Movies and TV Does anybody watch "Burn Notice?"

**Reaper16** · 01-26-2010, 02:45 PM

The "strings" don't matter for shows like Burn Notice or 24. They're cartoons. Enjoy the ride.

Speaking of which, how weird was it to have the annoying guy from Dana/Jennie's past on 24 be the annoying son of the insurance scammer on Burn Notice? It is quite the achievement to be on two popular shows in the same week.

**Baby Lee** · 01-26-2010, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reaper16

The "strings" don't matter for shows like Burn Notice or 24. They're cartoons. Enjoy the ride.

Speaking of which, how weird was it to have the annoying guy from Dana/Jennie's past on 24 be the annoying son of the insurance scammer on Burn Notice? It is quite the achievement to be on two popular shows in the same week.

Strings always matter. And I'm not just talknig about plot holes or shortcuts. I'm talking about when the craft shortcomings detract from the story. It makes the difference between 'Whoa!' and 'WFT?'

Think the difference between SW:Ep1 and the slew of knockoff [BSG original] in it's wake, or the difference between The West Wing and Studio 60.

**Reaper16** · 01-26-2010, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

Strings always matter. And I'm not just talknig about plot holes or shortcuts. I'm talking about when the craft shortcomings detract from the story. It makes the difference between 'Whoa!' and 'WFT?'

Think the difference between SW:Ep1 and the slew of knockoff [BSG original] in it's wake, or the difference between The West Wing and Studio 60.

I'll nitpick your string, then. Did the episode ever say that it was easier for Michael to break in to the place (to cover the tracks to as to save Tina)? I didn't hear it. Using Tina is far easier especially from a standpoint of risk, which is why they used her in the first place. Michael did the break-in thing as an apology. It was reckless but driven by emotion; an interesting thing to see if Mr. Weston does with increasing frequency. As for the other string... maybe months down the road the scammers get off on reasonable doubt or something but they probably wouldn't have the information to go back and follow up on the people that Michael and crew saved. You're either letting a professional tic color your viewing of a show that is fairly unbelievable to begin with or you don't realize that the future legal case against the scammers doesn't matter to the show at all.

kcxiv · 01-27-2010, 12:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reaper16

I'll nitpick your string, then. Did the episode ever say that it was easier for Michael to break in to the place (to cover the tracks to as to save Tina)? I didn't hear it. Using Tina is far easier especially from a standpoint of risk, which is why they used her in the first place. Michael did the break-in thing as an apology. It was reckless but driven by emotion; an interesting thing to see if Mr. Weston does with increasing frequency. As for the other string... maybe months down the road the scammers get off on reasonable doubt or something but they probably wouldn't have the information to go back and follow up on the people that Michael and crew saved. You're either letting a professional tic color your viewing of a show that is fairly unbelievable to begin with or you don't realize that the future legal case against the scammers doesn't matter to the show at all.

pretty much what i said a page back, but you said it in more words and more clearly.haha

He was prepared for a 65 year old to take the fall and it would have only been a loss of job for her. Him getting into it, means a whole lot more mess if he gets caught. He wanted to do it the easy way, until his mom didnt like it and it clearly was eating away at her.

Anyways, all shows are like this. just about EVERY SINGLE ONE.

**Baby Lee** · 01-27-2010, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reaper16

I'll nitpick your string, then. Did the episode ever say that it was easier for Michael to break in to the place (to cover the tracks to as to save Tina)? I didn't hear it. Using Tina is far easier especially from a standpoint of risk, which is why they used her in the first place. Michael did the break-in thing as an apology. It was reckless but driven by emotion; an interesting thing to see if Mr. Weston does with increasing frequency. As for the other string... maybe months down the road the scammers get off on reasonable doubt or something but they probably wouldn't have the information to go back and follow up on the people that Michael and crew saved. You're either letting a professional tic color your viewing of a show that is fairly unbelievable to begin with or you don't realize that the future legal case against the scammers doesn't matter to the show at all.

Actually, the strings that took me out of it were more subtle things, but I didn't reference them because I didn't commit them all to memory. So I went with the break-in because it stood out in my mind, not because it was the crux of my critique. If I had the will to, I guess I could rewatch and tick off the specifics, but it's not worth it.

That said, your last sentence is pure-D horse shit. Ohh, these poor put upon people need Michael Westen's particular skill set to get them out of a dangerous jam with an intricate plot to get the bad guys out of their lives and release them from danger, but it doesn't matter if that intricate plot falls apart tomorrow and the bad guys are back on the street exonerated and pissed as hell that someone tried to bring them down, because Michael Westen has moved on to a new episode.

Neglecting the details that actually delivers them from danger obviates the need for his skill set altogether. Why didn't they just hire some mook to tie the guy up. 'I doubt he'll get out of those ropes for, like, hours. So see ya."

And so we're clear, I love the show and have watched every episode. So this critique was of a good show that let me down a little this once in a vague, corner cutting manner. I'm not saying the show is pure shit or anything, so lets not get all twisted.

**Reaper16** · 01-27-2010, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

That said, your last sentence is pure-D horse shit. Ohh, these poor put upon people need Michael Westen's particular skill set to get them out of a dangerous jam with an intricate plot to get the bad guys out of their lives and release them from danger, but it doesn't matter if that intricate plot falls apart tomorrow and the bad guys are back on the street exonerated and pissed as hell that someone tried to bring them down, because Michael Westen has moved on to a new episode.

This has happened since the show began. Some of the resolutions have been far more ridiculous than the one on the last episode. Even still, the case brought against the scammers may not even need those stolen files to get a proper conviction. Michael says that the father and son were going at it after the son's arrest and "practically handed" the case to the investigators.

Frankie · 01-27-2010, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

Strings always matter. And I'm not just talknig about plot holes or shortcuts. I'm talking about when the craft shortcomings detract from the story. It makes the difference between 'Whoa!' and 'WFT?'

Totally agree.

Mastashake · 01-28-2010, 03:10 AM

This show is epically good, just because Bruce Campbell is in it.

01-28-2010, 03:10 AM	#8
Mastashake Insomniac Join Date: Mar 2005 Casino cash: $10004900	This show is epically good, just because Bruce Campbell is in it. __________________ "Leadership is a matter of having people look at you and gain confidence, seeing how you react. If you're in control, they're in control."
Posts: 700