. And then the show.... meh.

Really crossing my fingers here. I so want it to be awesome.

I love post apocalyptic stuff myself. One of my big wishes is for someone to give Robert R McCammon's Swan Song a Game of Thrones style treatment on HBO.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Haps said:


> Yeah the terra nova trailers looked awesome. And then the show.... meh.
> 
> Really crossing my fingers here. I so want it to be awesome.
> 
> I love post apocalyptic stuff myself. One of my big wishes is for someone to give Robert R McCammon's Swan Song a Game of Thrones style treatment on HBO.


Great book. I loved reading his stuff when I was in high school. I need to check out what he's written since then.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

If it is Jon Favreau directing, you just know he threw in the Cubs in the 2012 World Series. Ya wanna bet that the apocalypse came right before game 6 with the Cubs leading 3 games to 2? (AND the Cubs would have blown it) Oh. They play the Boston Red Sox just to show Ken Burns who the real losers are.


----------



## Fl_Gulfer (May 27, 2005)

Looks like a interesting show to watch, There isn't anything else to do at night besides stareing at the computer. Maybe I could learn ho 2 spel.


----------



## Waldorf (Oct 4, 2002)

From everything I've gathered around the net, this looks more like a "What if we took modern people who rely so heavily on technology and just took that away - what would happen?"

It doesn't _seem_ like much thought was put into why/how it was taken away. The whole thing smells more of fantasy than sci-fi to me. It's obviously not an EMP, it's not geomagnetic reversal, my bets are on government/clandestine group pressing 'reset' to take control. If it was just "electricity" not working, then I think steam would make a big comeback - the "bamboo technology" trope, if you will. Don't see any of that in trailers or screenshots.

The spoilery trailer gives it more of a Jericho vibe where



Spoiler



It's a planned clandestine event by the government or above the government to re-establish control over the populace.



Cautiously optimistic with low expectations. I hope I'm wrong.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

Waldorf said:


> ...The spoilery trailer gives it more of a Jericho vibe where
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The Jericho vibe is


Spoiler



Seeing somebody managing to power up a tower PC. The secret agent?/conspiracy guys have ways.


although I'll admit I bailed on Jericho shortly before the final end ending.

You know the brain shower for this thing was the east coast power failures or 9/11 telecom faliures.


----------



## Unbeliever (Feb 3, 2001)

I'm curious what they will use. They said "not even batteries worked." If whatever energy damping technology they're using affects that electrochemical process, why doesn't it affect that other group of electrochemical processes that has a head, two arms, and two legs?

--Carlos V.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

I can see how a gov't can shut off power plants. But stop a battery from working?


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Unbeliever said:


> I'm curious what they will use. They said "not even batteries worked." If whatever energy damping technology they're using affects that electrochemical process, why doesn't it affect that other group of electrochemical processes that has a head, two arms, and two legs?
> 
> --Carlos V.


Because the electrochemical process you are referring to occurs underneath the bony structure of the skull. The skull provides sufficient shielding to prevent disruption of organic electrochemical processes.

Which, of course, is complete BS. The point is this story is a work of fiction and we haven't even yet seen a single episode to know how fantastical a universe this is going to be. It could be our own world, in which we would expect certain logical rules to apply. Or it could take place in a universe more similar to the one Abrams crafted for Fringe, where scientifically incongruous stuff happens all the time and is never really explained well and yet that show manages to be very satisfying. I'm willing to give the show at least one episode to see what they offer up.


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

Maybe it's alien invasion and the ships are invisible and hovering the planet causing it to all not work.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

photoshopgrl said:


> Maybe it's alien invasion and the ships are invisible and hovering the planet causing it to all not work.


And that's the sum total of the aliens' involvement in the series. They're not out to rule us, they're not out to eat us, they're not out to steal our water. They just want to make our stuff not work. As long as our stuff doesn't work, they're content to just sit there, invisible.

But if we ever find a way to make our stuff work again, hoo-boy will WE be in trouble!


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

netringer said:


> If it is Jon Favreau directing, you just know he threw in the Cubs in the 2012 World Series. Ya wanna bet that the apocalypse came right before game 6 with the Cubs leading 3 games to 2? (AND the Cubs would have blown it)


There wouldn't have been a "2012 World Series Champions" sign on Wrigley Field unless the World Series had been completed (and the sign made) before the event.

I realized there also probably should be a _lot_ of burned-out/burned-down buildings in Chicago, but didn't really see that in the trailer. (The result of people doing whatever they can for light/heat/cooking, with no real way to put out any fires that get out of control, short of perhaps a bucket brigade from the lake.)

Perhaps the fact that I'm still thinking about this is a good sign for NBC...


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> And that's the sum total of the aliens' involvement in the series. They're not out to rule us, they're not out to eat us, they're not out to steal our water. They just want to make our stuff not work. As long as our stuff doesn't work, they're content to just sit there, invisible.
> 
> But if we ever find a way to make our stuff work again, hoo-boy will WE be in trouble!


Hey! I was joking but my theory is as good as any at this point.

The more I read this thread, the less I want to see the show. I have enough TV that I have to fully suspend all disbelief to watch. I don't need another.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

trainman said:


> There wouldn't have been a "2012 World Series Champions" sign on Wrigley Field unless the World Series had been completed (and the sign made) before the event.
> 
> I realized there also probably should be a _lot_ of burned-out/burned-down buildings in Chicago, but didn't really see that in the trailer.


LOL!



> (The result of people doing whatever they can for light/heat/cooking, with no real way to put out any fires that get out of control, short of perhaps a bucket brigade from the lake.)


Oh.

I thought you meant from all the riotous celebrations after the Cubs won the Series.


----------



## Sadara (Sep 27, 2006)

I love shows like this. Loved Jericho, loved Jeremiah, love Falling Skies, etc etc etc. I don't need much of a reason to give this show a chance. But, I do realize this may not be a very popular show and therefore not last. But, I will watch every episode until they do can it... and if I'm lucky it'll get a few seasons!


