>This is gonna be a very long email, so bear with me.
>OK, as I'm typing this, Korea is holding a quadrennial
>sporting event called the Asian Games. We're only four
>days into the 2-week event and it's already had its
>share of surprises for Thailand's athletes. (Hey, I'm
>Thai.) These I'll get to in a moment. But many of
>these will involve what seems to be the Korean
>obsession for cheating (how else do you explain Roy
>Jones Jr. *not* winning the gold at Seoul 88? ;-)).

The fact that none of the three judges who voted against him in the
final
were Asian, much less Korean (they were from Uruguay, Uganda, and
Morocco).
Nobody's entirely sure what happened, although one judge said, "I was
so
sure that the other four would vote for Jones that I voted for the
Korean
to spare him the embarassment of a 5-0 loss" (presumably as it would
have
been in front of the boxer's home crowd).  It could also be the general
anti-USA athletes sentiment (quite a number of people consider track
world
records by USA athletes as "legitimate" as swimming records set by
German
Democratic Republic (i.e. East Germany) women.

[Something about takraw, and then fencing]

>3. Gymnastics: And speaking of sports with judges,
>gymnastics is one of them. Thailand's single
>representative in gymnastics (who had won 4 years
>previous in Bangkok) was also cheated out of
>contention, but not by bad judging... but rather by
>the organizers. After having been informed that his
>routine would start at 4:30pm, Amornthep Waewsaeng
>arrived at the venue 90 minutes before the competion
>to warm up. However, Amornthep was informed by the
>organizers that he had to start the competition
>immediately. He only managed three positions in his
>best event (the rings) since he hadn't warmed up
>properly. Not surprisingly, he kept going on and on to
>the Thai press about this (not only was he the only
>Thai in gymnastics, this will be his last Games).

Reminds me of the Japanese judo athlete who was favored to win the gold
at
Atlanta in the heavyweight division, but was disqualified as he didn't
get
to the weigh-in on time - as he was stuck in the Olympic Village behind
a
traffic jam that nobody had anticipated (one of the reasons the IOC
President did not call those games "the best ever").  Never mind that,
since there's no "maximum weight" at the heavyweight level in judo
(unlike
wrestling), there isn't much need for a weigh-in.

>4. Weightlifting: No cheating here... Question: How
>can you be both in second place and out of contention
>for a medal at the same time? Answer: When you get an
>injury in weightlifting. Here, medals are only awarded
>for the total for the snatch and the clean and jerk
>and not for the individual disciplines (I presume that
>it's done this way in weightlifting competitions
>anyway).

They're supposed to switch to individual medals in 2004.  They also did
it
this way through the early 1970s, when they had a third discipline,
Military Press (like Clean & Jerk, but you are not allowed to bend your
legs in the "jerk" portion).

>Saipin Detsaeng came in second place after
>the snatch portion of her class (63kg). There was just
>one problem. After posting a weight of 105kg in her
>2nd lift, she sprained a shoulder in her 3rd lift
>(107.5kg), and thus she had to withdraw from the
>event. Talk about "snatching" defeat, eh? (Sorry,
>couldn't resist the pun...) Just one day earlier, Chom
>Singhnoy (62kg) was on his way to a bronze after
>finishing 3rd in the snatch with 132.5kg, when he
>sprained his knee in his first clean and jerk attempt
>with 157.5kg.

Nothing new about this - Vasily Alexeev, 1972 and 1976 Olympic
superheavyweight champion and probably the world's most popular
weightlifter (certainly while he was competing), easily won the snatch
portion at the 1978 World Weightlifting Championships, but got injured
in
his first lift in the Clean And Jerk and pretty much never lifted again
(his next appearance was at the 1980 Olympics, but he wasn't completely
healed and missed all three attempts in the Snatch).

>* If you do a little searching on Google Groups, you
>might find a post in rec.arts.movies.current-films by
>me on sports cliches. Here's one right now: coach...
>usually a washed-up pro or a would-be pro with a knee
>injury.

There's a resurgance of interest in "The White Shadow"; that may have
something to do with it.

>* There are two sports where you can set a world
>record in one event... and still be empty handed:
>weightlifting and speed skating (in fact, it happened
>at Salt Lake, where a Canadian guy set a record in one
>run of one speed skating event, but crashed in the
>other.)

Add track & field and swimming: you can set a world record in a
qualifying
round.

>No, nothing to do with rock music. Is it just me, or
>is this an often-used cliche?: "Main character's most
>significant competition is the offspring of someone
>who beat one of the main character's parents."

VERY oft-used cliche - and the main character pretty much invariably
wins.  (The "Step by Step" episode you mentioned is a rare exception,
and
even in this case, the "older" competition didn't actually make an
appearance until the end - usually, the parents have an early
confrontation
that sets things up.)  The reverse happens in "Rugrats" with Grandpa
and
the grandfather of the McNulty boys.

