FLM films - My Webpage

1996-06-19 00:00:00 - Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (moondog@primenet.com)


Nowhere Man has be cancelled. But Strange Luck shall return!

1996-06-19 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (starsk13@ix.netcom.com)


In <4q9dke$12c@nnrp1.news.primenet.com> moondog@primenet.com (Jim Kirk) writes: > >Nowhere Man has be cancelled. But Strange Luck shall return! > Who says?? From everything I've heard SL bit the big one too. I liked both shows, but Nowhere Man was definitely a cut above the rest. Leah

1996-06-20 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (CWZY26B@prodigy.com)


moondog@primenet.com (Jim Kirk) wrote: > >Nowhere Man has be cancelled. But Strange Luck shall return! So shall Nowhere Man. It can still be saved. http://pages.prodigy.com

1996-06-20 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (CWZY26B@prodigy.com)


moondog@primenet.com (Jim Kirk) wrote: > >Nowhere Man has be cancelled. But Strange Luck shall return! So shall Nowhere Man. It can still be saved. http://pages.prodigy.com/nowhere-man

1996-06-20 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (Kevin Locke <klocke@ix.netcom.com>)


Jason Conrad wrote: > > moondog@primenet.com (Jim Kirk) wrote: > > > >Nowhere Man has be cancelled. But Strange Luck shall return! > > So shall Nowhere Man. > It can still be saved. > > http://pages.prodigy.com/nowhere-man I am with you my friend!! I am not one to give up hope either. In my opinion "Nowhere Man" is the best show on television. "NOWHERE MAN CAN BE BROUGHT BACK!" Don't give up the fight a friend and fan of "Nowhere Man" Kevin (klocke@ix.netcom.com)

1996-06-21 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (alantuck@usa.pipeline.com)


On Jun 20, 1996 23:47:45 in article <Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer...>, 'Kevin Locke <klocke@ix.netcom.com>' wrote: >I am with you my friend!! >I am not one to give up hope either. In my opinion "Nowhere Man" is the best >show on television. "NOWHERE MAN CAN BE BROUGHT BACK!" Don't give up the fight >>a friend and fan of "Nowhere Man" You say Nowhere Man can be brought back? Don't give up the fight? I once had a hernia, but I don't want to have that brought back. Fight or no fight. I'm sorry, but I do not understand these repeated pleas. Bring WHAT back? The show called "Nowhere Man" no longer exists. Never mind the cancellation. Creatively, the show has been decapitated, dismembered, and buried in a shallow grave. The *only* possible reason any of the principals would return for a hypothetical TV movie or two would be to pick up a check. Plain and simple. And, you should expect the quality to reflect that fact. Take the actor, surround him with an entirely new and very temporary creative team, and slap something together. Oh, and you can be certain that whatever is slapped together receives the official Disney and UPN pandering to ratings seal of approval prior to air. *That* would be the most important part of this hypothetical project(s). Really, I should say "principal", not "principals", since Greenwood would be the only "principal" to return in your hypothetical scenario. Since his stock has risen in the past nine months, and his agent should now be able to hook him up with something comparable fairly easily, you can be certain that Greenwood would also want some sort of guarantee that he won't be driven nuts by the off-camera squirrels. Well, maybe a few of the camera guys would also return. And the guy that holds the boom. And, needless to say, the caterer, best boy and key grip. What, you think Greenwood wrote, edited and produced Nowhere Man, too? Who do you think would glue this masterpiece(s) together? Come to think of it, I read in The Hollywood Reporter that Stan Rogow will be helming a few TV movies on USA Network, so maybe he can find some time in his busy schedule. Maybe Rogow can be Veil's new hip sidekick, "Scorpio". Yeah, that's the ticket. They could call it, "Nowhere Man: The Gemini and Scorpio Files". Maybe "The American Gladiators" could do a crossover, only to be kidnapped, and Them implant the identities of Gemini and Scorpio inside of Ice and Lazer, while the identities of Ice and Lazer are implanted inside of Gemini and Scorpio. Hey, it's only for a TV movie or two, so what the hell. The show is already ruined. What possible harm could it do? Besides, I think it would be a hoot to see Rogow kick ass. Then, in the second TV movie, as we are still reeling from the first TV movie cliffhanger, Joel Surnow could do a crossover as "Aquarius", and in tandem with the French femme fatale from his USA Network project, they kick ass to save Rogow's ass. This would also satisfy those demanding existential. Since twisted life could not imitate twisted art, perhaps twisted art could imitate twisted life. Have you ever seen a skeleton with breast implants? We're talking dead and phony. That's the best description I can think of to describe what a Nowhere Man return to the small screen would mean. Let it go. -Alan Tucker-

1996-06-21 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (Kevin Locke <klocke@ix.netcom.com>)


Alan Tucker wrote: > > On Jun 20, 1996 23:47:45 in article <Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he > really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer...>, 'Kevin Locke > <klocke@ix.netcom.com>' wrote: > > > >I am with you my friend!! > >I am not one to give up hope either. In my opinion "Nowhere Man" is the > best > >show on television. "NOWHERE MAN CAN BE BROUGHT BACK!" Don't give up > the fight > >>a friend and fan of "Nowhere Man" > > > You say Nowhere Man can be brought back? Don't give up the fight? I once > had a hernia, but I don't want to have that brought back. Fight or no > fight. > > I'm sorry, but I do not understand these repeated pleas. Bring WHAT back? > The show called "Nowhere Man" no longer exists. Never mind the > cancellation. Creatively, the show has been decapitated, dismembered, and > buried in a shallow grave. > > The *only* possible reason any of the principals would return for a > hypothetical TV movie or two would be to pick up a check. Plain and > simple. And, you should expect the quality to reflect that fact. Take the > actor, surround him with an entirely new and very temporary creative team, > and slap something together. > > Oh, and you can be certain that whatever is slapped together receives the > official Disney and UPN pandering to ratings seal of approval prior to air. > *That* would be the most important part of this hypothetical project(s). > > Really, I should say "principal", not "principals", since Greenwood would > be the only "principal" to return in your hypothetical scenario. Since his > stock has risen in the past nine months, and his agent should now be able > to hook him up with something comparable fairly easily, you can be certain > that Greenwood would also want some sort of guarantee that he won't be > driven nuts by the off-camera squirrels. > > Well, maybe a few of the camera guys would also return. And the guy that > holds the boom. And, needless to say, the caterer, best boy and key grip. > > What, you think Greenwood wrote, edited and produced Nowhere Man, too? Who > do you think would glue this masterpiece(s) together? > > Come to think of it, I read in The Hollywood Reporter that Stan Rogow will > be helming a few TV movies on USA Network, so maybe he can find some time > in his busy schedule. Maybe Rogow can be Veil's new hip sidekick, > "Scorpio". Yeah, that's the ticket. They could call it, "Nowhere Man: > The Gemini and Scorpio Files". Maybe "The American Gladiators" could do a > crossover, only to be kidnapped, and Them implant the identities of Gemini > and Scorpio inside of Ice and Lazer, while the identities of Ice and Lazer > are implanted inside of Gemini and Scorpio. Hey, it's only for a TV movie > or two, so what the hell. The show is already ruined. What possible harm > could it do? Besides, I think it would be a hoot to see Rogow kick ass. > > Then, in the second TV movie, as we are still reeling from the first TV > movie cliffhanger, Joel Surnow could do a crossover as "Aquarius", and in > tandem with the French femme fatale from his USA Network project, they kick > ass to save Rogow's ass. This would also satisfy those demanding > existential. Since twisted life could not imitate twisted art, perhaps > twisted art could imitate twisted life. > > Have you ever seen a skeleton with breast implants? We're talking dead and > phony. That's the best description I can think of to describe what a > Nowhere Man return to the small screen would mean. Let it go. > > -Alan Tucker- Alan, Sorry but I can't really join you in your doubt for the possibility that the "show" could be brought back somehow, somewhere. Last night during the conference with Larry and Bruce on Compuserve, I came away with the impression that (1) Bruce would at least consider continuing the character of "Tom Veil" if he could have a little more input (I think he used the term "a stronger hand" (forgive me if I misquoted) and he could have talented people around to work with (i.e. writer,producer,etc.).(2) I admit that we know Larry has left the show because I surmise mostly of creative differences with himself and the "suits" but haven't you ever heard of people changing thier mind. I know that I have felt strongly about something before and changed my mind a time or two.Alan one other thing I would like to ask you is: Even though Larry created the show and many of us feel he is a very talented guy ((Couldn't anyone else with 5 Billion people in the world continue the show in a good way?) I mean really alan throughout history how many people have taken over on someone's creation and somehow made it BETTER!) What do you think?? Kevin (klocke@ix.netcom.com)