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

You know I was also thinking. What about lightning? Are there no more thunderstorms?


----------



## Graymalkin (Mar 20, 2001)

Honestly, I've had just about enough with all of these post-apocalyptic movies and TV series. This one doesn't interest me at all.


----------



## tiassa (Jul 2, 2008)

netringer said:


> If it is Jon Favreau directing, you just know he threw in the Cubs in the 2012 World Series. Ya wanna bet that the apocalypse came right before game 6 with the Cubs leading 3 games to 2? (AND the Cubs would have blown it) Oh. They play the Boston Red Sox just to show Ken Burns who the real losers are.


Prior to 2004 a Cubs-Red Sox World Series would have been the start of the Apocalypse (which would have come with the series tied 3-3 right after the home team tied game 7 in the bottom of the 9th), this almost happened in 2003, but Steve Bartman and Aaron <bleeping> Boone prevented it. Now, not so much. I can't think of an AL team that has replaced the Red Sox on top of the "WS Futility meter" the Texas Rangers maybe, but they only go back to 1960 (and they moved from DC to Texas).

I think the only sporting event that could trigger the Apocalypse is a Browns--Vikings Super Bowl.


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

So are we not using this thread now?


----------



## Family (Jul 23, 2001)

photoshopgrl said:


> So are we not using this thread now?


No this should be the thread and I am bumping it up so the other one dies.


----------



## dagap (Dec 5, 2003)

So airplanes fall out of the sky because they lose all power, except their external lights.


----------



## kaszeta (Jun 11, 2004)

See S.M. Stirling's Emberverse novels, which operate on a near-identical pretense: in that series of books, subtle changes to the fundamental relations of physics resulted in electricity, guns, explosives, internal combustion engines, steam power, and a raft of other things either not working, or not being as effective.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

Sadara said:


> I love shows like this. Loved Jericho, loved Jeremiah, love Falling Skies, etc etc etc. I don't need much of a reason to give this show a chance. But, I do realize this may not be a very popular show and therefore not last. But, I will watch every episode until they do can it... and if I'm lucky it'll get a few seasons!


Me too. :up:

But I'm getting a feeling that maybe this thread is more interesting than the show itself will be when it gets here. 

If the acting and the characters are good enough (Lost, Fringe) I can get over some inconsistencies in the plot if it's not too bad. And then, I'm no scientist, so I'm easily fooled.


----------



## photoshopgrl (Nov 22, 2008)

I might have to check this out. I'm still up in the air about it... I'm just still bitter as hell over Jericho. Most of the reason I haven't checked out Falling Skies.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

dtle said:


> I really need to have JJ Abrams (or the head writer) to come out and state "I have an explanation and an ending planned!" before I give it more than a couple of episodes.


They said that about _Lost_. Also, the _Battlestar Galactica_ remake.



kaszeta said:


> See S.M. Stirling's Emberverse novels, which operate on a near-identical pretense: in that series of books, subtle changes to the fundamental relations of physics resulted in electricity, guns, explosives, internal combustion engines, steam power, and a raft of other things either not working, or not being as effective.


I'm skeptical that such a change would be compatible with human life.

But I'll probably watch this anyway.


----------



## LordKronos (Dec 28, 2003)

photoshopgrl said:


> I'm just still bitter as hell over Jericho..


Loved that show initially, but they ruined it with the conspiracy garbage. Before that, it was awesome, and better the pretty much all post-apocalyptic shows/movies. As opposed to seeing how people live after society has crumbled, Jericho showed how people experience the actual crumbling of society and learn to deal with/recover from it.

This show looks semi interesting, but since it skips ahead 15 years, you don't get to experience all of that like you did with Jericho. Are there any other shows like Jericho in that respect? Falling Skies looks the closest (only 6 months later rather than several years), except that the focus is more on the aliens than the rebuilding.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

wmcbrine said:


> > I really need to have JJ Abrams (or the head writer) to come out and state "I have an explanation and an ending planned!" before I give it more than a couple of episodes.
> 
> 
> They said that about _Lost_. Also, the _Battlestar Galactica_ remake.


And they were eventually proven right.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

busyba said:


> And they were eventually proven right.


No, I meant, the creators of those shows claimed to have the endings, etc. planned. And then... well, you know.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

wmcbrine said:


> No, I meant, the creators of those shows claimed to have the endings, etc. planned. And then... well, you know.


Ah. Yes.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Did the BG people ever say that they had a plan?

They said the Cylons had a plan, but I don't recall them ever saying THEY had a plan, and in fact I have vague memories of Ronald Moore lavishing contempt on the notion that he SHOULD have a plan.


----------



## gchance (Dec 6, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Did the BG people ever say that they had a plan?
> 
> They said the Cylons had a plan, but I don't recall them ever saying THEY had a plan, and in fact I have vague memories of Ronald Moore lavishing contempt on the notion that he SHOULD have a plan.


Nah, Moore just continually insulted his audience on his podcast, all while telling them what whiskey he was drinking. Oh yes, and clinking his ice in the glass whenever possible.

Greg


----------



## tlc (May 30, 2002)

LordKronos said:


> Loved that show initially, but they ruined it with the conspiracy garbage. Before that, it was awesome, and better the pretty much all post-apocalyptic shows/movies. As opposed to seeing how people live after society has crumbled, Jericho showed how people experience the actual crumbling of society and learn to deal with/recover from it.
> 
> This show looks semi interesting, but since it skips ahead 15 years, you don't get to experience all of that like you did with Jericho. Are there any other shows like Jericho in that respect? Falling Skies looks the closest (only 6 months later rather than several years), except that the focus is more on the aliens than the rebuilding.


The Walking Dead is "after the fall" too.

