Megalextoria
Retro computing and gaming, sci-fi books, tv and movies and other geeky stuff.

Home » Sci-Fi/Fantasy » MST3K » Should MST3K Have Continued Forever?
Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend 
Switch to threaded view of this topic Create a new topic Submit Reply
Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #41895] Sat, 09 March 2013 04:38 Go to next message
TMC is currently offline  TMC
Messages: 21
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
Junior Member
http://officialfan.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=offtopic&am p;action=display&thread=467415

I'm of the opinion that MST3K should have been liked Doctor Who and
just had a revolving cast. The concept just seems too good to not keep
going and the types of characters (a host, an evil scientist, her
goons, the bots) seem flexible enough to cast a different actors into.

There would of course be downsides. For instance there are only so
many and movies out there and even fewer that MST3K could show and
would suit the format. However, taking into account they have the
entire history of cinema to work with it would be quite a while before
they ran out. Plus, time wouldn't just stand still and new bad movies
would continue being made. Also, as a last resort they could always
use the same movie twice. I'm sure a Manos riffing from 2013 with an
all new cast would be quite different from the original.

Another downside could be that some replacements could be weak and
thus entire years of the show could be lame. However, that's something
every continuous series has to face.
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #41899 is a reply to message #41895] Sat, 09 March 2013 06:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Professor Bubba is currently offline  Professor Bubba
Messages: 8
Registered: November 2012
Karma: 0
Junior Member
In article
<dcbe948f-3c33-4b0b-881b-332bbf1ac455@i5g2000pbj.googlegroups.com>, TMC
<tmc1982@gmail.com> wrote:

>

> http://officialfan.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=offtopic&am p;action=display&threa

> d=467415

>

> I'm of the opinion that MST3K should have been liked Doctor Who and

> just had a revolving cast. The concept just seems too good to not keep

> going and the types of characters (a host, an evil scientist, her

> goons, the bots) seem flexible enough to cast a different actors into.

>

> There would of course be downsides. For instance there are only so

> many and movies out there and even fewer that MST3K could show and

> would suit the format. However, taking into account they have the

> entire history of cinema to work with it would be quite a while before

> they ran out. Plus, time wouldn't just stand still and new bad movies

> would continue being made. Also, as a last resort they could always

> use the same movie twice. I'm sure a Manos riffing from 2013 with an

> all new cast would be quite different from the original.

>

> Another downside could be that some replacements could be weak and

> thus entire years of the show could be lame. However, that's something

> every continuous series has to face.



MST3K was tapped out long before it went away. I loved it long time,
but Joel left and, all of a sudden, everybody seemed to be trying too
hard to be funny. The shark jumped for me when they did the 1952 flick
Invasion U.S.A., and they missed all sorts of beats. The film
"starred" Edward G. Robinson Jr., but there wasn't even a line about
that. They did make a point of riffing on the two Lois Lanes (Phyllis
Coates and Noel Neill both appear briefly, and separately, in the
film), but they somehow misidentified another actress as Phyllis. How
do you do something like MST3K and not know who Phyllis Coates is?

Joel and others later did a thing called Cinematic Titanic, which had
the same flavor as MST3K with silhouettes and all, while Mike and crew
did audio-only commentary tracks that you're supposed to sync with your
copy of the movie. This neatly saved Mike all that licensing money and
permission-seeking. Neither effort seemed to gain any traction,
though.
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #41920 is a reply to message #41899] Sat, 09 March 2013 11:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
anim8rFSK is currently offline  anim8rFSK
Messages: 210
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <090320130623148920%bubba@nowhere.edu.invalid>,
Professor Bubba <bubba@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:

> In article

> <dcbe948f-3c33-4b0b-881b-332bbf1ac455@i5g2000pbj.googlegroups.com>, TMC

> <tmc1982@gmail.com> wrote:

>

>>

>> http://officialfan.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=offtopic&am p;action=display&thr

>> ea

>> d=467415

>>

>> I'm of the opinion that MST3K should have been liked Doctor Who and

>> just had a revolving cast. The concept just seems too good to not keep

>> going and the types of characters (a host, an evil scientist, her

>> goons, the bots) seem flexible enough to cast a different actors into.

>>

>> There would of course be downsides. For instance there are only so

>> many and movies out there and even fewer that MST3K could show and

>> would suit the format. However, taking into account they have the

>> entire history of cinema to work with it would be quite a while before

>> they ran out. Plus, time wouldn't just stand still and new bad movies

>> would continue being made. Also, as a last resort they could always

>> use the same movie twice. I'm sure a Manos riffing from 2013 with an

>> all new cast would be quite different from the original.

