[QuickTidal]

Rumour about

Spoiler

Who Mike's Character is going to become now that he's got the bionic eye and will need a cybernetic leg...Deathlock! Hope that turns out to be true!

[polishgenius]

I'd say that was comfortably the best ep of the season so far, though it still has some of the series' trademark truly enormous logic holes. Finally, intriguing things happened as regards the long-term arc that have implications for the wider universe!

[Tiste Simeon]

It's back? Not seen it advertised on British TV...

[polishgenius]

It's been postponed in the UK apparently. Will be back on telly in February I think.

[Binder of Demons]

That might just be the TV station in the UK waiting until a few eps have aired again in the US before restarting the series. That might simply be a way of avoiding the non-US broadcasters overtaking the US. There isn't a list of the broadcast dates for the next few eps in the US, so I can't see if there is any delay on that end. What night does SHIELD air in the US?

[Tiste Simeon]

In the first half of the season the episodes aired on the Friday right after the US showing...

[QuickTidal]

A decent, if not stellar, ep this week. Getting to see Fitz and Simmons treated as Superstars at the Academy was cool....as was Skye seeing Bucky Barnes name on the Lost Wall at the Academy....(that's TOTALLY in there to tie into CAP 2!)...

but best bit:

Spoiler

The revelation that Skye is actually an OUO (Object of Unknown Origin)...and is TECHNICALLY a Shield asset/artifact. CRAZY! Of all the theories I had (biggest one was that Coulson was her father) I was not expecting that! Also, the re-entering into the fray Mr. Dickhead Rich guy from Ep 2....and he's in with the Clairvoyant....nice nod to the overall plot arc there. I also see a lot of growth in Coulson post-finding out about his death/resurrection...he's darker and seems to care less about the mission and more about his team...which is great.

[Bulwyf]

Jakovasaurus, on 08 January 2014 - 04:43 PM, said:

I thought the episode was predictable and formulaic..... except for the Coulson/Tahiti/Magical place reveal.

Personally, I don't get the fan boy admiration for this show. It's somewhat fun, but far from being at the top of the list of best shows. The attempt at humor is silly. And the acting is horrible (except for the guy who plays Coulson). I still watch it because I'm hoping it will get better..... I'm barely hanging on.

The chick in the flower dress is hot, too bad she's been taken out of the picture. I wonder who the Clairvoyant is?

Spoiler

Undead, super soldiers would be totally boss.

I stopped watching after 3 or 4 episodes. My DVR was filling up and I had like 3 unwatched episodes, so I gave in and deleted them. Had to face facts and cut it lose, if I wasn't watching them that same week they came out and they were piling up, it wasn't the show for me.

But regarding this post and the post before it:

Spoiler

You pretty much new Tahiti was a coverup and didn't really happen after the first couple episodes (the ones that I watched). The way the other agents looked at each other every time it was brought up, and I think there was a comment made by someone about him not finding out the truth or something. I don't remember what was said but it was basically that Tahiti hadn't actually happened. You knew he had to either have been a clone or healed/brought back from the dead by some mystical power SHIELD had collected.

[polishgenius]

The Skye reveal was far more interesting than I was expecting. It's also the only reason why I'm not going to drop the show right away, because the rest of the episode was utter farce.

[champ]

http://uk.ign.com/ar...gents-of-shield

Lady Sif to make an appearance in 3 episodes time!

[QuickTidal]

We needed a big name to anchor some eps, and Sif is a PERFECT choice. THOR alum, and an actual Asgardian? Perfect.

also, Bill fucking Paxton is guesting for like 4 eps.

[Werthead]

Tiste Brent Not Abyss Weeks Simeon, on 10 January 2014 - 12:33 AM, said:

It's back? Not seen it advertised on British TV...

Between being panned in the reviews and losing half its viewers, Channel 4 decided against rushing it back onto the air again. The argument they used for the first half of the season - they wanted to minimise piracy - seems to have evaporated. So it'll be back in February, and they haven't revealed what timeslot it will be in. The assumption is the same slot after the Jamie Oliver show they replaced it with finishes, but that's not a given.

[QuickTidal]

Werthead, on 18 January 2014 - 09:19 PM, said:

Tiste Brent Not Abyss Weeks Simeon, on 10 January 2014 - 12:33 AM, said:

It's back? Not seen it advertised on British TV...

Between being panned in the reviews and losing half its viewers, Channel 4 decided against rushing it back onto the air again.

If Channel 4 bought the rights, they did so under contract for running it in a way dictated by those who own it. They don't get to DECIDE to run it whenever at all. It's not in syndication, so they don't have the right to do that. They have to follow a schedule. It's just a different schedule to the North American one. So they don't decide on anything. When running s first run show they are given PERMISSION and LICENSE...and that's it. Channel 4 doesn't decide squat.

And panned in the reviews is harsh. It's gotten MIXED reviews (sure)...it's CERTAINLY not been panned tho.

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 19 January 2014 - 05:48 AM

[LinearPhilosopher]

is it just me, or was the doctor from ep 11 sheppard from firefly?

[Werthead]

Quote

If Channel 4 bought the rights, they did so under contract for running it in a way dictated by those who own it. They don't get to DECIDE to run it whenever at all. It's not in syndication, so they don't have the right to do that. They have to follow a schedule. It's just a different schedule to the North American one. So they don't decide on anything. When running s first run show they are given PERMISSION and LICENSE...and that's it. Channel 4 doesn't decide squat.