It's much cheaper to film a lightly populated wasteland than a the destruction and chaos of destroying world civilization. IIRC, the Falling Skies backstory was explained with children's drawings. (rather clever actually) It didn't matter that it was only six months. Everyone was gone and the initial chaos was over. Also IIRC, Jericho managed by being a remote small town -- mushroom clouds in the distance.

That said, Jericho did have the "people _adjusting_ to the change" part, which is fun. On The Walking Dead, they're still adjusting, arguably learning things they should know by now.


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

tlc said:


> That said, Jericho did have the "people _adjusting_ to the change" part, which is fun.


Not quite so fun for the people doing the adjusting, I would imagine.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

DavidTigerFan said:


> I'm scared that I won't be able to suspend disbelief enough. I mean, every form of electricity is gone...what about human internal brain circuitry? What about dynamos? The energy created there has to go somewhere.


And one would presume that if combustion is possible a car wouldn't quit until after it was shut off for the first time after the event. Also, what about cars and machinery, like generators, that don't rely on electrical components (transitors, etc) to operate.


----------



## kaszeta (Jun 11, 2004)

Stormspace said:


> And one would presume that if combustion is possible a car wouldn't quit until after it was shut off for the first time after the event. Also, what about cars and machinery, like generators, that don't rely on electrical components (transitors, etc) to operate.


Wouldn't take a lot of change in thermophysical properties before a basic IC engine would stop running. Go put some diesel in your fuel tank and let me know how long it runs.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

kaszeta said:


> Wouldn't take a lot of change in thermophysical properties before a basic IC engine would stop running. Go put some diesel in your fuel tank and let me know how long it runs.


..or a magnet spinning around a copper coil using water to move the magnet? Based on what I saw the cause is going to be something more fantasy than sciencey in nature.

I can buy something disrupting electrical equipment much like an EMP would. Maybe even some of that equipment that uses IC to operate might use electrical components to regulate the motor or control surfaces(Cars and planes), but like another pointed out, we know how to generate electricity.

It would take a total breakdown of government to prevent a rudimentary recovery within a couple of years. Perhaps military assets we shielded enough that the governments of the world smashed each other leaving only the general populace to carry on.

I'll prolly watch the first few eps just for grins and chuckles. Couldn't be any worse than some of the disaster movies the wife makes me watch with her.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

tlc said:


> That said, Jericho did have the "people _adjusting_ to the change" part, which is fun. On The Walking Dead, they're still adjusting, arguably learning things they should know by now.


It's only been about a month or so for the TWD folks since the apocalypse took place.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

gchance said:


> Nah, Moore just continually insulted his audience on his podcast, all while telling them what whiskey he was drinking. Oh yes, and clinking his ice in the glass whenever possible.
> 
> Greg


Whiskey on ice? Should have known right there. The good stuff has to be neat.


----------



## tlc (May 30, 2002)

DreadPirateRob said:


> It's only been about a month or so for the TWD folks since the apocalypse took place.


A month since Grimes found the group or since the collapse? I was thinking maybe Lori held out a while before letting Shane jump her.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

tlc said:


> A month since Grimes found the group or since the collapse? I was thinking maybe Lori held out a while before letting Shane jump her.


I think it's three months or so since Rick got shot, and about three weeks since he woke up. I don't know when exactly the apocalypse happened in between.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

tlc said:


> A month since Grimes found the group or since the collapse? I was thinking maybe Lori held out a while before letting Shane jump her.





Rob Helmerichs said:


> I think it's three months or so since Rick got shot, and about three weeks since he woke up. I don't know when exactly the apocalypse happened in between.


I don't think there's any way that Rick could have been in a coma for more than 30 days or so and still be able to walk without assistance due to the muscle atrophy that would have taken place (although I am admittedly far from an expert on the subject). And he probably couldn't have survived more than a few days without food/water, so assuming that he could have had an IV that lasted for a day or two before it ran out, it can't have been more than a week between when the hospital was overrun/the last stand took place and when he woke up.

So all things considered, it seems like Rick had the misfortune of getting shot right before the outbreak started, that it spread like wildfire for about 2-3 weeks before going apocalyptic, and then the whole world went to hell in a week or so.

I think Rob is right that it's been about 3 weeks since Rick woke up. It's not clear, but I think that the events on Herschel's farm only lasted for about 2 weeks at most (which means that Max has mutant-like healing abilities), and it took him about a week to get to Atlanta, find the group, make the decision to leave for the CDC, and then leave the CDC before it blew up.

So all told, I think we're looking at 6-7 weeks in all.


----------



## That Don Guy (Mar 13, 2003)

LordKronos said:


> This show looks semi interesting, but since it skips ahead 15 years, you don't get to experience all of that like you did with Jericho. Are there any other shows like Jericho in that respect? Falling Skies looks the closest (only 6 months later rather than several years), except that the focus is more on the aliens than the rebuilding.


How about Terry Nation's _Survivors_ (the 1970s version, not the recent remake)? The first episode takes place while the "apocalypse" is starting to take full effect. I think the main difference is, all of the technology still exists, but they just have to find people who know how to fix/run it - assuming that any of them are still alive.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

DreadPirateRob said:


> So all things considered, it seems like Rick had the misfortune of getting shot right before the outbreak started, that it spread like wildfire for about 2-3 weeks before going apocalyptic, and then the whole world went to hell in a week or so.


Google Walking Dead timeline and you'll find several people who have independently come to the same conclusions from the information given in the show. Either Rick is a walking miracle or the writers of the show didn't do much research into what happens when people are in comas...


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> or the writers of the show didn't do much research


Inconceivable!


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

eddyj said:


> Inconceivable!


I do not think oh never mind.


----------



## cwerdna (Feb 22, 2001)

Wow, I'd never heard of this show until I saw a VERY abbreviated trailer that was at the end of Miss USA. That short trailer made it look a lot more interesting than the longer one in the 1st post.


Stormspace said:


> And one would presume that if combustion is possible a car wouldn't quit until after it was shut off for the first time after the event. Also, what about cars and machinery, like generators, that don't rely on electrical components (transitors, etc) to operate.