1996-06-22 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (vic33@usa.pipeline.com)


Alan Tucker wrote: >Have you ever seen a skeleton with breast implants? We're talking dead and phony. That's the best description I can think of to describe what a Nowhere Man return to the small screen would mean. Let it go. ---->>> Hey, I'm gonna start my first argument with Tucker! I think he's being far too pessimistic and cynical. Sure, IF we managed to get NWM back, it would probably not be as good as it was. BUT... there is a chance that someone with the same vision and same caliber of skill as Larry Hertzog would take over. Some unknown person with the determination to prove him/her self. Anything can happen. Larry might even be wooed/coerced/bribed into reviving the series. What if certain individuals were fired; a certain amount of money were discussed; certain guarantees were put in writing? You might think a "dog" low rating show like NWM would not merit such actions. Our huge reaction to the cancellation may have proven it's not such a dog. -- Vic33@usa.pipeline.com http://pwp.usa.pipeline.com/~vic33/ Contact me if you'd like a pay phone for your Portland area business. There is NO CHARGE.

1996-06-22 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (alantuck@usa.pipeline.com)


On Jun 22, 1996 03:43:08 in article <Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer...>, 'vic33@usa.pipeline.com(Vic33)' wrote: >Alan Tucker wrote: >>Have you ever seen a skeleton with breast implants? We're talking dead >and phony. That's the best description I can think of to describe what a >Nowhere Man return to the small screen would mean. Let it go. > >---->>> Hey, I'm gonna start my first argument with Tucker! I think he's >being far too pessimistic and cynical. Sure, IF we managed to get NWM back, >it would probably not be as good as it was. BUT... there is a chance that >someone with the same vision and same caliber of skill as Larry Hertzog >would take over. Some unknown person with the determination to prove >him/her self. Anything can happen. Sure, your argument would make a lot of sense if this was a public-access show. Unfortunately, it is not. Unless there is strong leverage in the form of high ratings and irreplaceable talent, "vision" is precisely what the network and studio says it is. Shari Lewis would make a good executive producer, because she would be the most qualified to run the string from the UPN and Disney offices to the hand attached to Lamb Chop. I am not being "far too pessimistic and cynical". I am being realistic. Come on, Vic, you can't possibly be that naive. I hate to say it, but I think you are wearing Elton John's rose-colored glasses from the "Goodbye Yellow Brick Road" tour. -Alan Tucker-

1996-06-22 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (Kevin Locke <klocke@ix.netcom.com>)


Alan Tucker wrote: > > On Jun 22, 1996 03:43:08 in article <Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he > really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer...>, > 'vic33@usa.pipeline.com(Vic33)' wrote: > > > >Alan Tucker wrote: > >>Have you ever seen a skeleton with breast implants? We're talking dead > >and phony. That's the best description I can think of to describe what a > >Nowhere Man return to the small screen would mean. Let it go. > > > > > >---->>> Hey, I'm gonna start my first argument with Tucker! I think he's > >being far too pessimistic and cynical. Sure, IF we managed to get NWM > back, > >it would probably not be as good as it was. BUT... there is a chance that > >someone with the same vision and same caliber of skill as Larry Hertzog > >would take over. Some unknown person with the determination to prove > >him/her self. Anything can happen. > > > Sure, your argument would make a lot of sense if this was a public-access > show. Unfortunately, it is not. Unless there is strong leverage in the > form of high ratings and irreplaceable talent, "vision" is precisely what > the network and studio says it is. Shari Lewis would make a good executive > producer, because she would be the most qualified to run the string from > the UPN and Disney offices to the hand attached to Lamb Chop. > > I am not being "far too pessimistic and cynical". I am being realistic. > Come on, Vic, you can't possibly be that naive. I hate to say it, but I > think you are wearing Elton John's rose-colored glasses from the "Goodbye > Yellow Brick Road" tour. > > -Alan Tucker- Alan It seems like your still avoiding asnswering the question! Even if Larry couldn't or won't return to revive the series is it your assumption that Nobody could continue the show. I am going to repeat it one more time. There are 5 or 6 billion people in the world. Do you honestly feel that nobody is qualified to write,produce or act in a continued "Nowhere Man" show if by chance a network picked it up. You say you are just being realistic but I have a slight problem with that. I don't know your background at all but do you really live your life not ever hoping for something. You write and tell me to give up the fight (so to speak) all I can say is that the chances are very slim for "Nowhere Man" to continue (from what I hear) but can one human being really suggest to another not to have HOPE for something I guess the only other thing that I have to say is: "Sometimes Wishes do come true" a friend Kevin

1996-06-23 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (alantuck@usa.pipeline.com)