>>

>> Another downside could be that some replacements could be weak and

>> thus entire years of the show could be lame. However, that's something

>> every continuous series has to face.

>

>

> MST3K was tapped out long before it went away. I loved it long time,

> but Joel left and, all of a sudden, everybody seemed to be trying too

> hard to be funny. The shark jumped for me when they did the 1952 flick

> Invasion U.S.A., and they missed all sorts of beats. The film


For me it jumped with the movie and THIS ISLAND EARTH.

> "starred" Edward G. Robinson Jr., but there wasn't even a line about

> that. They did make a point of riffing on the two Lois Lanes (Phyllis

> Coates and Noel Neill both appear briefly, and separately, in the

> film), but they somehow misidentified another actress as Phyllis. How

> do you do something like MST3K and not know who Phyllis Coates is?

>

> Joel and others later did a thing called Cinematic Titanic, which had

> the same flavor as MST3K with silhouettes and all, while Mike and crew

> did audio-only commentary tracks that you're supposed to sync with your

> copy of the movie. This neatly saved Mike all that licensing money and

> permission-seeking. Neither effort seemed to gain any traction,

> though.


I think Cinema Titanic is dead, but Rifftrax is still going, and pretty
funny (Birdemic is a riot).

--
"Every time a Kardashian gets a TV show, an angel dies."
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #41921 is a reply to message #41899] Sat, 09 March 2013 12:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mason Barge is currently offline  Mason Barge
Messages: 4
Registered: November 2012
Karma: 0
Junior Member
On Sat, 09 Mar 2013 06:23:14 -0500, Professor Bubba
<bubba@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:

> In article

> <dcbe948f-3c33-4b0b-881b-332bbf1ac455@i5g2000pbj.googlegroups.com>, TMC

> <tmc1982@gmail.com> wrote:

>

>>

>> http://officialfan.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=offtopic&am p;action=display&threa

>> d=467415

>>

>> I'm of the opinion that MST3K should have been liked Doctor Who and

>> just had a revolving cast. The concept just seems too good to not keep

>> going and the types of characters (a host, an evil scientist, her

>> goons, the bots) seem flexible enough to cast a different actors into.

>>

>> There would of course be downsides. For instance there are only so

>> many and movies out there and even fewer that MST3K could show and

>> would suit the format. However, taking into account they have the

>> entire history of cinema to work with it would be quite a while before

>> they ran out. Plus, time wouldn't just stand still and new bad movies

>> would continue being made. Also, as a last resort they could always

>> use the same movie twice. I'm sure a Manos riffing from 2013 with an

>> all new cast would be quite different from the original.

>>

>> Another downside could be that some replacements could be weak and

>> thus entire years of the show could be lame. However, that's something

>> every continuous series has to face.

>

>

> MST3K was tapped out long before it went away. I loved it long time,

> but Joel left and, all of a sudden, everybody seemed to be trying too

> hard to be funny. The shark jumped for me when they did the 1952 flick

> Invasion U.S.A., and they missed all sorts of beats.


It was indeed a shame. It could have "theoretically" gone on for
decades -- wouldn't you love to hear them do an episode from
Revolution, or Last Resort, or some similar? Walking Dead?
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #41969 is a reply to message #41920] Sat, 09 March 2013 21:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Michael OConnor is currently offline  Michael OConnor
Messages: 3
Registered: March 2013
Karma: 0
Junior Member
On Mar 9, 11:31 am, anim8rFSK <anim8r...@cox.net> wrote:
> In article <090320130623148920%bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid>,

>  Professor Bubba <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>> In article

>> <dcbe948f-3c33-4b0b-881b-332bbf1ac...@i5g2000pbj.googlegroups.com>, TMC

>> <tmc1...@gmail.com> wrote:

>

>>> http://officialfan.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=offtopic&am p;action=disp...

>>> ea

>>> d=467415

>

>>> I'm of the opinion that MST3K should have been liked Doctor Who and

>>> just had a revolving cast. The concept just seems too good to not keep

>>> going and the types of characters (a host, an evil scientist, her

>>> goons, the bots) seem flexible enough to cast a different actors into..

>

>>> There would of course be downsides. For instance there are only so

>>> many and movies out there and even fewer that MST3K could show and

>>> would suit the format. However, taking into account they have the

>>> entire history of cinema to work with it would be quite a while before

>>> they ran out. Plus, time wouldn't just stand still and new bad movies

>>> would continue being made. Also, as a last resort they could always

>>> use the same movie twice. I'm sure a Manos riffing from 2013 with an

>>> all new cast would be quite different from the original.