You'd be very surprised about modern cars. Cars sold in the US since 1996 are required to have OBD II (http://www.obdii.com/connector.html). I'm sure we've had computer control of engines and timing since WELL before that.

If one had a much older car w/o any sort of computer controls, if there were an EMP, I'd imagine that it still could work afterward.

Also, there's CANbus (see http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/how-to/repair/how-it-works-the-computer-inside-your-car). While looking for the article I read recently, which turned out to be that Popular Mechanics article, I stumbled across http://johndayautomotivelectronics.com/?p=10064 and learned something new.

I do wonder what the explanation in the show is of why everything stopped working.

I'm not sure I'm so much into the drama that this longer trailer emphasized. I'll probably watch the 1st ep or two to see if it holds my interest.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

cwerdna said:


> I do wonder what the explanation in the show is of why everything stopped working.


I'm sure the writers do too...


----------



## sieglinde (Aug 11, 2002)

I have not read Sterling's book but I suspect he offered no explanation.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

cwerdna said:


> Wow, I'd never heard of this show until I saw a VERY abbreviated trailer that was at the end of Miss USA. That short trailer made it look a lot more interesting than the longer one in the 1st post.
> 
> You'd be very surprised about modern cars. Cars sold in the US since 1996 are required to have OBD II (http://www.obdii.com/connector.html). I'm sure we've had computer control of engines and timing since WELL before that.
> 
> ...


Only one of my three cars have one of those. However I'm certain both have components that would be affected by an EMP. So in that one scene out of the hundreds of cars in line maybe one or two would have kept running? Nah. Not enough drama to show only a couple cars still going.


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

Elizabeth Mitchell has replaced Andrea Roth.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/30/elizabeth-mitchell-revolution_n_1640228.html


----------



## Waldorf (Oct 4, 2002)

aadam101 said:


> Elizabeth Mitchell has replaced Andrea Roth.
> 
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/30/elizabeth-mitchell-revolution_n_1640228.html


Ooo, good move. We like her.


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

Waldorf said:


> Ooo, good move. We like her.


I enjoyed Andrea Roth on Ringer. Not sure who I would have preferred more.


----------



## tiellv (Nov 11, 2002)

This upcoming series makes me think of a book I read a while back called _"One Second After"_ The book was very unnerving. 
http://www.amazon.com/One-Second-Af...ords=one+second+after+by+william+r.+forstchen


----------



## andyw715 (Jul 31, 2007)

FYI, filming has started here in Wilmington, NC.
They are looking for local men riders (horse) as extras....among others.


----------



## Jesda (Feb 12, 2005)

Looks potentially awesome and awful all at once. I think I'd have a hard time believing that someone couldn't just harness a river and make a generator or burn some wood and create a small power plant. Electrons don't just magically disappear.


See? I'm already ruining for myself.


----------



## jamesl (Jul 12, 2012)

it will last 1/2 a season, 
maybe a full season 
but will definitely not be renewed


----------



## Tyrion The Imp (Jul 11, 2012)

Fleegle said:


> I love post-apocalyptic stuff, so I'll be recording this one. I'm hoping it's good, but a few of the clips I've seen remind of of teh teen melodrama that ruined Fox's Terra Nova.


Hesitant to watch it because it does look it has that melodrama that Terra Nova had.

I'll record it and take a look, but I feel like it'll get cancelled.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

jamesl said:


> it will last 1/2 a season,
> maybe a full season
> but will definitely not be renewed


That's a terrible Haiku.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

danterner said:


> That's a terrible Haiku.


Terrible logic, too.

I'm sure the exact same thing could have been said, with the exact same justification, about Lost.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

I'm reading a book by SM Stirling that has the same premise--somebody in this thread recommended it earlier. It's one of those things that is impossible, but yet you are seeing it first hand, so you had better get on board and react to the new situation, or you're done. When the zombie apocalypse comes, it does no good to sit around saying there's no such thing.  

Useless to say in this forum, but lets just accept the premise instead of debating how impossible it is. Please.....


----------



## jamesl (Jul 12, 2012)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Terrible logic, too.
> 
> I'm sure the exact same thing could have been said, with the exact same justification, about Lost.


I'm sure the exact same thing could have been said, with the exact same justification, about Terra Nova


----------



## madscientist (Nov 12, 2003)

jamesl said:


> I'm sure the exact same thing could have been said, with the exact same justification, about Terra Nova


I think you're making Rob's point for him.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

Jesda said:


> Looks potentially awesome and awful all at once. I think I'd have a hard time believing that someone couldn't just harness a river and make a generator or burn some wood and create a small power plant. Electrons don't just magically disappear.


Even from what little we've seen in the trailer, it seems clear to me that there's an ongoing suppression effect -- it's not an EMP, it's much more interesting than that. And the amulet temporarily cancels the effect in a local area.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

danterner said:


> That's a terrible Haiku.


It scans more like the end of a limmerick.


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

wmcbrine said:


> It scans more like the end of a limmerick.


Exactly my point.


----------



## dwit (May 5, 2004)

Looks to much like Terra Nova and Falling Skies.

I'm wondering if it will even last a whole season.


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Did the BG people ever say that they had a plan?
> 
> They said the Cylons had a plan, but I don't recall them ever saying THEY had a plan, and in fact I have vague memories of Ronald Moore lavishing contempt on the notion that he SHOULD have a plan.


Say what you will about the ending but that was still two of the best seasons of TV I've ever watched. And parts of 3 and 4 were also still goof. As much as I love Firefly, it did not really even last what would normally be considered a full season -- who knows how it would have gone.


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

The only thing I can think of similar is a book I read called "The Trigger" by Arthur C Clarke. It's premise was that a device was created that "supressed" all explosions, rendering bullets, bombs, and all explosives inert.


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Terrible logic, too.
> 
> I'm sure the exact same thing could have been said, with the exact same justification, about Lost.