It's about as oft used as "In any competition between boys and girls,
the
girls pretty much always win."  (You hardly ever see boys win, as
they're
trying to send one of two messages: one, "girls can do anything boys
can
do" (in those few instances where boys win, usually the competition is
close and some coach tells the girl, "I guess you are good enough to be
on
the boy's team"; two, if the fact that the opponent is a girl is a
surprise, the boy is going to spend most of the rest of the episode
having
to live it down.)

[...]

[Note: just to prove my original cliche point, I put up Rocket Power
(Race Across New Zealand, with Theodore McGill competing against Otto after
daddy Chester McGill had previously "beaten" Ray) and Hey Arnold! (Tour de
Pond, with Arnold competing against Rex Higgins the 3rd after the original
Rex Higgins beat his grandfather). The Step by Step example featured one of
the teen kids being told by her mom that she had been "robbed" of the head
cheerleader title in her day, and after the new head cheerleader was
announced, the new head's mom picked her up and revealed herself to be...
the very person who had "robbed" mom all those years back. Don points out,
of course, that it's slightly different from the original cliche since it's usually 
before the competition starts that we learn about what had happened
before.]

>3. Another toon cliche rears its head: the "one sided
>argument". How many times have you seen this happen?

I just saw it - and not in a toon.  The second episode of the new
series "8
Simple Rules for Dating My Teenage Daughter" (starring John Ritter and
Katey Sagal ("Married...with Children", "Futurama")) just had an
episode
where one of the main characters' daughters was arrested for
shoplifting
and the father didn't let her give her side of the story (it seems that
the
person she was shopping with did the shoplifting, and one of the store
employees held them both).

[Note: Though Don pretty much explained how it was used in "8 Simple
Rules", I'l explain it anyway: One guy does something objectionable (at
least the other person thinks so) and the other person continuously
berates the first guy, not giving him a word in... and usually the first
guy has something to say that would clear things up. By the way... 8
Simple Rules is actually doing quite well, thank you very much.]

>"Who bought the lie detector (that Carl wanted to buy
>in ...Gal Pal Land), anyway?  Something tells me that
>isn't the last we've seen of it..."
>
>Did that "something" also tell you that we should be
>seeing Arnold with an electronic keyboard after he won
>the money to buy it in a Spelling Bee? Or maybe Rhonda
>wearing glasses when she went to Arnold's suprisingly
>Cool Party? Unless it's Ginger, it seems that
>Nicktoons rarely give a darn about events from
>previous eps.

Just like I pointed out on my site (if you check out the individual
episode
pages).  And Ginger has its share of amnesia; in two early episodes,
they
make it quite clear that she's not allowed to shave her legs, but
beginning
with "Summer of Camp Caprice", her legs are hairless.
Actually, somebody actually asked Craig Bartlett about Rhonda's
glasses; he
said something like "maybe her parents got her contact lenses".  In
fact,
in "Rhonda Goes Broke", she says she's looking for a contact lens when
she
goes dumpster-diving.

>Next year, Ginger enters high school right? That's the
>same demo as the rejected HA! spinoff. So why's Ginger
>allowed to get away with it but not Helga etc.?
>(My guess, Ginger will be booze free while the HA! spinoff
>would partially be about Miriam's addiction to alcohol.)

You guess wrong.  It's because Ginger already targets older kids (which
is
why it's in the TeeNICK block).  Besides, she's going from eighth grade
to
ninth grade, not from fourth grade to ninth grade (like Helga would).
(On top of that, I don't think it was as much the jump from fourth
grade to
ninth grade that kept Nick from having a Patakis pilot made as much as
it
was a combination of (a) its "dark" tone, and (b) the fact that Arnold
wasn't in it - quite a few Arnold fans are only in it to see what
happens
to "Arnold & Helga".)

[Note: Another set of explanations due:
1. In the As Told By Ginger ep "Trouble in Gal Pal Land", one of the
subplots involved Ginger's younger brother Carl wanting to buy a
lie detector.
2. In "Spelling Bee", Arnold eyes a $500 prize in the city 'bee to
buy a keyboard. He wins the bee (not least because Helga deliberately
misses an easy word), but as Don points out: "the keyboard doesn't appear
in any other episodes (so far, anyway)".
3. In "Cool Party", Rhonda throws a party but doesn't invite anyone she
considers a "geek"... it soon becomes a "party of one". It was established
in an earlier ep ("Rhonda's Glasses") that a) she has eyesight problems and
needs glasses, and b) glasses make her geeky. Anyway, she ends up going to
the party for so-called "geeks" Arnold was holding as well... Don points
out: "If Rhonda really wanted to be a geek, why didn't she wear her original
geeky glasses?"
4. The 2nd part refers to "The Patakis", as mentioned previously.]