On Jun 22, 1996 18:52:00 in article <Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer...>, 'Kevin Locke <klocke@ix.netcom.com>' wrote: Alan It seems like your still avoiding asnswering the question! Even if Larry couldn't or won't return to revive the series is it your assumption that Nobody could continue the show. I am going to repeat it one more time. There are 5 or 6 billion people in the world. Do you honestly feel that nobody is qualified to write,produce or act in a continued "Nowhere Man" show if by chance a network picked it up. You say you are just being realistic but I have a slight problem with that. I don't know your background at all but do you really live your life not ever hoping for something. You write and tell me to give up the fight (so to speak) all I can say is that the chances are very slim for "Nowhere Man" to continue (from what I hear) but can one human being really suggest to another not to have HOPE for something I guess the only other thing that I have to say is: "Sometimes Wishes do come true" a friend Kevin ---------------- Kevin, I do not think I was avoiding the question. In fact, I think I answered it quite directly. *Of course*, there are plenty of talented people on this planet. However, the talent of the executive producer is not the problem, per se. The problem, and not the only one, is that on this particular show, there were a whole lot of strings attached to the executive producer. And those strings were being yanked. Repeatedly. The executive producer was not a Muppet, but he might as well have been. Of course, Kermit also has substantial talent, something Stan Rogow apparently lacks, which made the numerous problems with the last four episodes all the more noticeable. (I also think Miss Piggy is kind of hot, but that's my own personal problem). Larry Hertzog has made it quite clear that it got to the point where the scripts were rewritten and the show produced in accordance with fairly strict network and studio specifications. The final product of those specifications was my problem with the show, not the name of the executive producer. I saw what the network and studio had come to expect. And, I did not like what I saw one bit. If Clara Peller were still alive, she would be screaming, "WHERE'S THE BEEF?!!" They were also missing the lettuce, tomato and pickle. All that was left was the bun that was supposed to hold the sandwich together. And a soggy one, at that. I articulated my many problems with these episodes in a recent post, so I won't repeat them here. Of course, maybe my opinion would be different if I had not seen all of the prior episodes. However, I already had 21 episodes from which to compare and contrast. Aside from several extremely weak episodes during the palmtop arc, most if them were pretty damn good. O.K., hypothetically speaking, let's assume somebody with amazing talent takes control. Just what is the definition of "control"? Queen Elizabeth has a royal title and lives in a very nice house, but does she have any real power? When you get right down to it, at this point it really does not matter who holds the title of "executive producer". If the executive producer is the guide dog, it is clear that the blind are being led in only one direction. And the low road is the only road. Really, at this point, what *is* the point? Where would the show go from here? I can only figure that you miss the Veil character more than you miss the actual show. Greenwood did a terrific job portraying him. If Bill Clinton watched the show, it must be assumed that he pointed at Veil and said, "I feel your pain." At this point, what do they do with the Veil character? And what do they do with the character to make people watch? After all, *that* is what it's all about. *That* is the bottom line, in more ways than one. And *that* is the show's biggest problem. And *that* is a HUGE problem. I think it would be like the proverbial mustache on the Mona Lisa, only brought into the 90's with a grunge half-beard and nose ring. But hey, if Metallica can fake their way through it, anyone can. If a return is what you want, go for it. Don't let me be the guy to crush your hopes and dreams. If, by some miracle, it makes a return appearance, most likely by way of a TV movie, I'll be curious and will make a mental note to tape it for later viewing. In the meantime, for that hour or two, I'll be doing my laundry. Alan

1996-06-23 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - ("Shannon T. Nutt" <shannon9@greenepa.net>)


> alantuck@usa.pipeline.com(Alan Tucker) wrote in article <4qip97$dkh@news1.t1.usa.pipeline.com>... > On Jun 22, 1996 18:52:00 in article <Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he > really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer...>, 'Kevin Locke > <klocke@ix.netcom.com>' wrote: > > > Alan > > It seems like your still avoiding asnswering the question! Even if Larry > couldn't or > won't return to revive the series is it your assumption that Nobody could > continue the > show. I am going to repeat it one more time. There are 5 or 6 billion > people in the > world. Do you honestly feel that nobody is qualified to write,produce or > act in a > continued "Nowhere Man" show if by chance a network picked it up. > > You say you are just being realistic but I have a slight problem with that. > I don't > know your background at all but do you really live your life not ever > hoping for > something. > > You write and tell me to give up the fight (so to speak) all I can say is > that the > chances are very slim for "Nowhere Man" to continue (from what I hear) but > can one > human being really suggest to another not to have HOPE for something > > I guess the only other thing that I have to say is: > > "Sometimes Wishes do come true" > > a friend > > Kevin > > ---------------- > > Kevin, > > I do not think I was avoiding the question. In fact, I think I answered it > quite directly. > > *Of course*, there are plenty of talented people on this planet. However, > the talent of the executive producer is not the problem, per se. The > problem, and not the only one, is that on this particular show, there were > a whole lot of strings attached to the executive producer. And those > strings were being yanked. Repeatedly. The executive producer was not a > Muppet, but he might as well have been. > > Of course, Kermit also has substantial talent, something Stan Rogow > apparently lacks, which made the numerous problems with the last four > episodes all the more noticeable. (I also think Miss Piggy is kind of hot, > but that's my own personal problem). > > Larry Hertzog has made it quite clear that it got to the point where the > scripts were rewritten and the show produced in accordance with fairly > strict network and studio specifications. The final product of those > specifications was my problem with the show, not the name of the executive > producer. > > I saw what the network and studio had come to expect. And, I did not like > what I saw one bit. If Clara Peller were still alive, she would be > screaming, "WHERE'S THE BEEF?!!" They were also missing the lettuce, > tomato and pickle. All that was left was the bun that was supposed to hold > the sandwich together. And a soggy one, at that. I articulated my many > problems with these episodes in a recent post, so I won't repeat them here. > > > Of course, maybe my opinion would be different if I had not seen all of the > prior episodes. However, I already had 21 episodes from which to compare > and contrast. Aside from several extremely weak episodes during the > palmtop arc, most if them were pretty damn good. > > O.K., hypothetically speaking, let's assume somebody with amazing talent > takes control. Just what is the definition of "control"? Queen Elizabeth > has a royal title and lives in a very nice house, but does she have any > real power? > > When you get right down to it, at this point it really does not matter who > holds the title of "executive producer". If the executive producer is the > guide dog, it is clear that the blind are being led in only one direction. > And the low road is the only road. > > Really, at this point, what *is* the point? Where would the show go from > here? I can only figure that you miss the Veil character more than you > miss the actual show. Greenwood did a terrific job portraying him. If > Bill Clinton watched the show, it must be assumed that he pointed at Veil > and said, "I feel your pain." > > At this point, what do they do with the Veil character? And what do they > do with the character to make people watch? After all, *that* is what it's > all about. *That* is the bottom line, in more ways than one. And *that* > is the show's biggest problem. And *that* is a HUGE problem. > > I think it would be like the proverbial mustache on the Mona Lisa, only > brought into the 90's with a grunge half-beard and nose ring. But hey, if > Metallica can fake their way through it, anyone can. > > If a return is what you want, go for it. Don't let me be the guy to crush > your hopes and dreams. If, by some miracle, it makes a return appearance, > most likely by way of a TV movie, I'll be curious and will make a mental > note to tape it for later viewing. In the meantime, for that hour or two, > I'll be doing my laundry. > > Alan > There's a few problems with your analysis, although several of your points are well taken. First of all, Stan Rogow came onto the scene halfway through the series, and he deserves credit for the good shows in the second half just as much as Larry deserves credit for the first half. Secondly, the best episode of all came under Stan's "reign": Through a Lens Darkly. But he was there for the worst episode as well: The Dark Side of the Moon, and a pretty dull episode: Forever Jung. I think Stan did a great job on the last three episodes, but you seem to think otherwise. Remember, the final show was co-written by Larry, so if you want to blame Stan for the final outcome, you have to blame Larry just as much! I admire Larry a lot for his creation, but Hollywood has shown over and over again someone can take a premise created by someone else and make it even better!. A few examples: 1. Both Harve Bennett and Rob Bowman took STAR TREK and turned it into what it is today. 2. Kenneth Johnson took the ALIEN NATION movie and turned it into a great TV series 3. Robert Singer took control from Deborah Joy Levine and turned LOIS & CLARK into a major hit. And in case you want a few more, could I mention the movie versions of THE FUGITIVE and MISSION:IMPOSSIBLE to you?! > > >