>

>>> Another downside could be that some replacements could be weak and

>>> thus entire years of the show could be lame. However, that's something

>>> every continuous series has to face.

>

>> MST3K was tapped out long before it went away.  I loved it long time,

>> but Joel left and, all of a sudden, everybody seemed to be trying too

>> hard to be funny.  The shark jumped for me when they did the 1952 flick

>> Invasion U.S.A., and they missed all sorts of beats.  The film

>

> For me it jumped with the movie and THIS ISLAND EARTH.

>

>> "starred" Edward G. Robinson Jr., but there wasn't even a line about

>> that.  They did make a point of riffing on the two Lois Lanes (Phyllis

>> Coates and Noel Neill both appear briefly, and separately, in the

>> film), but they somehow misidentified another actress as Phyllis.  How

>> do you do something like MST3K and not know who Phyllis Coates is?

>

>> Joel and others later did a thing called Cinematic Titanic, which had

>> the same flavor as MST3K with silhouettes and all, while Mike and crew

>> did audio-only commentary tracks that you're supposed to sync with your

>> copy of the movie.  This neatly saved Mike all that licensing money and

>> permission-seeking.  Neither effort seemed to gain any traction,

>> though.

>

> I think Cinema Titanic is dead, but Rifftrax is still going, and pretty

> funny (Birdemic is a riot).


I went to see Cinematic Titanic a year ago, and they did some crappy
low budget 70's movie about this serial killer who could travel via
his astral form from prison and his ghost or whatever was going around
murdering women in the small town he came from. I thought it was very
funny, and I don't understand why they can't adapt CT to television.
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #41970 is a reply to message #41921] Sat, 09 March 2013 22:44 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Remysun is currently offline  Remysun
Messages: 6
Registered: May 2012
Karma: 0
Junior Member
On Mar 9, 12:23 pm, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:

> It was indeed a shame.  It could have "theoretically" gone on for

> decades -- wouldn't you love to hear them do an episode from

> Revolution, or Last Resort, or some similar?  Walking Dead?


Dave Barry kind of did that blogging about 24. It was awesome.
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #41971 is a reply to message #41970] Sat, 09 March 2013 22:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Obveeus is currently offline  Obveeus
Messages: 31
Registered: November 2012
Karma: 0
Member
"Remysun" <remysun2000@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 9, 12:23 pm, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:

>

>> It was indeed a shame. It could have "theoretically" gone on for

>> decades -- wouldn't you love to hear them do an episode from

>> Revolution, or Last Resort, or some similar? Walking Dead?

>

> Dave Barry kind of did that blogging about 24. It was awesome.


For people that like to watch bad movies, one option is a subscription with:
http://www.cultmovienetwork.com/
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #42060 is a reply to message #41970] Sun, 10 March 2013 13:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mason Barge is currently offline  Mason Barge
Messages: 4
Registered: November 2012
Karma: 0
Junior Member
On Sat, 9 Mar 2013 19:44:12 -0800 (PST), Remysun
<remysun2000@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Mar 9, 12:23 pm, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:

>

>> It was indeed a shame.  It could have "theoretically" gone on for

>> decades -- wouldn't you love to hear them do an episode from

>> Revolution, or Last Resort, or some similar?  Walking Dead?

>

> Dave Barry kind of did that blogging about 24. It was awesome.


Now that HAD to be funny. I might have to look it up :)
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #42159 is a reply to message #42060] Sun, 10 March 2013 22:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Remysun is currently offline  Remysun
Messages: 6
Registered: May 2012
Karma: 0
Junior Member
On Mar 10, 1:06 pm, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Mar 2013 19:44:12 -0800 (PST), Remysun

>

> <remysun2...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> On Mar 9, 12:23 pm, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:

>

>>> It was indeed a shame.  It could have "theoretically" gone on for

>>> decades -- wouldn't you love to hear them do an episode from

>>> Revolution, or Last Resort, or some similar?  Walking Dead?

>

>> Dave Barry kind of did that blogging about 24. It was awesome.

