It's not supposed to be completely realistic nor are they expecting viewers to think so, they are deep in a part of the Amazon that isn't even on maps and magic exists there.

I thought it was really refreshing that they accept what is happening since it was so obviously real. People were dying and whatnot. Would you rather have them going, "oh demons don't exist, he probably killed himself or something" for the whole episode?

It wasn't a great demon, it would need to kill lots of people to become powerful. It was still very weak, that is why they were able to re-trap it.

I thought the part where they were at the spirit tree was the best part.

roundhouse wrote: No, but there's got to be some sort of balance between the two, somehow.
Yeah, definitely. I 100% agree with that.

roundhouse wrote:
Roundhouse, what I said was that it never caught my attention. I tried to watch it initially, then left it on while I surfed around the Web. In fairness, I'm not into all that terrible hokey "Blair Witch" BS. It's all fake and completely contrived. That Spielberg is involved in it is a huge disappointment to me because it is so lightweight.

I tried to watch "Falling Skies" and "Terra Nova" for a couple of episodes each, but the ONLY way I will watch either of those again is if there is nothing else on but repeats of the potential Republican candidates' latest forum/debate. Boring!!!!! "The Walking Dead"? You gotta be kidding me!! How much can you milk a storyline about a bunch of brain-eating dead guys who can't move as well as me? I'm 64 and have suffered from "White Man's Disease" since before any of you were born!

I agree about Terra Nova and Falling Skies. They were both awful. Funny that Spielberg had his name attached to those shows as well.

The Walking Dead is quickly becoming a horrible show.

roundhouse wrote:
Spielberg is fully in George Lucas territory at this point. He hasn't been trust worthy since Jurassic Park 2 which I feel is vastly underrated in terms of awfulness.

pants wrote:
I think people also tend to look way too far into "produced by (insert name)." Did you know that a producer is just a financier/investor in many, many cases? It's not like Spielberg is sitting on the set and has creative input on much. It's DIRECTOR Spielberg, etc. that you want to look for.

Spielberg is on a lot of producer credits these days, such as the new Musical show Smash. Real Spielberg-like, right?

WallyWorld wrote:
With TV shows the producer is often times the biggest force behind the show. This is true of the good shows certainly. If anything I've come to realize producer means more than just financier as it always used to be assumed.

If Spielberg is just above the title he gets the credit good or bad. He certainly had all the opportunity to make a positive influence in his show's if he wanted to.

WallyWorld wrote: That's what I tried to say earlier in this thread. Pants might be right to some extent, but I think in this situation it was just about the money and he didn't anything regarding influencing the actual show.

While I do agree that Spielberg probably pocketed a bunch of money just to attach his name to these projects, pants is also correct that tv producers are extremely important to the success of the show. Usually with Tv shows there are at least a handful of directors who take turns doing an episode. Producers are the driving force behind the show and the directors need to stay consistent with each other and the storyline, etc. With movies, any respectable/experienced director is given a lot of free reign to convey their vision and have a lot more control.

Spielberg definitely deserves some of the blame even if he is only doing it as a cash grab. It's not like he can possibly be stressed for money, right? He should at least put some effort into trying to make these shows mildly watchable.

roundhouse wrote: Fair points, I can't argue the above.

P.S. Walking Dead > Alcatraz > The River > Eating my own turds > Falling Skies > Terra Nova

I haven't watched Alcatraz since the premiere. Is it actually pretty decent?

roundhouse wrote: It's not bad. I kinda like it, but it's nothing super special. But it's definitely better than all those other shows no doubt.

The first 90% of that episode was really, legitimately good. Definitely way better than the first two episodes for sure.

But then the ending is just utterly absurd and beyond stupid. They are all blind and like 1 minute away from certain death to everyone; but then the one producer guy gives a little speech and suddenly they are all "deemed worthy" and the evil tribe people just leave and let them live? And they somehow know this across a great distance so that they can help the black guy who happens to be getting buried alive beneath that tree at the same time as well? So then everyone lives and gets cured of their blindness and all is hunkey dorey?

OMG give me a break. Just totally retarded.

I will say that it was pretty funny when the token black guy got to the tree, and saw that there was a cave beneath that he had to crawl into for the plant bulbs needed to cure the blindness. Lol.

P.S. Can anyone answer me how or WHY exactly that Mexican daughter chick only speaks Spanish... yet she understands English perfectly well? And people only speak English to her, and she only always responds just in Spanish? Ummmmm...?

And just how exactly is she some sort of world renowned expert on everything Supernatural? What the hell???

College Wolf wrote:
ROFLMAO! Thank you, CW, for saving me the trouble of trying to see the reruns or watching for the date/time they would play the first two back-to-back. Whew!!