1996-06-23 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (larryh@interramp.com)


In article <01bb6176.89a5cbc0$6e76cdce@nuttPPP>, shannon9@greenepa.net says... > There's a few problems with your analysis, although several of your points > are well taken. First of all, Stan Rogow came onto the scene halfway > through the series, and he deserves credit for the good shows in the > second half just as much as Larry deserves credit for the first half. > Secondly, the best episode of all came under Stan's "reign": Through a > Lens Darkly. But he was there for the worst episode as well: The Dark > Side of the Moon, and a pretty dull episode: Forever Jung. > I think Stan did a great job on the last three episodes, but you seem to > think otherwise. Remember, the final show was co-written by Larry, so if > you want to blame Stan for the final outcome, you have to blame Larry just > as much! > I admire Larry a lot for his creation, but Hollywood has shown over and > over again someone can take a premise created by someone else and make it > even better!. > Shannon, I have no argument with your thinking that someone (if not ANYONE) could take over a show and keep it going, if not even make it better. But be careful of your analysis of the series and what constitutes Stan and what constitutes Larry. You weaken your sound argument by making observations that make little sense to those of us who worked to make NwM what it was. FYI, Stan's only contribution to "Through A Lens Darkly" was to insist upon the shot of "Hidden Agenda" (the one with the Washington D.C. background). He wanted it placed differently but that would've truly highlighted the man's insensitivities (of which there were no shortages). I placed the shot where I believe it was most effective and least offensive. IMHO, however, it had no place in the episode. If that was what made TALD a great show to you, I'm sorry for you. I can also tell you that I almost lost my job (not for the first time) over TALD because the network wouldn't approve the story and Stan didn't really go to bat for it. I put the script into work despite this and ultimately "bargained" with the network to keep it. (At one point Disney and Stan *is* their henchman, threatened to make me personally pay for the script.) If, as you say, the best ep was TALD, you damage your argument by pointing to Stan in any way. If, however, it was tone, style, story concept and emotional power, I suggest you look to me or to Art. This doesn't impair your opening salvo -- as I said above -- that there are surely others who can get the job done. But listening to your evaluation, for those of us on the production staff, gives Alan's arguments more credibility than I'm sure you'd like them to have. Larry Larry

1996-06-24 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (alantuck@usa.pipeline.com)


On Jun 23, 1996 22:30:48 in article <Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer...>, '"Shannon T. Nutt" <shannon9@greenepa.net>' wrote: > > >> alantuck@usa.pipeline.com(Alan Tucker) wrote in article ><4qip97$dkh@news1.t1.usa.pipeline.com>... >> On Jun 22, 1996 18:52:00 in article <Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess >he >> really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer...>, 'Kevin Locke >> <klocke@ix.netcom.com>' wrote: >> >> >> Alan >> >> It seems like your still avoiding asnswering the question! Even if Larry >> couldn't or >> won't return to revive the series is it your assumption that Nobody >could >> continue the >> show. I am going to repeat it one more time. There are 5 or 6 billion >> people in the >> world. Do you honestly feel that nobody is qualified to write,produce or >> act in a >> continued "Nowhere Man" show if by chance a network picked it up. >> >> You say you are just being realistic but I have a slight problem with >that. >> I don't >> know your background at all but do you really live your life not ever >> hoping for >> something. >> >> You write and tell me to give up the fight (so to speak) all I can say >is >> that the >> chances are very slim for "Nowhere Man" to continue (from what I hear) >but >> can one >> human being really suggest to another not to have HOPE for something >> >> I guess the only other thing that I have to say is: >> >> "Sometimes Wishes do come true" >> >> a friend >> >> Kevin >> >> ---------------- >> >> Kevin, >> >> I do not think I was avoiding the question. In fact, I think I answered >it >> quite directly. >> >> *Of course*, there are plenty of talented people on this planet. >However, >> the talent of the executive producer is not the problem, per se. The >> problem, and not the only one, is that on this particular show, there >were >> a whole lot of strings attached to the executive producer. And those >> strings were being yanked. Repeatedly. The executive producer was not >a >> Muppet, but he might as well have been. >> >> Of course, Kermit also has substantial talent, something Stan Rogow >> apparently lacks, which made the numerous problems with the last four >> episodes all the more noticeable. (I also think Miss Piggy is kind of >hot, >> but that's my own personal problem). >> >> Larry Hertzog has made it quite clear that it got to the point where the >> scripts were rewritten and the show produced in accordance with fairly >> strict network and studio specifications. The final product of those >> specifications was my problem with the show, not the name of the >executive >> producer. >> >> I saw what the network and studio had come to expect. And, I did not >like >> what I saw one bit. If Clara Peller were still alive, she would be >> screaming, "WHERE'S THE BEEF?!!" They were also missing the lettuce, >> tomato and pickle. All that was left was the bun that was supposed to >hold >> the sandwich together. And a soggy one, at that. I articulated my many >> problems with these episodes in a recent post, so I won't repeat them >here. >> >> >> Of course, maybe my opinion would be different if I had not seen all of >the >> prior episodes. However, I already had 21 episodes from which to >compare >> and contrast. Aside from several extremely weak episodes during the >> palmtop arc, most if them were pretty damn good. >> >> O.K., hypothetically speaking, let's assume somebody with amazing talent >> takes control. Just what is the definition of "control"? Queen >Elizabeth >> has a royal title and lives in a very nice house, but does she have any >> real power? >> >> When you get right down to it, at this point it really does not matter >who >> holds the title of "executive producer". If the executive producer is >the >> guide dog, it is clear that the blind are being led in only one >direction. >> And the low road is the only road. >> >> Really, at this point, what *is* the point? Where would the show go >from >> here? I can only figure that you miss the Veil character more than you >> miss the actual show. Greenwood did a terrific job portraying him. If >> Bill Clinton watched the show, it must be assumed that he pointed at >Veil >> and said, "I feel your pain." >> >> At this point, what do they do with the Veil character? And what do >they >> do with the character to make people watch? After all, *that* is what >it's >> all about. *That* is the bottom line, in more ways than one. And >*that* >> is the show's biggest problem. And *that* is a HUGE problem. >> >> I think it would be like the proverbial mustache on the Mona Lisa, only >> brought into the 90's with a grunge half-beard and nose ring. But hey, >if >> Metallica can fake their way through it, anyone can. >> >> If a return is what you want, go for it. Don't let me be the guy to >crush >> your hopes and dreams. If, by some miracle, it makes a return >appearance, >> most likely by way of a TV movie, I'll be curious and will make a mental >> note to tape it for later viewing. In the meantime, for that hour or >two, >> I'll be doing my laundry. >> >> Alan --------------- >> >There's a few problems with your analysis, although several of your points >are well taken. First of all, Stan Rogow came onto the scene halfway >through the series, and he deserves credit for the good shows in the >second half just as much as Larry deserves credit for the first half. >Secondly, the best episode of all came under Stan's "reign": Through a >Lens Darkly. But he was there for the worst episode as well: The Dark >Side of the Moon, and a pretty dull episode: Forever Jung. >I think Stan did a great job on the last three episodes, but you seem to >think otherwise. Remember, the final show was co-written by Larry, so if >you want to blame Stan for the final outcome, you have to blame Larry just >as much! >I admire Larry a lot for his creation, but Hollywood has shown over and >over again someone can take a premise created by someone else and make it >even better!. Shannon, Your response is way off-the-mark. Well, maybe not the part about several of my points being well taken. :-) Other than that, everything about it is inaccurate. I can't and won't get into specifics, but you'll just have to take my word for it. Anyway, the thrust of my post had nothing to do with blaming any particular individual. It's a moot point. The thrust was that if a miracle were to occur, and the show were to make a return in some form, it would not matter. From both a creative and a personnel standpoint. The show is creatively dead (in my opinion), so it does not matter who props up the body. And the shots would not be called by somebody associated with the show. All it would come down to is would the guide dog be a qualified Golden or Labrador Retriever, or would the guide dog be a retarded pit bull. It does not matter. The dog trainer would be giving commands to the guide dog, anyway. Alan Tucker