>

> Now that HAD to be funny.  I might have to look it up :)


Be sure to check out the other fan comments alongside. Take a season
set. Read along as you press play, it's sublime.
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #42207 is a reply to message #41895] Mon, 11 March 2013 06:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
George Johnson is currently offline  George Johnson
Messages: 129
Registered: September 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
"TMC" <tmc1982@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:dcbe948f-3c33-4b0b-881b-332bbf1ac455@i5g2000pbj.googlegroups.com...
> http://officialfan.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=offtopic&am p;action=display&thread=467415

>

> I'm of the opinion that MST3K should have been liked Doctor Who and

> just had a revolving cast. The concept just seems too good to not keep

> going and the types of characters (a host, an evil scientist, her

> goons, the bots) seem flexible enough to cast a different actors into.

>

> There would of course be downsides. For instance there are only so

> many and movies out there and even fewer that MST3K could show and

> would suit the format. However, taking into account they have the

> entire history of cinema to work with it would be quite a while before

> they ran out. Plus, time wouldn't just stand still and new bad movies

> would continue being made. Also, as a last resort they could always

> use the same movie twice. I'm sure a Manos riffing from 2013 with an

> all new cast would be quite different from the original.

>

> Another downside could be that some replacements could be weak and

> thus entire years of the show could be lame. However, that's something

> every continuous series has to face.


Ah, the classic dilemma of success.
Retire while in strength & optimism or fade into obscurity as your
fanbase grows bored?

Take "The Simpsons", many folks felt it should've ended within the first
decade, others prefer the current version.
You can continue altering your new fan's perceptions by shaking up the
cast or try to remain the same through decades.

Popular success can be just as much a burden as an obscure
mediocre-but-useful day job.
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #42226 is a reply to message #42207] Mon, 11 March 2013 09:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
anim8rFSK is currently offline  anim8rFSK
Messages: 210
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <ODi%s.55332$sI3.11813@newsfe22.iad>,
"George Johnson" <matrix29@charter.net> wrote:

> "TMC" <tmc1982@gmail.com> wrote in message

> news:dcbe948f-3c33-4b0b-881b-332bbf1ac455@i5g2000pbj.googlegroups.com...

>> http://officialfan.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=offtopic&am p;action=display&thr

>> ead=467415

>>

>> I'm of the opinion that MST3K should have been liked Doctor Who and

>> just had a revolving cast. The concept just seems too good to not keep

>> going and the types of characters (a host, an evil scientist, her

>> goons, the bots) seem flexible enough to cast a different actors into.

>>

>> There would of course be downsides. For instance there are only so

>> many and movies out there and even fewer that MST3K could show and

>> would suit the format. However, taking into account they have the

>> entire history of cinema to work with it would be quite a while before

>> they ran out. Plus, time wouldn't just stand still and new bad movies

>> would continue being made. Also, as a last resort they could always

>> use the same movie twice. I'm sure a Manos riffing from 2013 with an

>> all new cast would be quite different from the original.

>>

>> Another downside could be that some replacements could be weak and

>> thus entire years of the show could be lame. However, that's something

>> every continuous series has to face.

>

> Ah, the classic dilemma of success.

> Retire while in strength & optimism or fade into obscurity as your

> fanbase grows bored?

>

> Take "The Simpsons", many folks felt it should've ended within the first

> decade, others prefer the current version.

> You can continue altering your new fan's perceptions by shaking up the

> cast or try to remain the same through decades.

>

> Popular success can be just as much a burden as an obscure

> mediocre-but-useful day job.


One big problem is that the creators kept leaving (and new ones came in)
and everybody got a piece of the pie. They usually cite this as the
reason they can't bring the show back; too many controlling interests.

--
"Every time a Kardashian gets a TV show, an angel dies."
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #42227 is a reply to message #42207] Mon, 11 March 2013 10:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
moviePig is currently offline  moviePig
Messages: 17
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
Junior Member
On Mar 11, 6:48 am, "George Johnson" <matri...@charter.net> wrote:
> "TMC" <tmc1...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>

> news:dcbe948f-3c33-4b0b-881b-332bbf1ac455@i5g2000pbj.googlegroups.com...

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>> http://officialfan.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=offtopic&am p;action=disp...

>

>> I'm of the opinion that MST3K should have been liked Doctor Who and

>> just had a revolving cast. The concept just seems too good to not keep

>> going and the types of characters (a host, an evil scientist, her

>> goons, the bots) seem flexible enough to cast a different actors into.

>

>> There would of course be downsides. For instance there are only so

>> many and movies out there and even fewer that MST3K could show and

>> would suit the format. However, taking into account they have the

>> entire history of cinema to work with it would be quite a while before

>> they ran out. Plus, time wouldn't just stand still and new bad movies

>> would continue being made. Also, as a last resort they could always

>> use the same movie twice. I'm sure a Manos riffing from 2013 with an

>> all new cast would be quite different from the original.