And how'd _that_ turn out?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

busyba said:


> And how'd _that_ turn out?


It lasted six years, and made ABC a TON of money.

Or did you mean something else?


----------



## busyba (Feb 5, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> It lasted six years, and made ABC a TON of money.
> 
> Or did you mean something else?


I meant for the viewers.

But I guess it's all a question of perspective.


----------



## andyw715 (Jul 31, 2007)

For local peoples.

They are filiming today for "Revolution" on Marathon Ave. 11am - 2am (sat).


----------



## Fl_Gulfer (May 27, 2005)

They must be filming in northern India this week.


----------



## Malcontent (Sep 5, 2004)

Watch "Revolution's" Olympics preview


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

I like how they have been emphasizing the girl with the bow in the ads and pictures, to cash in on the popularity of The Hunger Games.


----------



## avoiding work (Jan 3, 2005)

I love sci-fi shows like this, but a common problem that I have is that they never have an end. If the networks have a hit, they want to run it to continue for ever. Seldom do you get a situation like Lost, where there is (arguably) a well-planned ending. It would be great if they would indicate at the beginning that this show will last exactly x (e.g. 2 or 3) seasons, and come to an end.

I have the same thoughts about the show Once Upon a TIme. I am enjoying the show, but will eventually tire of it. Then sometime after most people have stopped watching, they will end it - but I won't see the ending because I will have already given up.


----------



## Tyrion The Imp (Jul 11, 2012)

avoiding work said:


> I love sci-fi shows like this, but a common problem that I have is that they never have an end. If the networks have a hit, they want to run it to continue for ever. Seldom do you get a situation like Lost, where there is (arguably) a well-planned ending. It would be great if they would indicate at the beginning that this show will last exactly x (e.g. 2 or 3) seasons, and come to an end.
> 
> I have the same thoughts about the show Once Upon a TIme. I am enjoying the show, but will eventually tire of it. Then sometime after most people have stopped watching, they will end it - but I won't see the ending because I will have already given up.


I have had a hard time following Once Upon a Time. Honestly, every time I go back and try and watch a new episode, I get bored of it pretty quickly.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

avoiding work said:


> I love sci-fi shows like this, but a common problem that I have is that they never have an end.


"avoiding work"... you have 12 posts in 7 years. You're not avoiding near enough work.

But I totally agree with your point. Far too many shows run far too long. A great concept, shown over a limited amount of time, would (IMHO) increase viewership. People would watch, knowing a conclusion is coming.

But what do we know, compared to the vast and unlimited knowledge of TV execs.


----------



## Malcontent (Sep 5, 2004)

astrohip said:


> A great concept, shown over a limited amount of time, would (IMHO) increase viewership. People would watch, knowing a conclusion is coming.


The majority of U.K. shows do this. I love it and wish U.S. shows would take a lesson.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

avoiding work said:


> I love sci-fi shows like this, but a common problem that I have is that they never have an end. If the networks have a hit, they want to run it to continue for ever. Seldom do you get a situation like Lost, where there is (arguably) a well-planned ending. It would be great if they would indicate at the beginning that this show will last exactly x (e.g. 2 or 3) seasons, and come to an end.
> 
> I have the same thoughts about the show Once Upon a TIme. I am enjoying the show, but will eventually tire of it. Then sometime after most people have stopped watching, they will end it - but I won't see the ending because I will have already given up.


How do you propose for this to work? The vast majority of shows don't last past the first season. If the creators and the network plan for the show to last 2-3 seasons, and then the ratings don't warrant the show continuing past the first season, then viewers are pissed. If the creators and the network plan for the show to last 2-3 seasons, and the show continues to be profitable through the third season and then it just ends, both viewers and network shareholders will be pissed.

I think the current method makes the most sense, from a business perspective. If there is viewer demand for a show (ratings), it will continue. If not, it will be canceled. There really isn't any other way to do it.


----------



## Polcamilla (Nov 7, 2001)

Malcontent said:


> The majority of U.K. shows do this. I love it and wish U.S. shows would take a lesson.


There's no shortage of British shows that have ended badly and 
/or unexpectedly in spite of this.


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

Anyone else losing interest in this show since seeing NBC's new promo's during the Olympics?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

robojerk said:


> Anyone else losing interest in this show since seeing NBC's new promo's during the Olympics?


I've intentionally avoided any promos of this show. I'm going to watch it regardless, as it's right up my alley. So given that I know I'm going to watch, I'd rather go in with as little foreknowledge as possible.


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

The promos don't show anything you wouldn't already know by now. Looks like they shot it on a sound stage with green screen. It (the promos) looks like cheap crap.


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

I think the promos make it sound more interesting. At least to me. I'm really looking forward to watching it.


----------



## Tyrion The Imp (Jul 11, 2012)

I just hope it doesn't turn up like another Terranova - horrible acting and cheesy at times.

I think with Gus in the show, it should be fine, but some of the preview looked cheesy as hell.


----------



## Alfer (Aug 7, 2003)

robojerk said:


> Anyone else losing interest in this show since seeing NBC's new promo's during the Olympics?


Yeah.

I was somewhat intrigued by the show early on, hoping for something really engaging like LOST. but other than the "gee-wiz" CG stuff, this looks like another cliched end of world drama that's trying to appeal to the Hunger Games crowd or similar group.

I MAY watch the opening episode, but if it turns out to be a bunch of pretty people in a soap opera like story, I'm out.


----------



## justen_m (Jan 15, 2004)

Alfer said:


> this looks like another cliched end of world drama that's trying to appeal to the Hunger Games crowd or similar group


That's what I'm afraid of, based on all the promos starring the hot young chick with a crossbow. At least there aren't vampires. I hope it is better than Terranova. If not, I'll probably still watch it until it is cancelled. I even watch bad SyFy original movies if they are TEOTWAWKI related. Hmm. I supposed "bad" is redundant.