1996-06-24 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (vic33@usa.pipeline.com)


A bunch of people said: snip - snip - snip!!!! This re-re-repost was getting way too long. I think we're being very silly to spend so much time arguing about what COULD happen. Anything could happen. Such as: 1) The Family Channel buys the rights to Nowhere Man, and pays Larry lots of money to edit them in with old episodes of Columbo, so it looks like Peter Falk and Bruce G. are involved in a murder investigation. Since Columbo already smokes cigars, he automatically becomes one of "them". 2) Larry sells all his assets so he can buy the rights to Nowhere Man, and launch into independent production on a feature film. 3) Disney remarkets NWM to UPN as "Nowhere Homey" starring Ice T and Sherman Hemsley. It is the story of a drug dealer whose identity has been erased. Although his police record has been lost, which is a good thing; his customers don't know him and he gets in lots of trouble trying to sell drugs to them; which is bad. 4) Everyone changes their minds and decide to restart the show as it was, giving Larry full control and lots of money. (Enough money to make Larry believe he is not compromising his artistic integrity.) 5) Bruce Greenwood gets a job in the next "Star Trek" TV series: Star Trek: Going Nowhere. He is captain of Voyager II. In the pilot episode, they go looking for Voyager, and get trapped in some weird anomaly that erases their existance and shoots them into a nowhere galaxy 10 gazillion light years away from Earth. Some very silly ideas... but any of them COULD happen! The future cannot be predicted. :-) (Obligatory smiley face to demonstrate that I am not completely insane.) Vic33@usa.pipeline.com http://pwp.usa.pipeline.com/~vic33/ Contact me if you'd like a pay phone for your Portland area business. There is NO CHARGE.

1996-06-24 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (alantuck@usa.pipeline.com)


On Jun 24, 1996 08:09:42 in article <Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer...>, 'vic33@usa.pipeline.com(Vic33)' wrote: >I think we're being very silly to spend so much time arguing about what >COULD happen. Anything could happen. Such as: > >1) The Family Channel buys the rights to Nowhere Man, and pays Larry lots >of money to edit them in with old episodes of Columbo, so it looks like >Peter Falk and Bruce G. are involved in a murder investigation. Since >Columbo already smokes cigars, he automatically becomes one of "them". Cool. Or maybe Disney could sell the rights to MGM/UA, and they could put it on the big screen as "Nowhere Penny: Pennies From Heaven 2". Larry Hertzog, in a unique deal never before done in Hollywood, is given total control of the project, a huge front and back-end deal, and all merchandising rights and profits, with the conditions that he agrees to at least make an effort to give it a touch of commercialism to keep it out of the art houses, he agrees to clean out the cage of the MGM lion, and Stan Rogow gets to tag along and make one decision. The existential feel and emotional power of the best episodes are combined with the existential feel and emotional power of the original film. Veil and Steve Martin (as Veil's new sidekick, Arthur Parker, aka "Robman") sell sheet-music to Them. They believe the lyrics from their songs are true. They know the lyrics are true. They....have to be. Believing life is a bowl of cherries, even when they've got nothing but the pits, they are torn between what is truth and what is fiction. Reality and fantasy collide. They are tracked by Them across country by the "electric feel" of the songs. There are sound effects creating an uneasy tension throughout the film as Bernadette Peters keeps dropping her earrings. Veil and Robman have a spectacular song and dance number together, during which a huge shot of "Hidden Agenda" is superimposed in the left-hand part of the screen for the entire seven-minute number. Christopher Walken plays The Director. It all fits. Alan Tucker

1996-06-24 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (alantuck@usa.pipeline.com)


On Jun 24, 1996 08:09:42 in article <Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer...>, 'vic33@usa.pipeline.com(Vic33)' wrote: >I think we're being very silly to spend so much time arguing about what >COULD happen. Anything could happen. Such as: Although Vic's scenarios are very possible, as is my earlier film scenario teaming a singing and dancing Steve Martin with a singing and dancing Veil, this is also a very realistic possibility for the return of Nowhere Man: As part of Disney's vow to bring "quality programming" to its afternoon lineup, Disney orders a series of Nowhere Man Back to School Specials for ABC. Larry Hertzog agrees to helm, on the condition that he is given a lifetime pass to Euro Disney, and Disney arranges for "weekly visits" from a young lady dressed as Snow White (sans The Dwarfs). In the first ABC Back to School Special, Veil returns to the area where his nightmare all started. Veil returns to Central America. Haunted by the possibility that his photo may actually have been of the hanging of former feared baseball slugger and Washington Senators great Frank Howard, he infiltrates a labor camp for disenfranchised children, and becomes a camp counselor. Veil counsels children and teaches them photography while they work in deplorable conditions making two American cents per hour. Many moral and ethical dilemmas are explored. The cast of "Home Improvement" guest stars as "The Rodriguez Family". Bob Saget guest stars as "Jake". Special Guest Star Kathie Lee Gifford is "The Camp Director". Alan Tucker