Channel 4 bought the UK transmission rights and get to decide when to show it in the UK, the same with any other channel buying a US import. There will likely be some kind of restriction on that, but these days it's usually, "Don't show it before we do in the USA," and then they can do what they like with it. It's certainly not in ABC's interests to force foreign broadcasters to wait weeks before showing the series because they know that will result in piracy which hurts them in the long run as well as the local broadcaster (if the ratings stay strong, C4 will give ABC money for future seasons).

Certainly in this case, it was Channel 4's decision to wait to show the rest of the season.

Quote

And panned in the reviews is harsh. It's gotten MIXED reviews (sure)...it's CERTAINLY not been panned tho.

It's been pretty much torn to pieces, possibly overly-harshly; after the first few episodes were poor, I found it to improve markedly in the last few episodes up to the mid-season finale and by most accounts the last episode or two since it came back were reasonable (well, apart from not answering the question they promised to answer).

This post has been edited by Werthead: 24 January 2014 - 07:33 PM

[QuickTidal]

Werthead, on 24 January 2014 - 07:32 PM, said:

Channel 4 bought the UK transmission rights and get to decide when to show it in the UK, the same with any other channel buying a US import. There will likely be some kind of restriction on that, but these days it's usually, "Don't show it before we do in the USA," and then they can do what they like with it. It's certainly not in ABC's interests to force foreign broadcasters to wait weeks before showing the series because they know that will result in piracy which hurts them in the long run as well as the local broadcaster (if the ratings stay strong, C4 will give ABC money for future seasons).

Certainly in this case, it was Channel 4's decision to wait to show the rest of the season.

No, pretty sure that's not how it works. That's only true of syndicated stuff. First Run shows are dictated by their distributing parent company, otherwise the license is uselessly one-sided.

Syndication differs from licensing the show to a television network; once a network picks up a show, it is usually guaranteed to run on most or all the network's affiliates on the same day of the week and at the same time (in a given time zone, in countries where this is a concern). Some production companies create their shows and license them to networks at a loss, at least at first, hoping that the series will succeed and that eventual off-network syndication will turn a profit for the show.

Bolded bit for illustrating my point. Channel 4 has to follow an airing schedule laid out by the distributor. In this case, ABC.

Quote

It's been pretty much torn to pieces, possibly overly-harshly;

Where? Links? Examples? I've yet to read a review that panned it. I've read mixed reviews...but none panned it. Torn to pieces? Wha?

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 24 January 2014 - 08:08 PM

[Binder of Demons]

@ QUICKTIDAL - There are several shows which have aired in Canada ahead of the US, and they hadn't gone to syndication. Can't remember which ones they are off the top of my head, but I remember seeing episodes of new US shows showing up as torrents before they had aired in the states. Maybe only a day early, but sometimes a week too because of a a sports event delaying the Us broadcast. So there is certainly precedent.

So I believe Wert has it on this one.

[QuickTidal]

Binder of Demons, on 24 January 2014 - 09:38 PM, said:

@ QUICKTIDAL - There are several shows which have aired in Canada ahead of the US, and they hadn't gone to syndication. Can't remember which ones they are off the top of my head, but I remember seeing episodes of new US shows showing up as torrents before they had aired in the states. Maybe only a day early, but sometimes a week too because of a a sports event delaying the Us broadcast. So there is certainly precedent.

So I believe Wert has it on this one.

I don't think so. Unless a deal is reached with the CRTC ahead of time based on a production (things that FILM in Canada are given the upper airing hand over the US. REIGN, for example shoots in Toronto (and overseas)..and as a result it is allowed to air on M3 in Canada on Wednesday's whereas it airs a day later on Thursday's in the US...even though it's a CW production. This happens frequently, and the other fact is that there are simulcast deals in place between the US networks and Canada because they are so closely linked. So you may see a day or two advance difference in Canada over the US with a US show...but it's ALWAYS mere days in the same week...not weeks. It's SO closely linked between our countries that when the US delays for sports or Thanksgiving...so do we...even though we don't need to. Trust me on this.

Sorry, Wert is way off base here. You are welcome to buy it, but from what I know of those I know in the industry distributor network is god. I can only go on what I know of those friends I have who work in the film/TV industry.

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 24 January 2014 - 11:18 PM

[polishgenius]

The distributor may be god, but that doesn't mean they're not sometimes happy to just give the local network free reign past a certain point on the basis that they know their audience and schedule foibles far better.


I mean, I don't have knowledge of these things, but the way Channel 4 (and British TV in general) run both foreign programming and their own shows, it seems unlikely that they (or any other channel) would be willing or able to run many US TV shows if they were all going to be dictated to that degree.

Apart from anything else, I'm not sure how the bolded bit there is meant to apply to Channel 4, who aren't in any way an affiliate of AMC as far as I know.


I think there might be a bit of cross-cultural wire-crossing here tbh- Canadian and US TV are far more closely linked and similarly run than UK telly, which is a whole different kettle of fish. NA industry practices just aren't going to be applicable.

[QuickTidal]

polishgenius, on 24 January 2014 - 11:27 PM, said:

Apart from anything else, I'm not sure how the bolded bit there is meant to apply to Channel 4, who aren't in any way an affiliate of AMC as far as I know.

It applies because it means that there are rules in place for "licensing" as opposed to syndication which gives more free reign.