----------



## kaszeta (Jun 11, 2004)

justen_m said:


> That's what I'm afraid of, based on all the promos starring the hot young chick with a crossbow. At least there aren't vampires.


Apparently hot young chicks with bows are the new vampire.

Yeah, I was somewhat optimistic, especially when they brought Fring in. Now I'm concerned.


----------



## philw1776 (Jan 19, 2002)

After the long eagerly awaited "Terra Nova" turned out to be atrociously unwatchable despite my 8 year old mind's infatuation with dinos, I'm not getting my hopes up about "Revolution".


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

I think the premise would be much more interesting if the change were happening right now, than the 15 years ago thing. The best part of the apocalypse is accepting that it's real and adjusting to it. But I'll give it a try. Fingers crossed.


----------



## mwhip (Jul 22, 2002)

Pilot is up on Hulu:

http://www.hulu.com/watch/397518


----------



## cwerdna (Feb 22, 2001)

^^^
Weird. So, they put the pilot up on Hulu before premiering it on TV?


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

cwerdna said:


> ^^^
> Weird. So, they put the pilot up on Hulu before premiering it on TV?


not the first time this has happened.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

cwerdna said:


> ^^^
> Weird. So, they put the pilot up on Hulu before premiering it on TV?


Not that unheard of. Lots of new shows get released in various methods before their official TV airdate. The networks know that premiere week(s) are very crowded and that a certain percentage of viewers simply won't have the time or won't know about the premiere date for any given show. So by making it available through alternate means, they're hoping that people will see it, begin talking, and building a buzz for the show. And if nothing else, they'll make sure to tune in for the second episode.

The danger in this strategy is that too many people see it through alternate methods and then don't tune in to the broadcast premiere. Then, the ratings come out and say the show is a bomb even though there are lots of people who saw it and are planning to tune in for episode 2. However, once the word is out that the show is a bomb, especially a serialized show like this, people will automatically assume it will be canceled prematurely and won't give it the necessary time.

So either NBC is very confident in this show, or they're very desperate and they'll try anything. Or probably a combination of the two.


----------



## allan (Oct 14, 2002)

I'm afraid being the next "Terra Nova" is the best case. I'm expecting another Flash Forward, or Event, both of which, IMHO, made TN look good. I plan to try it, but I'm not hopeful.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

allan said:


> I'm afraid being the next "Terra Nova" is the best case. I'm expecting another Flash Forward, or Event, both of which, IMHO, made TN look good. I plan to try it, but I'm not hopeful.


+1. I'm going to archive a few and revisit it once the show is picked up for a second season.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Stormspace said:


> +1. I'm going to archive a few and revisit it once the show is picked up for a second season.


Why? What if it ends up being canceled after a single season, but that single season was well done and told a good story. Why would you want to limit yourself to only watching a show if it makes it past the first year?


----------



## wprager (Feb 19, 2006)

DevdogAZ said:


> Why? What if it ends up being canceled after a single season, but that single season was well done and told a good story. Why would you want to limit yourself to only watching a show if it makes it past the first year?


Speaking of Firefly ...


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

DevdogAZ said:


> Why? What if it ends up being canceled after a single season, but that single season was well done and told a good story. Why would you want to limit yourself to only watching a show if it makes it past the first year?


If it gets good critical reviews I'll still have it and watch it then. I just won't rush into it.


----------



## DougF (Mar 18, 2003)

DevdogAZ said:


> Why? What if it ends up being canceled after a single season, but that single season was well done and told a good story. Why would you want to limit yourself to only watching a show if it makes it past the first year?


I'm not going to wait for the second season pickup, but I will probably wait for the full season order before watching. I just don't like investing time in a show that may be off the air in a few weeks, gets hastily wrapped up, ends in a cliffhanger we'll never see the resolution of, etc.


----------



## allan (Oct 14, 2002)

DougF said:


> I'm not going to wait for the second season pickup, but I will probably wait for the full season order before watching. I just don't like investing time in a show that may be off the air in a few weeks, gets hastily wrapped up, ends in a cliffhanger we'll never see the resolution of, etc.


I've found that if I accumulate 4-5 episodes without watching, the odds are very high I won't watch at all. I'll probably poke my nose in the threads about the show and if everyone is saying "Agh! It stinks, it reeks!", I'll probably skip it.


----------



## Stormspace (Apr 13, 2004)

allan said:


> I've found that if I accumulate 4-5 episodes without watching, the odds are very high I won't watch at all. I'll probably poke my nose in the threads about the show and if everyone is saying "Agh! It stinks, it reeks!", I'll probably skip it.


Not us. When Heroes came on we recorded the whole first season simply because we didn't have enough time to watch the show and it was new. After reading all the positive reviews and talking to friends I decided it would be worth it to watch, so over the december holidays we did a Heroes marathon over several days. Totally worth it, especially since December TV sucks.


----------



## Malcontent (Sep 5, 2004)

mwhip said:


> Pilot is up on Hulu:
> 
> http://www.hulu.com/watch/397518


It's also been captured and is available on usenet (perhaps torrents also).


----------



## danterner (Mar 4, 2005)

Malcontent said:


> It's been captured and is available on usenet (perhaps torrents also).


It's also available for streaming on NBC's iOS app.


----------



## Malcontent (Sep 5, 2004)

FYI,

A *HD* WEB-DL capture of the first episode of 'Revolution' has been posted to usenet in addition to the SD.


----------



## mwhip (Jul 22, 2002)

Malcontent said:


> FYI,
> 
> A *HD* WEB-DL capture of the first episode of 'Revolution' has been posted to usenet in addition to the SD.


How is the quality?


----------



## Malcontent (Sep 5, 2004)

mwhip said:


> How is the quality?


Pretty good.

1280x720

AAC - Sound


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Malcontent said:


> Fantastic.
> 
> 1280x720
> 
> AAC - Sound


And the show itself's quality?


----------



## mwhip (Jul 22, 2002)

TAsunder said:


> And the show itself's quality?