1996-06-24 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (Mark Long <MSL@oup-usa.org>)


Alan Tucker wrote: >Or maybe Disney could sell the rights to MGM/UA, and they could put >it on the big screen as "Nowhere Penny: Pennies From Heaven 2". Larry >Hertzog, in a unique deal never before done in Hollywood, is given total >control of the project, a huge front and back-end deal, and all >merchandising rights and profits, with the conditions that he agrees to at >least make an effort to give it a touch of commercialism to keep it out of >the art houses, he agrees to clean out the cage of the MGM lion, and Stan >Rogow gets to tag along and make one decision. Here's what Rogow gets to decide: For the musical numbers, do we use the elegance and power of the original records like they did in= the original British miniseries (which would cost too much money), or do we cheap-bastard our way through it by having the stars th= emselves record mediocre cover versions like in the movie?

1996-06-24 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (alantuck@usa.pipeline.com)


On Jun 24, 1996 17:21:25 in article <Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer...>, 'Mark Long <MSL@oup-usa.org>' wrote: >Alan Tucker wrote: > >>Or maybe Disney could sell the rights to MGM/UA, and they could put >>it on the big screen as "Nowhere Penny: Pennies From Heaven 2". Larry >>Hertzog, in a unique deal never before done in Hollywood, is given total >>control of the project, a huge front and back-end deal, and all >>merchandising rights and profits, with the conditions that he agrees to at >>least make an effort to give it a touch of commercialism to keep it out of >>the art houses, he agrees to clean out the cage of the MGM lion, and Stan >>Rogow gets to tag along and make one decision. >Here's what Rogow gets to decide: For the musical numbers, do we use the >elegance and power of the original records like they did in= >the original British miniseries (which would cost too much money), or do we >cheap-bastard our way through it by having the stars th= >emselves record mediocre cover versions like in the movie? Mark, No, you missed it. It's in the second paragraph of the original post. Rogow was allowed to tag along and make one decision. His decision was to ruin the spectacular seven-minute song and dance number by superimposing a gargantuan image of "Hidden Agenda" on the left-hand side of the screen. Jeez. How could you have possibly missed it? Didn't you see Entertainment Tonight? Didn't you read Roger Ebert's review? Quite honestly, I otherwise enjoyed the picture, but I still demanded that the usher refund my $7.50. Since I took a date, they had to refund $15.00. Alan Tucker

1996-06-25 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (vic33@usa.pipeline.com)


On Jun 24, 1996 10:30:31 in article <Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer...>, 'alantuck@usa.pipeline.com(Alan Tucker)' wrote: Veil and Robman have a spectacular song and dance number together, during which a huge shot of "Hidden Agenda" is superimposed in the left-hand part of the screen for the entire seven-minute number. Christopher Walken plays The Director. It >all fits. > >--->>> this could happen, of course; but I think Bernadette Peters would have to be in the dance number as well. -- Vic33@usa.pipeline.com http://pwp.usa.pipeline.com/~vic33/ Contact me if you'd like a pay phone for your Portland area business. There is NO CHARGE.

1996-06-25 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (Alexander.Cheyney@mail.trincoll.edu)


Alan-Another Gem. I got this one to show Missy. Alex alantuck@usa.pipeline.com(Alan Tucker) wrote: >On Jun 24, 1996 08:09:42 in article <Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he >really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer...>, >'vic33@usa.pipeline.com(Vic33)' wrote: > >>I think we're being very silly to spend so much time arguing about what >>COULD happen. Anything could happen. Such as: > > > >Although Vic's scenarios are very possible, as is my earlier film scenario >teaming a singing and dancing Steve Martin with a singing and dancing Veil, >this is also a very realistic possibility for the return of Nowhere Man: > >As part of Disney's vow to bring "quality programming" to its afternoon >lineup, Disney orders a series of Nowhere Man Back to School Specials for >ABC. Larry Hertzog agrees to helm, on the condition that he is given a >lifetime pass to Euro Disney, and Disney arranges for "weekly visits" from >a young lady dressed as Snow White (sans The Dwarfs). > >In the first ABC Back to School Special, Veil returns to the area where his >nightmare all started. Veil returns to Central America. Haunted by the >possibility that his photo may actually have been of the hanging of former >feared baseball slugger and Washington Senators great Frank Howard, he >infiltrates a labor camp for disenfranchised children, and becomes a camp >counselor. Veil counsels children and teaches them photography while they >work in deplorable conditions making two American cents per hour. Many >moral and ethical dilemmas are explored. The cast of "Home Improvement" >guest stars as "The Rodriguez Family". Bob Saget guest stars as "Jake". >Special Guest Star Kathie Lee Gifford is "The Camp Director". > >Alan Tucker >

1996-06-27 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (mcshade@interaccess.com)


larryh@interramp.com (Larry Hertzog) wrote: >In article <01bb6176.89a5cbc0$6e76cdce@nuttPPP>, shannon9@greenepa.net >says... >> There's a few problems with your analysis, although several of your >points >> are well taken. First of all, Stan Rogow came onto the scene halfway >> through the series, and he deserves credit for the good shows in the >> second half just as much as Larry deserves credit for the first half. >> Secondly, the best episode of all came under Stan's "reign": Through a >> Lens Darkly. But he was there for the worst episode as well: The Dark >> Side of the Moon, and a pretty dull episode: Forever Jung. >> I think Stan did a great job on the last three episodes, but you seem >to >> think otherwise. Remember, the final show was co-written by Larry, so >if >> you want to blame Stan for the final outcome, you have to blame Larry >just >> as much! >> I admire Larry a lot for his creation, but Hollywood has shown over and >> over again someone can take a premise created by someone else and make >it >> even better!. >> >Shannon, >I have no argument with your thinking that someone (if not ANYONE) could >take over a show and keep it going, if not even make it better. >But be careful of your analysis of the series and what constitutes Stan >and what constitutes Larry. You weaken your sound argument by making >observations that make little sense to those of us who worked to make >NwM what it was. >FYI, Stan's only contribution to "Through A Lens Darkly" was to insist >upon the shot of "Hidden Agenda" (the one with the Washington D.C. >background). He wanted it placed differently but that would've truly >highlighted the man's insensitivities (of which there were no shortages). >I placed the shot where I believe it was most effective and least >offensive. IMHO, however, it had no place in the episode. If that was >what made TALD a great show to you, I'm sorry for you. >I can also tell you that I almost lost my job (not for the first time) >over TALD because the network wouldn't approve the story and Stan didn't >really go to bat for it. I put the script into work despite this and >ultimately "bargained" with the network to keep it. (At one point Disney >and Stan *is* their henchman, threatened to make me personally pay for >the script.) If, as you say, the best ep was TALD, you damage your >argument by pointing to Stan in any way. If, however, it was tone, >style, story concept and emotional power, I suggest you look to me or to >Art. >This doesn't impair your opening salvo -- as I said above -- that there >are surely others who can get the job done. But listening to your >evaluation, for those of us on the production staff, gives Alan's >arguments more credibility than I'm sure you'd like them to have. >Larry >Larry People, People, can we try and at least save Nowhere Man... Hey! Larry, What the latest update on talks?