>

>> Another downside could be that some replacements could be weak and

>> thus entire years of the show could be lame. However, that's something

>> every continuous series has to face.

>

>     Ah, the classic dilemma of success.

>     Retire while in strength & optimism or fade into obscurity as your

> fanbase grows bored?

>

>     Take "The Simpsons", many folks felt it should've ended within the first

> decade, others prefer the current version.

>     You can continue altering your new fan's perceptions by shaking up the

> cast or try to remain the same through decades.

>

>     Popular success can be just as much a burden as an obscure

> mediocre-but-useful day job.


Admittedly, 'The Simpsons' is a living miracle. Nevertheless, if you
want to start a petition that all series should be mini-series, I'll
sign.

--

- - - - - - - -
YOUR taste at work...
http://www.moviepig.com
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #42303 is a reply to message #41899] Mon, 11 March 2013 14:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ken McElhaney is currently offline  Ken McElhaney
Messages: 7
Registered: March 2013
Karma: 0
Junior Member
On Mar 9, 6:23 am, Professor Bubba <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:
> In article

> <dcbe948f-3c33-4b0b-881b-332bbf1ac...@i5g2000pbj.googlegroups.com>, TMC

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> <tmc1...@gmail.com> wrote:

>

>> http://officialfan.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=offtopic&am p;action=disp...

>> d=467415

>

>> I'm of the opinion that MST3K should have been liked Doctor Who and

>> just had a revolving cast. The concept just seems too good to not keep

>> going and the types of characters (a host, an evil scientist, her

>> goons, the bots) seem flexible enough to cast a different actors into.

>

>> There would of course be downsides. For instance there are only so

>> many and movies out there and even fewer that MST3K could show and

>> would suit the format. However, taking into account they have the

>> entire history of cinema to work with it would be quite a while before

>> they ran out. Plus, time wouldn't just stand still and new bad movies

>> would continue being made. Also, as a last resort they could always

>> use the same movie twice. I'm sure a Manos riffing from 2013 with an

>> all new cast would be quite different from the original.

>

>> Another downside could be that some replacements could be weak and

>> thus entire years of the show could be lame. However, that's something

>> every continuous series has to face.

>

> MST3K was tapped out long before it went away.  I loved it long time,

> but Joel left and, all of a sudden, everybody seemed to be trying too

> hard to be funny.  The shark jumped for me when they did the 1952 flick

> Invasion U.S.A., and they missed all sorts of beats.  The film

> "starred" Edward G. Robinson Jr., but there wasn't even a line about

> that.  They did make a point of riffing on the two Lois Lanes (Phyllis

> Coates and Noel Neill both appear briefly, and separately, in the

> film), but they somehow misidentified another actress as Phyllis.  How

> do you do something like MST3K and not know who Phyllis Coates is?

>

> Joel and others later did a thing called Cinematic Titanic, which had

> the same flavor as MST3K with silhouettes and all, while Mike and crew

> did audio-only commentary tracks that you're supposed to sync with your

> copy of the movie.  This neatly saved Mike all that licensing money and

> permission-seeking.  Neither effort seemed to gain any traction,

> though.


I guess it depends on what you mean by "traction". While the demise of
Cinematic Titanic is one thing, Rifftrax has done quite well for
itself. In fact, a Kickstarter campaign to raise money to live riff
"Twilight" is now four times past its goal. No traction? Well, it was
never the intention of Rifftrax to go on cable TV, but they regularly
produce new riffs on full length movies, have VOD that can be
downloaded and shorts as well.

I think "successful" would more accurately describe Rifftrax whether
you care for the humor or not anymore, they have succeeded in creating
a profitable business venture for several years now and show little
sign of letting up.

Ken
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #42304 is a reply to message #42303] Mon, 11 March 2013 16:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Barb May is currently offline  Barb May
Messages: 3
Registered: March 2013
Karma: 0
Junior Member
Ken McElhaney wrote:
> I think "successful" would more accurately describe Rifftrax whether

> you care for the humor or not anymore, they have succeeded in creating

> a profitable business venture for several years now and show little

> sign of letting up.

>

> Ken


Love those guys...

I prefer downloading the movies with the Rifftrax already included (via
torrents), so I've donated some money to them via the PayPal "donate"
link on their web site.