I think that is for a different thread.


----------



## Malcontent (Sep 5, 2004)

TAsunder said:


> And the show itself's quality?


I haven't had time to watch it. I only scanned the first 30 seconds to check video quality.


----------



## whitson77 (Nov 10, 2002)

Somebody start a spoiler thread. I want to read your opinions before I take the time to watch it. Let me use you.


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

whitson77 said:


> Somebody start a spoiler thread. I want to read your opinions before I take the time to watch it. Let me use you.


You can't start a episode thread yet. I started one last year for a Apt 23 episode on Amazon that was available early and got dinged for it.


----------



## cwerdna (Feb 22, 2001)

robojerk said:


> You can't start a episode thread yet. I started one last year for a Apt 23 episode on Amazon that was available early and got dinged for it.


So what? Did you get a demerit or did the TiVocommunity police come after you? 

Seems like fair game to start an ep thread if the ep's available online thru legitimate means.


----------



## digdug (Jan 13, 2004)

I liked it. It's nice for a distraction. I can see the potential to go down the Terra Nova route, which I'm hoping it won't.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

Malcontent said:


> FYI,
> 
> A *HD* WEB-DL capture of the first episode of 'Revolution' has been posted to usenet in addition to the SD.


Thanks!

I hate Hulu.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

cwerdna said:


> So what? Did you get a demerit or did the TiVocommunity police come after you?
> 
> Seems like fair game to start an ep thread if the ep's available online thru legitimate means.


It's not. You can't start a thread until the normally aired version airs. Thems be the rules.

ETA: You can't start a normal episode thread, I should have said. If you want to start a thread clearly noted for a web or online early edition, go for it.


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

cwerdna said:


> So what? Did you get a demerit or did the TiVocommunity police come after you?


Yes, I have an "infraction" on my TCF profile.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

I'm sorry if this has been discussed, but I just saw my first promo for this show: any reason why guns don't work?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Anubys said:


> I'm sorry if this has been discussed, but I just saw my first promo for this show: any reason why guns don't work?


They do. At least, some do.

Judging from the first episode, either the physics that lies behind what works and what doesn't is complicated, or it's all plot-driven.


----------



## vertigo235 (Oct 27, 2000)

My guess is that guns work, but manufactured ammo is hard to come by, so they use old muskets as its pretty easy to make lead balls.


----------



## Peter000 (Apr 15, 2002)

Not to be a spoiler nazi, but I don't think show specifics should be discussed in this thread unspoilered, to be on the safe side. 

Or start a new episode thread.


----------



## cwerdna (Feb 22, 2001)

astrohip said:


> It's not. You can't start a thread until the normally aired version airs. Thems be the rules.
> 
> ETA: You can't start a normal episode thread, I should have said. If you want to start a thread clearly noted for a web or online early edition, go for it.


But then what happens when it airs on TV? Should there be another thread for the same ep? Will the threads get merged by the moderators?

If those really are the rules, they're kind lame, IMHO. If it's available via early via legitimate sources like Hulu (pirated copies via Usenet and Torrents don't count), to me, a "normal" ep thread should be ok.

I skimmed the rules at http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=271608, but judging by the last edit date, I doubt network shows commonly appeared early on Hulu or networks' web sites in late 2008.


Peter000 said:


> Not to be a spoiler nazi, but I don't think show specifics should be discussed in this thread unspoilered, to be on the safe side.
> 
> Or start a new episode thread.


Agreed.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

cwerdna said:


> But then what happens when it airs on TV? Should there be another thread for the same ep? Will the threads get merged by the moderators?
> 
> If those really are the rules, they're kind lame, IMHO. If it's available via early via legitimate sources like Hulu (pirated copies via Usenet and Torrents don't count), to me, a "normal" ep thread should be ok.
> 
> I skimmed the rules at http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=271608, but judging by the last edit date, I doubt network shows commonly appeared early on Hulu or networks' web sites in late 2008.


I agree that if a show is available early through legit means, we should be allowed to start a thread for it. The rules were mostly written when this was not an issue, and they should be revised to cover this relatively new scenario. That's much better than having two separate threads for the same episode and having to merge them later.

The only issue is what to title the thread. I'd suggest that when it's created early, the thread title reflect that it is for both early viewing and the date the episode is scheduled to air. Edit: Or exactly how Peter000 did it already. Hadn't been to NPF yet this morning.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Just saw a tweet that Kim Raver (24, Grey's Anatomy) has been added to the cast of Revolution. That's definitely not a good sign, IMO. That just made me a little less excited for this show.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> Just saw a tweet that Kim Raver (24, Grey's Anatomy) has been added to the cast of Revolution. That's definitely not a good sign, IMO. That just made me a little less excited for this show.


I usually like that actress.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

I've got the season pass set. Looking forward to when I can watch it off the TiVo after it airs.


----------



## Waldorf (Oct 4, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> Just saw a tweet that Kim Raver (24, Grey's Anatomy) has been added to the cast of Revolution. That's definitely not a good sign, IMO. That just made me a little less excited for this show.


Any word on Ted McGinley's availability?


----------



## mwhip (Jul 22, 2002)

Spoilerized for something read in the fall preview of EW:



Spoiler



There was a pic of Elizabeth Mitchell and the husband in the days after with the kids. It appears there will be some back story.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Waldorf said:


> Any word on Ted McGinley's availability?


Ha.

However, I wasn't saying that because I think she's a show killer. I was just saying it because I think she sucks. Clearly other people don't share my opinion, because she continues to get work.


----------



## DavidTigerFan (Aug 18, 2001)

So I saw fire. Why can't they make a steam engine?


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

DavidTigerFan said:


> So I saw fire. Why can't they make a steam engine?


Because it needs an electric starter, silly!


