>I saw the fall-out of two love triangles on that show last night. They were
>being played out with the threat of a nuclear bomb going off. Of course, one
>triangle is now been finished off thanks to that laugh out operating room
If ANYBODY is watching this show for the romance, boy are they desperate. No soap.
huh? The love stuff? That's just filler to get everybody moved around to beat the ticking clock. Namby-pamby Chloe blowing baddies away with the semi-automatic is classic 24. So was the live and let die motif. Jack is constantly deciding which inviolable rule to break next.
24 IS the best show on TV. One of the dumbest, too, but those things are not incompatible -- TV being a medium that requires the viewer to relinquish any pretense of intelligence.
Couple weeks ago on 24 they caught the only guy who could reveal the whereabouts of the villain who had caused the melt-down of a nuclear reactor, shot down Air Force One with the President in it and had hi-jacked a thermonuclear device in order to erase and American city before sunrise... they were about to extract info from their source by any means necessary when some civil rights attorney showed up with an order from a local judge protecting the guy's 5th and 8th Amendment rights. So, in the middle of an unprecedented national crisis all the spies sat around saying, Darn, this court order means we can't prevent some city from being nuked... oh, well! Then, of course, Hero Jack resigned and unofficially broke the guy's fingers to get the info but not exactly break the strictures of the Constitution.
Ladies and gentlemen,
I will attempt to veer this conversation back from whether Kiefer Sutherland will save the day.
I believe knowledge is what makes a sport. Who among us have not "converted" a non-track fan by explaining to them what to look for in a certain race or event. I for one thing american football is an fabulous spectator sport, not just for the exciting plays, but because I know the game well enough to understand when a game is still close, what makes a great play, and when a game is really in garbage time. What the coaches are thinking. When they make a gutsy call...etc...
Now, there are some elemental truths to track and field that don't require knowledge. These are the same truths that make a company sack race a great "spectator sport". First one done, wins. If it's close, you know it. No "education" required.
I for one, obviously by being on this forum, am a lifelong T & F fan. But track is simply not THAT exciting to watch that often. Too many unclose races. Too many field events that require the afformentioned knowledge to make exciting. Does a 28 foot LJ look that different from a 25 foot jump on tv to a novice? No.
Now, that being said. NASCAR? I've even tried to gleen the knowledge it takes to enjoy. Don't get it.
>It's a soap opera with action sub-plots-not the other way around.>>
Absolutely! They don't get any soapier than this one. (But it's still a great watch, trying to figure out what ludicrous sub-plot they'll throw at you next) (Is Sherry Palmer still alive to throw into the mix?)
noone wrote:I am still steaming about the thread a week ago where track fans ridiculed certain other sports. On the off-chance that you guys have an open mind let me make a few comments about some of those sports:
Curling: Sure, sweeping looks strange to people who have never seen it before, just like some idiots laugh at race walking. But it is an important part of the sport: Good sweeping can add up to six feet to a shot, and it will keep a shot straight rather than allowing it to curl. The skip has to make a quick decision whether to sweep a shot ("Hurry!Hard") or to lay off. There are many other strategic elements to this exciting sport, but they are hard to explain to a novice.
Soccer: Some people make fun of soccer because games tend to be low-scoring. So to a true fan is an 11-5 baseball game more fun to watch than a 1-0 game? Does the fact that each team scores 40 or 50 "goals" in basketball make that sport exciting? Actually to me, the fact that goals are so easy and common makes each goal less significant and exciting.
Synchronized swimming: So-called because the athlete performs in time with music, therefore solo synchro is not an oxymoron. Like figure skating, freestyle skiing and ballroom dancing this activity is on the borderline between art and sport, but it does not deserve ridicule.
Downhill skiing: True, the athletes compete one after another rather than in a mass start. If that bothers you then you must think pole vaulting and javelin throwing are boring too. Skiing, like golf, is partly dependent on the weather and the course which is why upsets are relatively common (unlike track). I'm not sure if that makes the sport more or less exciting.
Now I'd like somebody to explain to me the attractions of skateboarding and WWF ...
Only a few weeks to go and you can get your fill of curling and downhill! woo-hoo!
On the other hand, at the "other" UT (Tennessee), our retired SID Haywood Harris is a huge supporter and fan of track and field. Still attends the annual track banquet, as does the current SID, Bud Ford.
gh wrote:>Jones Ramsey, the long-time sports publicist at the University of Texas, should >be excused for one of his most famous utterances. For when he said, "The only >thing worse than track is field," ...
Dallas Morning News.>>
Yup, that was old Jones. He also said, "Why, I'd travel 50 miles if there was a track meet..... in the other direction!" Cantankerous old coot, but I suspect that as a football SID they didn't come much better.
Coincidentally, latest NCAA News notes that he died just a couple of weeks ago.