>Of all the notes there, how could you NOT point out
>that Ted Williams did what Kaline does in this ep? (I
>mean, hitting an HR @ his last AB.)

Mickey Mantle did the same thing - in that case, however, Denny McLain 
pretty much tossed batting practice pitches at Mantle.  (When you're a 
30-game winner - the last pitcher to even come close to 30, by the way 
- 
you can get away with things like that.)

[Note: Referring to the Hey Arnold! ep "The Baseball" where some guy
named Mickey Kaline (Ron Perlman) hit a homer with his last at bat.... 
guess who caught the ball? ;-)]

>I went to disney's website today, when I clicked on
>"TV shows" and then Disney Channel, the top banner
>read: Kim Possible, Lizzie McGuire, The Proud Family
>(remember that this was developed for Nick), More
>Shows, Games, and E-Mail This Page.
>
>Since when did Disney become reliant on just these 3
>frickin' shows?

Since (a) Kim Possible seems to be popular (it's not just the "spy" 
gimmick), (b) The Proud Family is its "see, we can make animation about 
African-Americans too" show, and (c) Lizzie McGuire = Hilary Duff.  
(It's 
probably only a matter of time before she makes a guest appearance on 
Malcolm In The Middle...)

>The likes of Lloyd and Jett Jackson and other live action programming 
are 
>relegated to a list below these "top 3" shows.

When was the last time a new episode of either of these shows aired?  
(When 
was the last time one was even made?)

>1. I was browsing at the local bookstore the other day
>(and note that I live in Thailand) and I notice that
>many of the more known titles are either:
>* fantasy genre
>* series
>* imports
>* any combination of the above 3
>Blame Harry for this.

Nothing new about this, and I blame hobbits more than Harry Potter - 
long 
before the movies, the "Lord of the Rings" books (J.R.R. Tolkein didn't 
like it being called a trilogy) were quite popular.  Also, there didn't 
seem to be any stopping the "Goosebumps" series (although they aren't 
imports and aren't exactly "fantasy") until Harry Potter showed up.

>  Read 'em (no pun intended) and
>weep: in series we have Circle of Magic, Unfortunate
>Events (soon to be a Nick film I'm told), Artemis Fowl
>(now with an Arctic adventure) and Deltora Quest (from
>Australia), and in stand-alones we have Alanna, and
>Everworld (by KA Applegate, who also wrote Animorphs).

You're right about "A Series of Unfortunate Events"; the (live-action) 
movie is currently scheduled for the end of 2003, as far as I know.  
(If 
anybody calls it "Lemony Snicket", that's the pen name of the author - 
"A 
Series of Unfortunate Events" is, in fact, the name of the book series, 
so 
I don't know if that will be the name of the movie.)

[Note: "Unfortunate Events" has since been delayed to 2004, due to 
various problems, including two directors rejecting work in the film. Also,
I've found out that Alanna is actually the first of a series.]

> > Here's one for you: what do the following shows have in common - 
Rugrats,
> > Seinfeld, AfterMASH (the "M*A*S*H" sequel), and The Jackie Thomas 
Show?
>
>I don't know but I'll take a stab: "Making room for
>someone". Jackie Thomas show was also known as  "Make
>Room for Daddy" and Rugrats had a video called "Make
>Room for Dil". Then again, Simpsons isn't in the list
>and they had "Make Room for Lisa".

In order, their casts included Melanie Chartoff, Michael Richards, 
Brandis 
Kemp, and Maryedith Burrell, who were in the cast of ABC's Saturday 
Night 
Live wannabe "Fridays".

>Speaking of RP, what do people have against it I
>wonder? Here's my stab at it: Lame characterisations
>and all those popup screens ("PSYCHE!")

That, and they're pretty much the best at every sport they try.  (I 
suppose 
that counts as "lame characterizations"

>Extra I thought of just now: The omission of Phoebe
>from the credits for Phoebe Takes the Fall... probably
>the only time you're ever gonna see this happen
>(live-action shows already name-check all the major
>characters, and some animated shows do that too).

Lacey Chabert was never credited in "Family Guy" despite being the 
voice of 
Meg in all of its first-season episodes.

I've seen the reverse happen - Julie Kavner was included in the credits 
of 
an episode of "The Simpsons" where her only scene was cut at the last 
minute, and Flea was credited as Donnie in the The Wild Thornberrys 
episode 
"Gift of Gab" even though Donnie wasn't in it (it was a flashback to 
when 
Eliza got her powers "two years ago", and they hadn't found Donnie 
yet).

At least animated shows are using "show-based" credits rather than 
showing 
all of the voices used in that season in every episode (and in some 
cases, 
some people aren't credited as they only use the voices in the first 
ten or 
so episodes of that season).