--
Barb
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #42305 is a reply to message #42303] Mon, 11 March 2013 16:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Professor Bubba is currently offline  Professor Bubba
Messages: 8
Registered: November 2012
Karma: 0
Junior Member
In article
<05b27dde-3ab7-47e1-9907-abb284bfa107@i5g2000pbj.googlegroups.com>, Ken
McElhaney <mcelhaney@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Mar 9, 6:23 am, Professor Bubba <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:


>> Joel and others later did a thing called Cinematic Titanic, which had

>> the same flavor as MST3K with silhouettes and all, while Mike and crew

>> did audio-only commentary tracks that you're supposed to sync with your

>> copy of the movie.  This neatly saved Mike all that licensing money and

>> permission-seeking.  Neither effort seemed to gain any traction,

>> though.

>

> I guess it depends on what you mean by "traction". While the demise of

> Cinematic Titanic is one thing, Rifftrax has done quite well for

> itself. In fact, a Kickstarter campaign to raise money to live riff

> "Twilight" is now four times past its goal. No traction? Well, it was

> never the intention of Rifftrax to go on cable TV, but they regularly

> produce new riffs on full length movies, have VOD that can be

> downloaded and shorts as well.

>

> I think "successful" would more accurately describe Rifftrax whether

> you care for the humor or not anymore, they have succeeded in creating

> a profitable business venture for several years now and show little

> sign of letting up.



I'm happy for Mike et al. that Rifftrax is still going, but it's never
become a "thing." I know that what I meant by "traction" wasn't clear.

I didn't know that Cinematic Titanic had flatlined. I did know that no
one was talking about it, though, the same way nobody talks about
Rifftrax (where "nobody" may also mean "hardly anybody").
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #42306 is a reply to message #42305] Mon, 11 March 2013 17:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ken McElhaney is currently offline  Ken McElhaney
Messages: 7
Registered: March 2013
Karma: 0
Junior Member
On Mar 11, 3:24 pm, Professor Bubba <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:
> In article

> <05b27dde-3ab7-47e1-9907-abb284bfa...@i5g2000pbj.googlegroups.com>, Ken

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> McElhaney <mcelha...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>> On Mar 9, 6:23 am, Professor Bubba <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:

>>> Joel and others later did a thing called Cinematic Titanic, which had

>>> the same flavor as MST3K with silhouettes and all, while Mike and crew

>>> did audio-only commentary tracks that you're supposed to sync with your

>>> copy of the movie.  This neatly saved Mike all that licensing money and

>>> permission-seeking.  Neither effort seemed to gain any traction,

>>> though.

>

>> I guess it depends on what you mean by "traction". While the demise of

>> Cinematic Titanic is one thing, Rifftrax has done quite well for

>> itself. In fact, a Kickstarter campaign to raise money to live riff

>> "Twilight" is now four times past its goal. No traction? Well, it was

>> never the intention of Rifftrax to go on cable TV, but they regularly

>> produce new riffs on full length movies, have VOD that can be

>> downloaded and shorts as well.

>

>> I think "successful" would more accurately describe Rifftrax whether

>> you care for the humor or not anymore, they have succeeded in creating

>> a profitable business venture for several years now and show little

>> sign of letting up.

>

> I'm happy for Mike et al. that Rifftrax is still going, but it's never

> become a "thing."  I know that what I meant by "traction" wasn't clear.

>

> I didn't know that Cinematic Titanic had flatlined.  I did know that no

> one was talking about it, though, the same way nobody talks about

> Rifftrax (where "nobody" may also mean "hardly anybody").


I guess it depends on what "hardly anybody" means. I would not count
this newsgroup, but if you just look at the Kickstarter project they
are currently doing right now, I think that it does qualify as a
"thing" or "something" at least. Raising over $200,000 for a live riff
has to involve quite a few people who think Rifftrax is a "thing".
http://tinyurl.com/adcsq5t

Perhaps the conversation has simply moved somewhere else?

Ken
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #42324 is a reply to message #42306] Mon, 11 March 2013 18:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Professor Bubba is currently offline  Professor Bubba
Messages: 8
Registered: November 2012
Karma: 0
Junior Member
In article
<8c2839d6-1253-48b2-954f-e141be21f8a6@w2g2000pbw.googlegroups.com>,
<"mcelhaney@hotmail.com"> wrote:

> On Mar 11, 3:24 pm, Professor Bubba <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:

>> In article

>> <05b27dde-3ab7-47e1-9907-abb284bfa...@i5g2000pbj.googlegroups.com>, Ken

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

>> McElhaney <mcelha...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>>> On Mar 9, 6:23 am, Professor Bubba <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:

>>>> Joel and others later did a thing called Cinematic Titanic, which had

>>>> the same flavor as MST3K with silhouettes and all, while Mike and crew

>>>> did audio-only commentary tracks that you're supposed to sync with your

>>>> copy of the movie.  This neatly saved Mike all that licensing money and

>>>> permission-seeking.  Neither effort seemed to gain any traction,

>>>> though.