----------



## Craigbob (Dec 2, 2006)

I watched it via DirecTv's VOD. It is a full episode preview and it looks pretty good. I have set up a SP for it. Would that be considered a legitimate source so we can talk about it in more detail?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Craigbob said:


> I watched it via DirecTv's VOD. It is a full episode preview and it looks pretty good. I have set up a SP for it. Would that be considered a legitimate source so we can talk about it in more detail?


There's a thread for that.


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> Just saw a tweet that Kim Raver (24, Grey's Anatomy) has been added to the cast of Revolution. That's definitely not a good sign, IMO. That just made me a little less excited for this show.


Oh no!! That's terrible news! She ruins everything!! I thought she was on Grey's Anatomy?


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

cwerdna said:


> ^^^
> Weird. So, they put the pilot up on Hulu before premiering it on TV?


Sure, 'cause on Hulu you can't skip the obnoxious commercials.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

DavidTigerFan said:


> So I saw fire. Why can't they make a steam engine?


Why can't they pull weeds by hand? AKA, why does Wrigley Field have kudzu on the outside?


----------



## WhiskeyTango (Sep 20, 2006)

netringer said:


> Why can't they pull weeds by hand? AKA, why does Wrigley Field have kudzu on the outside?


The world has gone to hell and you're worried about landscaping?


----------



## robojerk (Jun 13, 2006)

WhiskeyTango said:


> The world has gone to hell and you're worried about landscaping?


They maintained it just fine before just fine electricity stopped. These people should have some pride and clean up the city.


----------



## bandguy (May 26, 2011)

I liked this show. Saw it a few weeks ago on hulu plus. Isn't it by the same guy that did LOST?


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

robojerk said:


> They maintained it just fine before just fine electricity stopped. These people should have some pride and clean up the city.


Ya know. Some cities in Europe are 1000 years old. Somehow they weren't overgrown no mans lands until they got electricity 100 years ago.


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

netringer said:


> Why can't they pull weeds by hand? AKA, why does Wrigley Field have kudzu on the outside?


I thought it was pretty obvious why the landscaping was so bad but it's probably considered racist.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

Not to belabor the obvious here, but...



WhiskeyTango said:


> The world has gone to hell and you're worried about landscaping?


I'm gonna assume he was joking, but the central fact of this show (probably not adequately depicted, no matter what they do) is that BILLIONS of people will have died. If there's anyone even left living in the city, taking pride in it is probably not the highest thing on their priority list.

Pre-electric conditions aren't a good analogy, because it isn't the lack of electricity that's most important, but the _loss_ of it -- the abrupt transition away from it in a world that was (in many parts) dependent on it and designed around it. That would take a long time to recover from, even with the best 19th-century technology to draw from. And it seems like even some of that may not work, but I haven't seen the show yet.

Eventually, yes, people could build a relatively advanced, modern and well-run society, at whatever level of technology was available to them. But the show appears to be set no more than a couple decades after the event, maybe less. (?) They're still cleaning up the mess, at best. Maybe still living through the inevitable famines and plagues.


----------



## WhiskeyTango (Sep 20, 2006)

wmcbrine said:


> Not to belabor the obvious here, but...
> 
> I'm gonna assume he was joking, but the central fact of this show (probably not adequately depicted, no matter what they do) is that BILLIONS of people will have died. If there's anyone even left living in the city, taking pride in it is probably not the highest thing on their priority list.
> 
> ...


Yea I was going to respond with pretty much what you said but figured he had to be joking after seeing the responses so I just let it go.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

It struck me that Wrigley Field was more decrepit than I would expect a building like that to be if it sat untouched for 15 years, which I think was the timetable. Not that I expected anyone to be fixing it up--just that I didn't realize that much maintenance was required. I haven't done much to the outside of my house in the last 15 years, but it doesn't look THAT bad.....does it? Maybe I should take a closer look.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

stellie93 said:


> It struck me that Wrigley Field was more decrepit than I would expect a building like that to be if it sat untouched for 15 years, which I think was the timetable. Not that I expected anyone to be fixing it up--just that I didn't realize that much maintenance was required. I haven't done much to the outside of my house in the last 15 years, but it doesn't look THAT bad.....does it? Maybe I should take a closer look.


It doesn't take very long for nature to take over. There was some show on that depicted what would happen to structures and cities without man around. And much of the data was extrapolated from populated areas that for one reason or another are now ghost towns. It didn't take very long for nature to start reclaiming everything. Since man has to constantly do maintenance to prevent nature from encroaching on everything.

Sent from my HTC ReZound using Forum Runner


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

aadam101 said:


> I thought it was pretty obvious why the landscaping was so bad but it's probably considered racist.


Oh, yeah. I didn't notice. The disaster removed all of the electricity and all of _them_.


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

aaronwt said:


> It doesn't take very long for nature to take over. There was some show on that depicted what would happen to structures and cities without man around. And much of the data was extrapolated from populated areas that for one reason or another are now ghost towns. It didn't take very long for nature to start reclaiming everything. Since man has to constantly do maintenance to prevent nature from encroaching on everything.
> 
> Sent from my HTC ReZound using Forum Runner


I'm thinking about some abandoned buildings I have seen that have been vacant for 10-15 years and none of them look like that. I suppose some amount of landscaping could be done on these buildings and I just didn't know it but I have never seen buildings look that bad.


----------



## WhiskeyTango (Sep 20, 2006)

The ivy in Wrigley Field would take off and consume the building without proper maintenance making it more overgrown than other structures. The pics below are from a Japanese mining island abandoned in 2001.


----------



## allan (Oct 14, 2002)

aaronwt said:


> It doesn't take very long for nature to take over. There was some show on that depicted what would happen to structures and cities without man around. And much of the data was extrapolated from populated areas that for one reason or another are now ghost towns. It didn't take very long for nature to start reclaiming everything. Since man has to constantly do maintenance to prevent nature from encroaching on everything.
> 
> Sent from my HTC ReZound using Forum Runner


Heck, it doesn't take long for nature to take over my mom's neighbor's yard!


----------