>One quibble. Despite an obvious commitment to
>diversity -- a bus driver, for example, is a disabled
>vet -- there aren't many girl characters. However,
>devoted fans will want to know that Helga, Arnold's
>powerhouse rival, finally fesses up and says the
>"L-word" to Arnold. Hey, in the neighborhood, that's
>the biggest news since ** Stinky and Sid mooned
>Principal Wartz. **
>-- C.W. Nevius, for the SF Gate.

"SF Gate" is the website for a number of San Francisco/San Jose area 
newspapers.  Nevius works for the San Francisco Chronicle; I think he's 
their main TV critic, which is how he would know about "Hey Arnold!".  
He 
forgot that Harold mooned Wartz as well.

[Note: "Phoebe Takes the Fall" is the name of an ep of Hey Arnold! in 
which Helga trains for a city academic contest... but then ends up pulling
out at the last minute and putting Phoebe in instead, since she apparently
doesn't feel that she deserves to be here (she only got in when Phoebe
let her win the school qualifying competition, thus the ep title). Curiously, 
despite being a major character in this ep, and having her name in the ep 
title, Phoebe's voice actress Anndi McAfee didn't get a credit.
Besides Meg on Family Guy, Chabert is also the main character in The Wild
Thornberrys, Eliza.]

>A couple of years ago, Jerry Schuller submitted a
>script to Klasky-Csupo; however, they rejected the
>script, as they felt that an episode on handicapped
>children was not appropriate for the series.
>
>What do you think? Here's what I think:
>
>1.
>TOMMY: Hey, Kid! You wanna come over and play with us?
>
>Doesn't sound like something Tommy would say...

Throw in an "uh" after "kid" and I can see Tommy saying something like 
that.

>2.
>(Playroom, Open Area: A bully walks up to Chuckie &
>grabs him by the shirt. Seeing this from a distance,
>Nicky comes charging at the bully with his walker and
>plows him over. The bully gets up and runs off
>crying.)
>CHUCKIE: Wow! Thanks!
>NICKY: Hey! Don't mention it!
>
>One word: Huh?

Tommy and company get help from other babies all the time.  Remember 
the 
episode where they're at the park and they have to walk to the water 
fountains on the other side (and it turns into a desert epic)?

>3. It's somewhat weird that they would reject this
>script... after all, one of their cast is handicapped
>(Quan is legally blind, and her character is in the
>script as well). Why not have a handicapped character
>as well?

Probably because the target audience - young kids - wouldn't understand 
what is going on.  (This is why Kimi isn't blind, for example.)  
Besides, 
handicapped characters have been done - three words: "Radical New 
Equipment".

> > >(Playroom, Open Area: A bully walks up to Chuckie &
> > >grabs him by the shirt. Seeing this from a distance,
> > >Nicky comes charging at the bully with his walker and
> > >plows him over. The bully gets up and runs off crying.)
> > >CHUCKIE: Wow! Thanks!
> > >NICKY: Hey! Don't mention it!
> > >
> > >One word: Huh?
> >
> > Tommy and company get help from other babies all the
> > time.  Remember the
> > episode where they're at the park and they have to
> > walk to the water
> > fountains on the other side (and it turns into a
> > desert epic)?
>
>That's not the problem: the problem is that Nicky's
>handicapped. It's not as if he can run fast enough to
>run the bully over...

It depends on the handicap.  If it's a problem with a leg, he can use 
his 
one good leg to build up some momentum.

> > handicapped characters have been done - three words:
> > "Radical New Equipment".
>
>The one where Reg throws a race to an
>artificial-legged snowboarder (the "equipment" the
>title refers to I guess?).

That's the one.

[...]

>Latest numbers say that, like Arnold, [TWT] will likely
>at least recoup its production budget. It's got $24.5m
>of the $25m budget (however, marketing cost $22m).
>I have said at #arnold that this will be precedent for
>those who'd want the 2nd HA film to be produced, as it
>would certainly be better than the first film and it
>would also be in a jungle. Nick are probably thinking:
>"what's the point of making a well-reviewed film if it
>can't rake in the bucks?".

The main reason the HA! film isn't in production right now: studio 
politics.  The politics haven't changed.  (Besides, Craig wants to 
rewrite 
the script again - and he's got time, as they can't get the movie 
released 
before mid-2005.)

[Note: read the rejected script here.]

>In animation, forgotten characters are dime per dozen
>(Nadine and Ruth, anyone?)

Actually, Nadine would have had a larger part in "the jungle movie".  
Ruth 
was written out when Lila became Arnold's new "love interest".

>There are quite a few [forgotten character traits] in Hey Arnold!:
>* Rhonda is short-sighted (besides "Rhonda's Glasses",
>you hardly, if at all, see her wear specs)

She says she wears contacts now, in "Rhonda Goes Broke" (my guess: her 
parents felt she was old enough to wear them after she went through 
finishing school).