>>

>>> I guess it depends on what you mean by "traction". While the demise of

>>> Cinematic Titanic is one thing, Rifftrax has done quite well for

>>> itself. In fact, a Kickstarter campaign to raise money to live riff

>>> "Twilight" is now four times past its goal. No traction? Well, it was

>>> never the intention of Rifftrax to go on cable TV, but they regularly

>>> produce new riffs on full length movies, have VOD that can be

>>> downloaded and shorts as well.

>>

>>> I think "successful" would more accurately describe Rifftrax whether

>>> you care for the humor or not anymore, they have succeeded in creating

>>> a profitable business venture for several years now and show little

>>> sign of letting up.

>>

>> I'm happy for Mike et al. that Rifftrax is still going, but it's never

>> become a "thing."  I know that what I meant by "traction" wasn't clear.

>>

>> I didn't know that Cinematic Titanic had flatlined.  I did know that no

>> one was talking about it, though, the same way nobody talks about

>> Rifftrax (where "nobody" may also mean "hardly anybody").

>

> I guess it depends on what "hardly anybody" means. I would not count

> this newsgroup, but if you just look at the Kickstarter project they

> are currently doing right now, I think that it does qualify as a

> "thing" or "something" at least. Raising over $200,000 for a live riff

> has to involve quite a few people who think Rifftrax is a "thing".

> http://tinyurl.com/adcsq5t

>

> Perhaps the conversation has simply moved somewhere else?



Maybe so, because I hadn't heard a thing about it since the startup
until now. I agree that money talks, but in this case I guess it's not
talking to me. Thing is, the apparent success of Rifftrax is exactly
the kind of deal I should have been hearing about, going where I go and
talking who I talk to. One of us seems to be doing something wrong.
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #42325 is a reply to message #42324] Mon, 11 March 2013 18:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ken McElhaney is currently offline  Ken McElhaney
Messages: 7
Registered: March 2013
Karma: 0
Junior Member
On Mar 11, 5:21 pm, Professor Bubba <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:
> In article

> <8c2839d6-1253-48b2-954f-e141be21f...@w2g2000pbw.googlegroups.com>,

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> <"mcelha...@hotmail.com"> wrote:

>> On Mar 11, 3:24 pm, Professor Bubba <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:

>>> In article

>>> <05b27dde-3ab7-47e1-9907-abb284bfa...@i5g2000pbj.googlegroups.com>, Ken

>

>>> McElhaney <mcelha...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>>>> On Mar 9, 6:23 am, Professor Bubba <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:

>>>> > Joel and others later did a thing called Cinematic Titanic, which had

>>>> > the same flavor as MST3K with silhouettes and all, while Mike and crew

>>>> > did audio-only commentary tracks that you're supposed to sync with your

>>>> > copy of the movie. This neatly saved Mike all that licensing money and

>>>> > permission-seeking. Neither effort seemed to gain any traction,

>>>> > though.

>

>>>> I guess it depends on what you mean by "traction". While the demise of

>>>> Cinematic Titanic is one thing, Rifftrax has done quite well for

>>>> itself. In fact, a Kickstarter campaign to raise money to live riff

>>>> "Twilight" is now four times past its goal. No traction? Well, it was

>>>> never the intention of Rifftrax to go on cable TV, but they regularly

>>>> produce new riffs on full length movies, have VOD that can be

>>>> downloaded and shorts as well.

>

>>>> I think "successful" would more accurately describe Rifftrax whether

>>>> you care for the humor or not anymore, they have succeeded in creating

>>>> a profitable business venture for several years now and show little

>>>> sign of letting up.

>

>>> I'm happy for Mike et al. that Rifftrax is still going, but it's never

>>> become a "thing." I know that what I meant by "traction" wasn't clear..

>

>>> I didn't know that Cinematic Titanic had flatlined. I did know that no

>>> one was talking about it, though, the same way nobody talks about

>>> Rifftrax (where "nobody" may also mean "hardly anybody").

>

>> I guess it depends on what "hardly anybody" means. I would not count

>> this newsgroup, but if you just look at the Kickstarter project they

>> are currently doing right now, I think that it does qualify as a

>> "thing" or "something" at least. Raising over $200,000 for a live riff

>> has to involve quite a few people who think Rifftrax is a "thing".