1996-06-28 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (Kevin Locke <klocke@ix.netcom.com>)


Mathew wrote: > > People, People, can we try and at least save Nowhere Man... > > Hey! Larry, What the latest update on talks? Mathew, That was the whole "point" as to why the conversation started in the first place! Even though I would like to give "Alan" credit for at least taping the show to watch at a later date if by chance the "Nowhere Man" series was to be brought back(Something about he would be doing his laundry "if and when" any future episode was to air). My problem isn't even with all his opinions. He sometimes makes some good points(please note that I disagree with many as well!) It is more this: He says (or at least implies) he is a "fan" of the show but he would be more interested in doing something like laundry more than the curiousity as to seeing what type of show "could" be brought back just doesn't sound much like a "fan" to me. I can only speak for myself but "I" for one would be enthusiastic about the possibilities of what the show could become (given the right circumstances) and would without a question at least have enough excitement to sit down and watch the show when it aired! Sorry if I am rehashing old stuff but I haven't had much opportunity to check any "postings" for a few days. a "Fan" of Nowhere Man Kevin

1996-06-29 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (alantuck@usa.pipeline.com)


On Jun 28, 1996 07:46:33 in article <Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer...>, 'Kevin Locke <klocke@ix.netcom.com>' wrote: >My problem isn't even with all his opinions. He sometimes makes some good >points(please note that I disagree with many as well!) It is more this: He >says (or at least implies) he is a "fan" of the show but he would be more interested in >doing something like laundry more than the curiousity as to seeing >what type of show "could" be brought back just doesn't sound much like a "fan" >to me. Kevin, There is an inherent problem with your logic. I *am* a fan of the show. But of what show are you speaking? When a complete overhaul of the show's structure, not to mention the show's personnel, is ordered by the network and/or studio, it is NOT the same show. The Cleveland Browns will be back playing in Cleveland in 1999. But they won't be the same Cleveland Browns. The Cleveland Browns are now in Baltimore, playing as the Baltimore Ravens. Does that mean in 1999, after personally going to Browns games for 35 years, I should automatically become a Browns fan just because they are the "Cleveland Browns"? No, they are just a bunch of guys, likely the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, who will be dressed like the old Cleveland Browns, will have the same name as the old Cleveland Browns, and will introduce themselves as the Cleveland Browns. But are they *really* the Cleveland Browns? It is quite clear what they (or Them, if you wish) want NwM to become. Unlike the quality of a football team, this is a future quite easy to predict. Watch the last four episodes. That is what they want. If they had more time to hammer it out in a second season, you can bet they would have made it so hackneyed and derivative, that it would have become practically unrecognizable. There is the same wrapper, but a different product inside. It is no different than putting vanilla ice cream inside an empty container that says "butter pecan", and then serving it to the people as "butter pecan ice cream". Watch whatever you want. I want my Cleveland Browns. Alan Tucker

1996-06-29 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (chrgrfan@aol.com)


Quite a clever analogy, Mr. Tucker, but there are several flaws with it. First of all, what makes the Cleveland Browns the Cleveland Browns? If, as you suggest, it is the players, then the Browns can return. Players come and go. Coaches come and go. Upper management comes and goes. The thing that stays the same is the name, that's it. Such would be the case with NwM. Sure, most of the main players would be gone. But jumping off the bandwagon, especially now, is like giving up on your favorite team because the team was sold, the head coach was fired, and a couple of players were traded. There is no doubt that the team won't be the same. Certainly the style won't be the same. But maybe, just maybe, this new collection of folks will surprise you and be just as good, or heaven forbid, even better. Simply put, a *true fan* of a sports team, as well as a television show, doesn't give up just because the main players change. They always come in with an open mind, hoping that the team or show will do well with its new style. If you can't do this, you might as well call yourself a fan of a particular player or coach. Jump around with him when he gets traded or fired, but don't call yourself a fan of the team. In other words, don't call yourself a fan of NwM if you don't like the direction the show went as Larry got phased out. In other words, don't call yourself a fan of the show if you don't hope that the show can come back even close to its former self. Call yourself a Larry Hertzog fan, or a Art Monteraselli fan, or whoever it is that wrote/produced/directed your favorite eps. Because that's what you *really* are. ChargerFan

1996-06-29 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (alantuck@usa.pipeline.com)


On Jun 29, 1996 16:07:15 in article <Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer...>, 'chrgrfan@aol.com (ChrgrFan)' wrote: >If you can't do this, you might as well call yourself a fan of a >particular player or coach. Jump around with him when he gets traded or >fired, but don't call yourself a fan of the team. In other words, don't >call yourself a fan of NwM if you don't like the direction the show went >as Larry got phased out. In other words, don't call yourself a fan of the >show if you don't hope that the show can come back even close to its >former self. Call yourself a Larry Hertzog fan, or a Art Monteraselli >fan, or whoever it is that wrote/produced/directed your favorite eps. >Because that's what you *really* are. "ChargerFan", Not even close. I am a big fan of the style of play, not of the coaching staff. I did not go to Browns games to oooh and aaah at the offensive line coach. I went to see the game. Larry Hertzog and Art Monteraselli may be hip dudes, and while I am quite confident that the three of us will swap our moms' gefilte fish and pasta recipes while we play a relaxing game of canasta, that has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the matter at hand. I hate to repeat myself for the billionth time, but since I am once again being accused by the literalists (and no, that's not a new political party) of something that has no semblance of truth, here goes. Unlike what apparently is the VAST majority in this newsgroup, I loved the existential/enigmatic/internal Nowhere Man, I disliked the literal/science fiction/conspiracy/clue/external Nowhere Man. It is really that simple. Nothing more, nothing less. As far as I recall, Larry Hertzog was still driving the Dodge during the palmtop arc. Granted, the nagging wife wanted to take control of the wheel, but Larry's foot was still on the gas pedal. Am I correct, or was this, to paraphrase Archie Bunker, "merely a pigment of my imagination"? I made no secret of my hatred of those episodes then, and I will make no secret of my hatred of those episodes now. In my opinion, they were even worse than the last four. There goes your "Larry Theory". The Warren Commission will now have to close its file. I think the palmtop arc was dead on arrival. If the last four eps was blown potential, the palmtop arc was no potential. It combined the worst elements of Nowhere Man, such as bad science fiction putting the suspension of disbelief mode into maximum-overdrive, and combined it with a ridiculous molasses-slow pace. The slow pace worked great in the existential eps, but combined with plots such as the preposterous notion of bone-stretching in a tanning bed, or whatever that was all about, it was awful. That dance scene at the end of "Forever Jung" would have worked in an existential ep, but after seeing babes in tights and a mad scientist, well, let's just say the dance scene should have never left the Arthur Murray Dance Studio. It was the same problem with all of those eps. Slow pace, ridiculous science fiction plot, drop a clue here, drop a clue there, just plain drop a birthmark. From "Heart of Darkness" to "Stay Tuned" (O.K., "Heart of Darkness" had no science fiction, but it was still bad), with the exception of a few fleeting moments, I hated every one of them. And, while the network may have been passing some notes, to the best of my knowledge, Stan Rogow nor any other doofus had yet to take their Crayola crayons to the script. So, to finally get you guys out of the little hair I have left, step in the cold shower, and wash, rinse, and repeat after me: Larry Hertzog wrote, rewrote and produced some episodes of Nowhere Man that absolutely, positively sucked. Are we there yet, ChargerFan? Alan Tucker