>* Mr. Green is a city councilman

Mentioned - briefly - in the movie.

>* And thought not a trait per se... Didn't Arnold want
>to buy an electronic keyboard with the money he won?

You did notice that I mentioned all three of those things on my site?
Let's not forget the bag of money Arnold found in "Bag of Money".

>Also, Didi Pickles on Rugrats is probably the first
>character to have been shown as a student and teacher
>(and not in flashbacks either). She's a student in
>"Back to School" (not yet aired in the US) and there's
>one ep waaaay back in season 1 where she teaches (Now
>why did we never see her in such a role again?
>Probably would detract from the show's focus that's
>why...)

Some stories mention that she's a teacher ("Game Show Didi" comes to 
mind), 
but I'm not sure if she's a full-time teacher or a substitute.  
Considering 
that Stu is unemployed (okay, he's an "inventor", but considering that 
pretty much everything he's invented fell apart, they need to get the 
money 
to raise two babies from somewhere.)

[Previously discussed: a scene in a Christmas ep of As Told by Ginger 
where the title character says "Happy Birthday, Baby J".]

> > (It's controversial because this is about as close as Nickelodeon 
has
> > come to admitting that a non-Jewish religion exists.)
>
>Well, they have mentioned Zen on Rugrats (like in the
>first movie when Stu takes out a locket there's a Zen
>book in the drawer, and like in King Ten Pin where Stu
>is practicing Zen in bowling)... and isn't feng shui a
>somewhat religious activity?

Practicing some Zen beliefs and practicing Zen Buddhism are two 
different 
things.

>Seriously, why is it that practically only Jews get a
>notable mention? Isn't Christianity the major religion
>of the US?

"Christianity" isn't "a" religion, and that might be part of the 
problem.  (There was an episode of "Cheers" where Woody and his wife 
got 
into an argument over religion - they were both Lutherans, but one was 
Lutheran Church of America and the other Missouri Synod.)  Besides, you 
can 
mention Judaism without offending most Christians (after all, Jesus of 
Nazareth was born Jewish), but the very nature of Christianity offends 
Jews 
(who believe that there can't be a "one son of God").

>I think Nick realized that the first 4 eps of the TWT
>miniseries would be eligible for Prime Time Emmys
>(they aired at 8:30pm), and the 5th wouldn't if it
>were to air at 5:30pm. They're probably saving it for
>airing during primetime as well.

Since only one episode is submitted for nomination for the entire 
series 
(in theory - obviously nominations are based on the entire series), it 
doesn't really matter which episodes air in prime time.

>Besides, I see boarders saying that the final one is the most 
important of 
>the eps.

So it would make sense to show it along with the others.

>Also, since many of the ATBG eps have aired overseas
>first, I have a feeling that those eps would be
>declared ineligible (including "And Then She Was
>Gone", which aired in the UK first).

That's not true with these TWT episodes - these were definitely "world 
premieres", mainly because quite a few other countries haven't had the 
movie in theaters yet.

[Stuff about Eliza's sister Debbie dreaming that she'd been turned
into a baboon and how it ties in to the film]

But again, it only takes one eligible episode to qualify a series, and
there's no way to enforce basing the nominations on the episodes 
submitted 
for entry - even in the final Emmy voting (which is now done at home 
rather 
than in some Beverly Hills hotel).
(But you know as well as I do that one of the Fox series will win 
again.)

(By the way, that ATBG title is "And She Was Gone" - it was written as 
"And 
Then She Was Gone", but somebody discovered a mystery novel with that 
title.)

> > it doesn't really matter which episodes air in prime time.
>
>If the ep they submit didn't air in prime time, it's not eligible, is
it?

No, but as long as one episode is aired in prime-time, technically the
entire series is nominated regardless of when the episodes aired, and
virtually nobody votes for an animated series based just on the
submitted
episode.  (Back in the days when the award voting was held at a hotel,
they
could try to enforce voting based on the submitted episodes, but now
that
everybody votes at home, it's much harder.)

> > (But you know as well as I do that one of the Fox series will win
again.)
>
>Yeah, ever since Fox stopped pursuing a best comedy
>series nod for the Simpsons (which was like in 93-94),
>they've won this category every year. What's up with
>that?

Not true - Pinky & The Brain's Christmas Special won in 1996.  (I think
that was the first year The Simpsons returned to the animated category;
I
know The Simpsons was nominated as an animated series.)  It helps Fox
that
they have had three nominees out of the five each year beginning in
2000
(when Futurama started), and Fox's shows are pretty much the only ones
aimed at adults that were well-written.

