Re: ABC orders fantasy pilot

Anim8rFSK wrote:
> In article <13v083cpkqgn4e4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>  Michael Bowker <mikeb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> 
>> Anim8rFSK wrote:
>>> In article <13uvnfboafn229f@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>>>  Michael Bowker <mikeb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Anim8rFSK wrote:
>>>>> In article <f9fvu3p1pafsip44jshrfb51tpd8uudncl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>>>>>  Brian Thorn <bthorn64@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 20:34:48 -0700 (PDT), "Ian J. Ball"
>>>>>> <iball@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Psych" without the laughs?
>>>>>>> Maybe. But I've never had any desire to watch "Psych", 
>>>>>> "Psych" is a lot like "Monk".
>>>>> Except Psych is usually good, and Monk is usually bad.  :(
>>>>>
>>>>>  The so-called mysteries are usually very
>>>>>> weak. The show lives and dies on the chemistry and interplay
between
>>>>>> its leads. Shalhoub elevates "Monk" far above its mundane
foundations.
>>>>>> Roday and Hill are just plain fun to watch and do the same for
>>>>>> "Psych".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Brian
>>>> Monk was good first season.  But they ran into a trap.  They can't
"fix" 
>>>> monk without destroying the show and for some of us the static 
>>>> unchanging "disturbed" Monk is hard to watch (and get's harder and 
>>>> harder to watch every season).  I dropped out when they just switched

>>>> Monk's minder.
>>> Yes.  Monk used to be good, and has had a pretty much linear decline.
>>>
>>> Just literally saw an NBC ad for Monk and Psych come to NBC next
Sunday!
>>>
>> <shudder>
>>
>> Well I won't be watching.
> 
> Hey, they might be starting from the beginning, in which case Monk would

> be good!
> 
> Or starting from any point, in which case Psych will be good!   :)
> 

With USA level commercials?  I've already seen them.  Well not all the 
psych, but the fake psychic bit doesn't really thrill me. :)