1996-07-01 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (chrgrfan@aol.com)


Mr. Tucker, I was tempted to not even respond to your post in order to avoid a flame-off, but I thought I'd try to have you understand me, even if you won't reciprocate. My last post was a response to your "team" analogy, nothing more. Personally, I find it hard to understand your consistent attacking of people on this newsgroup that want the show to come back. Is it really so impossible to think that this show could not come back to a form that you would find to your liking? If you so hate what the show has become, why stay here? Why continue to watch? Why tape the shows that you missed? I think people here are frustrated with you because they don't understand you more than anything else. You attack their attempts to understand your line of thinking, and then label them. Why? You talk in analogies, but when they no longer prove your point, you abandon them. Why? Personally, my favorite episode was "Something About Her", one of those initial shows that occurred before the "tampering". I can understand why you don't like the "new" episodes as much, but does that mean you have to condemn anyone who found enjoyment in them? Finally: If, as you say, you are a true Nowhere Man fan, why don't you want the show to come back? If the "style" you enjoyed died after the first batch of episodes, then you can't possibly call yourself a fan of the show. The show has become much different since those days, and in fact, more episodes other than that type of show have aired during NwM's run. I hope you don't take this post as an attack to your character, as it seemed you did with the last post. It's just an attempt to understand how someone who calls himself a fan of the show can attack someone who says he likes it and wants it to come back... ChargerFan

1996-07-02 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (alantuck@usa.pipeline.com)


On Jul 01, 1996 22:21:38 in article <Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer...>, 'chrgrfan@aol.com (ChrgrFan)' wrote: >Finally: If, as you say, you are a true Nowhere Man fan, why don't you >want the show to come back? If the "style" you enjoyed died after the >first batch of episodes, then you can't possibly call yourself a fan of >the show. The show has become much different since those days, and in >fact, more episodes other than that type of show have aired during NwM's >run. > >I hope you don't take this post as an attack to your character, as it >seemed you did with the last post. It's just an attempt to understand how >someone who calls himself a fan of the show can attack someone who says he >likes it and wants it to come back... ChargerFan, I have made it clear on more than one occasion that if you or anybody else wants the show to return, go for it. I am not exactly sure what you expect, other than the same actor and the same title, because that's all you would get. Why do I not want the show back? I guess for the same reasons that I hate sequels to great movies. With notable rare exceptions that can be counted on one hand and three toes, sequels are a cheap bastardization of the original film, they piss on the original's memory, and they are produced for one reason, and for one reason only: $$$. Quality isn't even an afterthought. Although there are some out there trying to keep the production on life-support, Nowhere Man is creatively dead. No television network would allow any subsequent producer(s) to get away with anything remotely resembling a production which made Nowhere Man so special. And I do not consider the last four episodes special. Specious maybe, but certainly not special. It boggles my mind that in April, so many people bitched because "Through a Lens Darkly" did not have more clues. I am not a licensed radiologist, nor I have I seen the x-rays, but I believe these people to have rocks for brains. And unfortunately, there is a veritable canyon out there. The networks will only allow a literal type of show, a conspiracy whodunnit. Done well, it can be an interesting diversion. In my opinion, the last four episodes were not done well. Not even close. The content was good, the execution sucked. Of course, the content could not help being engaging, since there were provocative season-long questions that supposedly were finally going to be answered. And, as it turns out, many of those questions were left unanswered. And really, for all intents and purposes, they are now moot. I can only imagine how much worse any subsequent episodes would be. The show would resort to the lowest common denominator, because it is quite obvious by the reaction of many that nothing more is required. Just get the ratings, baby. Sell the sizzle, not the steak. And if the sizzle gets the ratings, then you can fry up generic soy and cereal burger, because nothing more is required. If the network and/or studio thought that 44 minutes of film showing Veil getting his hair shampooed would get big ratings, you had better believe that Stan Rogow, another gasbag, or a guy hooked up with the production just to pick up a credit and a check, would be dutifully taking orders to get the script and production done. If you enjoyed the last four episodes, and if you think you'll get a QUALITY production in a Nowhere Man return, hey, what can I say? It's a free country. I certainly wasn't personally attacking you. Unless, of course, Puddin implanted something in my cigarettes when I went to the bathroom to catch a smoke, tracked me cross-country by monitoring my electric personality, and subsequently cloned me in his image by implanting pudding to make my bones soft. In which case, I *was* personally attacking you. If you want the show back, go for it. Just be careful not to set your sights too high. Alan Tucker

1996-07-02 00:00:00 - Re: Bye, bye Nowhere Man... Guess he really is going nowhere... Cancelled... Bummer... - (sdredge <sdredge@micron.net>)


Kevin Locke <klocke@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > Mathew wrote: > > > > People, People, can we try and at least save Nowhere Man... > > > > Hey! Larry, What the latest update on talks? > If Nowhere Man was on say, FOX, it would not be can cancelled. It is a great show and the best non-sci fi show on any of the new networks. > > > > Mathew, > > That was the whole "point" as to why the conversation started in the first place! > Even though I would like to give "Alan" credit for at least taping the show to watch > at a later date if by chance the "Nowhere Man" series was to be brought back(Something > about he would be doing his laundry "if and when" any future episode was to air). > > My problem isn't even with all his opinions. He sometimes makes some good > points(please note that I disagree with many as well!) It is more this: He says (or > at least implies) he is a "fan" of the show but he would be more interested in doing > something like laundry more than the curiousity as to seeing > what type of show "could" be brought back just doesn't sound much like a "fan" to me. > > I can only speak for myself but "I" for one would be enthusiastic about the > possibilities of what the show could become (given the right circumstances) and > would without a question at least have enough excitement to sit down and watch the > show when it aired! > > Sorry if I am rehashing old stuff but I haven't had much opportunity to check any > "postings" for a few days. > > a "Fan" of Nowhere Man > Kevin