[Note: The debacle in question involves a 5 episode story of the
show, the first 4 eps of which were shown one week in February, but
after they ran promos that the 5th would air that weekend during a
marathon of the show, they ended up airing a marathon of The Fairly
OddParents instead. It has also been made known that (and this is
straight from the awards manager) "as long as there was a commitment
to air the episode in the USA within the timeframe, the fact that it
aired somewhere else first does not automatically disqualify it from
Emmy consideration." (This means, among other things, the "The Wild
Thornberrys" episode "Sir Nigel" and the "As Told by Ginger" episode
"And She Was Gone" are both eligible to be submitted, in spite of
those two premiering outside of the US before their US premieres.)]

>Basically, in any competition where there are two big
>rivals, the winner will turn out to be someone who
>*isn't* one of the two.

Latest one: SpongeBob SquarePants "The Great Snail Race".  Squidward
gets a 
new "pedigree" snail and plans to enter her in the annual Bikini Bottom 
Snail Race.  SpongeBob turns into the archetypical "monster coach" 
trying 
to get Gary to train (and train...and train) for the race.  Meanwhile, 
Patrick plans to enter his own snail, Rocky ("Patrick, that's a rock" - 
"I 
know - nerves of steel!").  In the race, SpongeBob's training is too 
much 
for Gary, who ends up crashing into a wall auto-race style; Squidward's 
snail turns around just before the finish to help him (and of course, 
they 
fall in love); the winner is...Rocky (who you never do see actually 
"move").

(Another cliche: events where characters involved in the show seem to 
be 
the only participants - the snail race consisted only of Rocky, Gary, 
and 
Squidward's snail...and on top of that, they had numbers 6, 7, and 8 on 
them.)

[...]

>Whenever there's a party on a TV show, one of the main characters is
>bound to be the only one in a certain group (for example, their 
classroom)
>who's not invited... and usually because the person delivering the 
invitations
>accidentally dropped the invitation for that particular person. I 
mean, 
>I've heard of it occuring
>on many TV shows, but only once in a film (it happens to Jamie Renee 
Smith 
>in "MVP"... and
>it's not the main plot focus). Either that, or it's a situation 
involving 
>2 parties being
>held on the same day.

"Two parties on the same day" is not that big of a cliche (although I 
do 
remember an episode of "Maude" back in the 1970s where that was used).  
A 
better party cliche: the party is (a) unauthorized, and (b) usually 
being 
held in the home of one of the main characters.
(Another "minor" party cliche: somebody doesn't go, or leaves early, 
because of somebody else who wasn't invited intentionally.  Rhonda's 
"cool" 
party on "Hey Arnold!" and the party Lil goes to in "All Grown Up" 
immediately come to mind.)

[...]

[Note: check out the previous page to check out what I meant about
the "Dan and Dave" cliche. In the email I sent to him, I mentioned instances
of this happening on Mike, Lu and Og, Detention, The Weird Al Show
(remember that?), and Rocket Power. It should also be noted that the first 
ep of the new Rugrats spinoff "All Grown Up" had just aired about a week 
before.]

>Other instances of a character important to a story having nothing to 
say 
>that comes to the top of my head (barring animals, of course):
>* Arnold's competitor Seymour in Hey Arnold!, "Eating Contest" 
(reading 
>the creds... I see they don't list anyone for Seymour).

Seymour burps, but that's about all he "says" - he's too busy eating to 
talk.

[A mention of Maggie's "silence" in the Simpsons ep "Lisa's Wedding"...
we've done this already]

(Another cliche: something that's been "secret" for a long time about 
to be 
revealed, but it isn't.  For example, in two "Hey Arnold!" episodes, 
somebody is reading Arnold's name, but they can't read the last name 
(in 
fact, in one episode, even Helga wonders what his last name is); on 
"Cheers", when Norm's wife Vera is about to appear, Diane throws a 
pumpkin 
pie at Sam, who ducks, and when Vera is seen, her face is covered with 
the 
pie.)

And you left out the two obvious ones: the two Daryls on 
"Newhart".  (Seriously, the two actors' contracts forbade them from 
saying 
anything (except when they yelled "QUIET!" in the last episode) when 
they 
were seen in public with William Sanderson (the actor who played their 
brother Larry.)

[...]

>That Cheers ep is a classic ep, I'm told. And how
>about Timmy's parents on FOP? We hear a truck whoosh
>by instead when they introduce themselves.

"But you can just call me (Dad / Mom)".

[...]

[Notes: FOP = The Fairly OddParents... Don's quote is apparently the
first thing said by Timmy's parents after the whoosh. Also mentioned in the
original email about silent roles: one of the characters on the sitcom
Jesse, Mr. Foley on Remember WENN (although not by name)... and Ian in the
As Told By Ginger pilot (the main reason Ginger goes to the party Courtney
is having).]

