Why is the SyFy channel getting a cooking show?

[Owain Taggart]

Yeah, just saying "reissue the old one" isn't realistic. Nobody is going to book, say, LOGAN'S RUN back into multiplexes again. If you're lucky, it will play for one night at a Sci-Fi Film Festival at some college revival house . . . .

Plus, and this is the part remake haters never seem to get, the remakes are not intended for you. The primary audience for a remake or reboot is NOT the diehard fans of the original; it's a whole new generation for whom that old "classic" is either brand-new or, at best, a fuzzy nostalgic memory.

Of course the diehard fans don't see any need for a new version. They had their fun the last time around (or the time before that). But I'm not sure why they want to deny new generations their own versions of the story?

In the meantime, they can always watch heir old DVDs, while the rest of us check out the new LOGAN'S RUN . . . .

Exactly. It's like what I said about True Grit a few posts ago. The original True Grit was good for what it was at the time of its release, but I also feel it sort of belongs to a certain generation. Sometimes a remake will be beneficial when the art of film-making has changed drastically due to new techniques, essentially viewing the story through a different lense so to speak. The scenery in the remake was beautiful, and I felt it used some framing techniques quite effectively, some that wouldn't have been possible when the original was made. Everything is upped a notch, and I think the movie has more character as a result. It wasn't a movie that was remade shot-for-shot like some remakes have been made, so they have nuances and different points of focus, but it was artfully done.

 

[Dusty Ayres]

Yeah, just saying "reissue the old one" isn't realistic. Nobody is going to book, say, LOGAN'S RUN back into multiplexes again. If you're lucky, it will play for one night at a Sci-Fi Film Festival at some college revival house . . . .

Actually, now that digital film projection is here to stay, reissues are coming back: there was a recent reissue of Taxi Driver at the AMC Yonge & Dundas, a re-release of Doctor Zhivago at the Scotiabank Theater, the Digital Film Festival each February at the same theater and others, plus a ton of other reissues by Cineplex and AMC. All due to digital projection, and just as good as the originals, without projector cuts, burn holes, hair, or any other problem with film prints. So, it wouldn't be impossible for a digital reissue of Logan's Run to happen.

Plus, and this is the part remake haters never seem to get, the remakes are not intended for you. The primary audience for a remake or reboot is NOT the die-hard fans of the original; it's a whole new generation for whom that old "classic" is either brand-new or, at best, a fuzzy nostalgic memory.

Of course the die-hard fans don't see any need for a new version. They had their fun the last time around (or the time before that). But I'm not sure why they want to deny new generations their own versions of the story?In the meantime, they can always watch heir old DVDs, while the rest of us check out the new LOGAN'S RUN . . . .

QFT.

 

[Kaziarl]

Didn't see anywhere else to put this, so here we go...

I just watched the first episode of MQK on the SyFy website, figuring I should at least give it a chance.

The dishes were interesting.

The Apple butter map was a clever idea, and I'm guessing a fun little treat for the guests.

The Birds Eye Surprise had a rocky start, but they sorted it out. And it seemed to be popular.

The Snake in the Grass looked good. Who would want pork rhines(sp?) and beef?

And I can't really imagine what the puffed rice balls dipped in nitrogen would be like... But the fog breath was a cool effect.


Ok, so it was kind of interesting. The main reason I gave it a chance is because he uses molecular gastronomy, which is something that does interest me. However, it was a little disappointing because he didn't really explain what it was that was happening. It was just "I gotta do this and this and this before time runs out."

Or rather, I should say, "They have to do this and this and this while I blame them for the mistakes and take credit for the success." Was it just me, or did he have a really bad attitude?

Anyway, it's something I might tune into every now and then, but it just still doesn't feel right for the scifi channel. This would be great on the food network, or even discovery if they delved into the how and why this stuff is reacting this way.

Well, there's my $0.02

YMMV

 

[Brian]

I was disappointed to see that it's a "reality" show and not a cooking show, "reality" in quotes because it comes with all the fake drama the quotes imply. The unreasonable people he had to work with (a client who wants to wait and taste the food at the last possible moment; a party planner who won't even walk through the party space to discuss how things will go down) seemed contrived to foster a false sense of drama, which I find manipulative and condescending toward the audience.

And I see that he's trying to portray himself as less of a prick than he came across on Top Chef, but it's not working. The way he treated that woman charged with doing the apples was full on prickish. He hired her to run the front of the house, then berated her for not being a fast sous chef? Please.

 

[KJbushway]

I hope the damn thing doesn't go beyond a season.
Same with Face-off.
And I hope Ghost hunters endeds soon as well.

 

[Brian]

I thought Face-Off was interesting. At least it had a SF/F tie-in.

Ghost Hunters I like, though I don't like their spin-offs, especially the Academy one. And even with GH, I find that lately I just fast-forward to the reveal to see if there's anything worth watching the rest of the episode for.

 

[Kaziarl]

The problem I have with Ghost Hunters is that paranormal stuff like that used to be an every once in a while special. And that was fine. Now there's so much of it that it's turned into a joke.

 

[Greg Cox]

I hope the damn thing doesn't go beyond a season.
Same with Face-off.
And I hope Ghost hunters endeds soon as well.

Faceoff was actually a lot of fun, and it's already been picked up for a second season . . . .

 

[Anduril]

I wonder how I could get into the ghost hunting racket? Seems like a good way to make some money.

 

[Kaziarl]

From the looks of things, walk around with a camera asking "Who's there? Can you reveal yourself?" to an empty room.

 

[Vendikarr]

From the looks of things, walk around with a camera asking "Who's there? Can you reveal yourself?" to an empty room.

Then scream and jerk the camera away from anything that could possibly be interesting.

 

[Brian]

That's what bugs me the most about GH... they are there supposedly wanting contact and being all "we're not here to hurt you, we just want to talk", then when they hear something, they freak out, "WHAT THE FUCK WAS THAT?!!!"

Then they come back from commercial and the other guy says, "Oh, that was me."

I guess there is money to be made. Some lady on a local talk radio station mentioned a ghost in her business last week, and a guy called in to promote his paranormal investigation group. The host asked him what they do, and I swear the guy was reading from the GH script in describing thermal cameras, EVPs and the like. It was word-for-word what Jason says to describe the techniques for casual viewers every week. So apparently, if you've seen GH, you are now an expert in paranormal investigations.

 

[KJbushway]

So is GHOSTFACERS!