>All Grown Up! (an upcoming plot, according to Cooltoons): Chuckie 
falls in 
>love with a girl, who happens to actually be in love with Tommy.
>Ginger (April Fools): Dodie falls in love with a boy, who happens to 
>actually be in love with Macie.
>And if that wasn't enough: Ginger (Love With a Proper Transfer 
Student): 
>Dodie falls in love with a boy, who happens to fall in love with 
Ginger.

Cliche.
Hey Arnold!: Arnold "likes" Lila, who falls in love with Arnold's 
cousin 
Arnie...who, it turns out, falls in love with Helga.

>That thing about "Next Question" reminds me about something I read in 
a 
>book on game shows (if you're
>familiar with the scene in "Quiz Show" where all Herbert Stemple 
thinks 
>after seeing a program caption
>for 21 is "Herbert takes a dive, this week on 21"...that scene really 
did 
>happen).

But not as it appeared in the movie.  In reality, had Herb gotten the 
"Marty" question correct, he would have won the game, and, as he put it 
later in an interview, "the world would have never heard of Charles van 
Doren"; instead, the game ended in a tie, so they went to a fifth (I 
think) 
round (where the winner would get $2500 times the difference in the 
scores...and if the champion lost, he lost the same amount, although 
Stempel didn't receive anywhere near what his announced final total 
was).  Also, in the movie, it appeared as if van Doren went to the 
Senate 
pretty much right after he lost (although he did miss the "Who is the 
King 
of Belgium?" question in his last game), but in reality, it happened 
years 
later, and I think "Twenty-One" had already been cancelled.
(Side note: the only known remaining episode of the daytime version of 
the 
old "The Price is Right" includes a reference to an upcoming 
"Twenty-One" 
which turned out to be the one where van Doren lost.)

>  In "The Million Dollar Chance of a Lifetime" there was one time 
where 
> the clues said "Philipines" and "shoes" and others, and
>the board read: I_ELDA _ARCOS. One pair of contestants couldn't figure 
it 
>out... oddly, neither could the  other, even though the answer to the 
>question, Imelda
>Marcos, had been in the news for quite some time.

And there would have been only two letters left to select (the "M", and 
the 
"stinger")
(Meanwhile, so many couples won the million dollars that they had to 
switch 
to something like $100,000 cash and $900,000 in prizes.)

>You mentioned that there was practically no Phoebe in the HA! film. 
IMO, 
>that's like leaving Debbie out of a
>TWT film (or Marianne for that matter, and it seems like they just 
might 
>do that in Rugrats Go Wild).

True, but remember, there was no intention of "Arnold Saves the 
Neighborhood" being a theatrical release when it was written and 
recorded...and animated.  There are very few episodes, after the first 
season, where most of the kids appear (I think "Cool Party" was written 
specifically as a "reunion" show of sorts - how many other episodes 
have 
Sid, Curly, and Nadine?).  The Wild Thornberrys, on the other hand, 
have a 
"main cast" of just six characters.

>What I'm really asking, is whether there has been a series-turned-film 
>that practically ignored a significant character before HA!.

Has there been a series-turned-film with so many "significant 
characters"?  (And if live-action films count, "McHale's Navy Joins the 
Air 
Force" didn't have Ernest Borgnine in it...)

>BTW, any idea whether Phoebe's supposed to have a bigger role in TJM?

Well, considering how many rewrites it's gone through, it's hard to 
say, 
but I think that it was written to give pretty much every kid (if not 
every 
adult as well) a part (even Nadine, although she'd be right at home in 
a 
Central American rainforest just crawling with reptile and insect 
life).

[Note: The part about game shows was in response to a part of an ep of Ginger, 
where she's in a school quiz, and one of the questions asked is about Samuel 
Clemens' nom de plume. You can read the details here... scroll down to the part 
about the ep "Next Question".]

>3. Slam
>Steve Mindykowski said that "Slam could've been a
>strong block for Nick if they gave it half a chance.

Not in the middle of Sunday afternoon.  The best time for SLAM! is
probably
Friday nights, but Nickelodeon thinks that's when it should air its
"popular" programs (after the popularity of ABC's "TGIF" Friday night
block).
By the way, Micah Wright was not a member of a union - had he been in
one,
he wouldn't have been hired in the first place.  (The main problem was,
Nickelodeon thought he was the "ringleader" trying to get the other
writers
to join him in asking for union representation, especially after the
Writers Guild of America's "informational picket" outside of the new
Nickelodeon Animation Studio when it opened.)

[Note: This message was sent soon after the demise of Nick's action-
oriented block called Slam... the full message was part of a longer message
which also featured the Thornberrys and All Grown Up!.]

>"Probably because popularity has little to do with
>Academy Award nominations?  How many years has the #1
>film at the box office not been nominated for Best
>Picture?"
>
>Actually, quite a lot. But you're kind of missing the
>point here. Treasure Planet had less gross AND was
>less favored by critics than the Thornberrys.

I didn't miss the point at all.  There is little correlation between
either
critical praise or box office success and Oscar nominations -
especially if
the "screening committee" ends up consisting of people who are
"animation
junkies" (and considering that each member had to watch at least 15
films -
80% of the 18 submitted for entry - that's not such a bad assumption).
A
number of people are turned off by the Klasky-Csupo animation style.
(The
answer to your next question - "So how does 'As Told by Ginger' keep
getting Emmy nominations" - is that once you get past the shows that
are
pretty much "automatic" nominations (The Simpsons, King of the Hill,
andn
Futurama), ATBG is probably the most "adult" show out there that
doesn't go
"over the top" (i.e. "South Park", although that show did get a
nomination
last year - and, based on the new "Kenny's back, and he stays alive
this
time" season, should get another nomination this year as well).)

(And speaking of "adult", I saw "The Proud Family", and Nickelodeon did
NOT
make a mistake by passing on it - its target audience is FAR above
Nickelodeon's (and it wouldn't be a good fit in TeeNICK).  I'm a little
surprised it's on Disney; I see it as more of a Cartoon Network-type
show.)

>Indeed I was expecting Thornberrys to be nominated.

I figured it was between Thornberrys (mainly on the strength of the
Paul
Simon song) and Treasure Planet for the final spot.

(...)

>While we're on the subject of TWT... this film and
>Jimmy both opened against LOTR, and both films
>received aboit 77% rating with Rotten Tomatoes. TWT
>actually had it better with a known fan base from the
>TV show. So why is it that Jimmy opened better, and
>ended up grossing about twice as much as TWT?

Either JN had better word of mouth, or better repeat business.
Remember,
the vast majority of money for animated movies comes from kids, and
pretty
much every review is targeted as adults.  (Example: Roger Ebert came
out
and said that kids would like "The Lizzie Maguire Movie", but his
review
was for adults - thumbs down.  Rotten Tomatoes counts that as a
"rotten".)
Also, don't forget that JN had a few commercial-length shorts airing on
Nickelodeon for months before the movie was released.

[Note: this had previously been a discussion on the alt.tv.nickelodeon
newsgroup on why the Thornberrys film was nominated for Best Song, but
not Best Animated Feature, at the 2003 Oscars. Also mentioned is the
Nick-snub-turned-Disney-hit series The Proud Family.]

>After having a bigger role in RGW than in the previous
>2 Rugrats flicks, what's next for Susie? How about,
>having a bigger role in AGU than she ever had in Rugrats?

If the opening credits of the one episode they've aired is anything to
go
by, this wouldn't be surprising.  My guess is, they need somebody of
Angelica's age who is, well, "better" than Angelica so they can send
the
message "see what you can become if you don't act like Angelica?".

>And while we're on this page, the same press release
>also mentions that Tommy has "burgeoning directorial
>talents".

Probably sounds like the basis for one or two episodes (school project,
home video, whatever).  Twister probably does it better...

[Note: clicking on the link above will take you to a page containing
the press release announcing the All Grown Up! series.]

>"Anyway, this has been bugging me since the first time
>I saw it, Alright by the last race Theadore had 1 1/2
>points, Otto has 1 point, and Reggie had 1/2 point.
>Then Theadore won, but he cheated and Reggie came in
>second so she should have gotten that point. Then it
>would've been Reggie with 1 and 1/2 points and Otto
>with 1 point, but then at the end it said they were
>king and queen wikikamukau (however you spell it).
>Reggie won didnt she?"
>
>OK, here's my take:
>Reg actually tied with Ted in the final race, so the
>totals would then read:
>Ted 2 (windsurfing win, plus ties in snowboarding and
>dirtboarding)
>Reg 1 (ties in snowboarding and dirtboarding)
>and Otto 1 (bikes win).
>Taking Ted out would then put Reg and Otto "on top". I
>think that's what they probably did.

If you disqualify Ted, then Reggie has 3 wins (everything except dirt
biking).  However, in all fairness, Otto lost in sailboarding (I for
one
don't call it "windsurfing" if it's around a fixed course) and
dirtboarding
because of sabotage, and who knows how he would have done in
snowboarding
had he not stopped to help Twister down the mountain (which, if you ask
me,
should have meant Team Rocket (oops, wrong show) should be disqualified
-
there's no way competitors should be allowed to aid each other like
that),
so there's no way of knowing who would have really won, so you put both
of
them on the cover of that magazine (oops, end of the wrong 90-minute
episode).

[Note: that last bit is a reference to the other 90 minute of the show thus
far, "Reggie's Beach Break". Also, I pointed out that Reg would only have 2,
not 3, wins due to her finishing last in sailboards.]