>> http://tinyurl.com/adcsq5t

>

>> Perhaps the conversation has simply moved somewhere else?

>

> Maybe so, because I hadn't heard a thing about it since the startup

> until now.  I agree that money talks, but in this case I guess it's not

> talking to me.  Thing is, the apparent success of Rifftrax is exactly

> the kind of deal I should have been hearing about, going where I go and

> talking who I talk to.  One of us seems to be doing something wrong.



If you follow the "Satellite News", the unofficial MST3K website, they
post Rifftrax stuff all the time and it generally gets plenty of
comments.
http://www.mst3kinfo.com/
I usually download the short films (99 cents each) and they have one
or two live shows which are broadcast across the country in selected
movie theaters. The "Twilight" effort represents a big change for them
as they usually do public domain stuff (Plan 9 for example).

Cinematic Titanic started out as DVD or download-only and then adding
live performances. Joel just announced that this would be the last
year for Cinematic Titanic, at least in terms of performing live.

Rifftrax is part of a larger corporation, but they have a staff of
writers and even guests who do commentary on their voice-overs from
time to time. One of their latest coups was getting "Cool as Ice", the
disastrous Vanilla Ice film from the early 90's as a VOD...not just a
commentary track, but the video itself can be downloaded with the
commentary track.

Ken
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #42326 is a reply to message #42305] Mon, 11 March 2013 19:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
anim8rFSK is currently offline  anim8rFSK
Messages: 210
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <110320131624145880%bubba@nowhere.edu.invalid>,
Professor Bubba <bubba@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:

> In article

> <05b27dde-3ab7-47e1-9907-abb284bfa107@i5g2000pbj.googlegroups.com>, Ken

> McElhaney <mcelhaney@hotmail.com> wrote:

>

>> On Mar 9, 6:23am, Professor Bubba <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:

>

>>> Joel and others later did a thing called Cinematic Titanic, which had

>>> the same flavor as MST3K with silhouettes and all, while Mike and crew

>>> did audio-only commentary tracks that you're supposed to sync with your

>>> copy of the movie. This neatly saved Mike all that licensing money and

>>> permission-seeking. Neither effort seemed to gain any traction,

>>> though.

>>

>> I guess it depends on what you mean by "traction". While the demise of

>> Cinematic Titanic is one thing, Rifftrax has done quite well for

>> itself. In fact, a Kickstarter campaign to raise money to live riff

>> "Twilight" is now four times past its goal. No traction? Well, it was

>> never the intention of Rifftrax to go on cable TV, but they regularly

>> produce new riffs on full length movies, have VOD that can be

>> downloaded and shorts as well.

>>

>> I think "successful" would more accurately describe Rifftrax whether

>> you care for the humor or not anymore, they have succeeded in creating

>> a profitable business venture for several years now and show little

>> sign of letting up.

>

>

> I'm happy for Mike et al. that Rifftrax is still going, but it's never

> become a "thing." I know that what I meant by "traction" wasn't clear.

>

> I didn't know that Cinematic Titanic had flatlined. I did know that no

> one was talking about it, though, the same way nobody talks about

> Rifftrax (where "nobody" may also mean "hardly anybody").


http://www.cinematictitanic.com

Looks like they're still around, just 'cloaked' :)

--
"Every time a Kardashian gets a TV show, an angel dies."
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #42327 is a reply to message #42226] Mon, 11 March 2013 19:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dimensional Traveler is currently offline  Dimensional Traveler
Messages: 59
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
Member
On 3/11/2013 6:13 AM, anim8rFSK wrote:
>

> One big problem is that the creators kept leaving (and new ones came in)

> and everybody got a piece of the pie. They usually cite this as the

> reason they can't bring the show back; too many controlling interests.

>

So many people in control that no one is in control?

--
The 'Enterprise' crew in the 2009 Star Trek are adrenaline addicted,
hyper-active teenagers with ADD whose Ritalin got replaced with
methamphetamine, displaying a level of discipline that a Somali pirate
wouldn't tolerate.
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #42340 is a reply to message #42325] Mon, 11 March 2013 23:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Professor Bubba is currently offline  Professor Bubba
Messages: 8
Registered: November 2012
Karma: 0
Junior Member
In article
<45e03556-1b82-4a6c-8eb4-c53525055465@kk9g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>,
<"mcelhaney@hotmail.com"> wrote:

> If you follow the "Satellite News", the unofficial MST3K website, they

> post Rifftrax stuff all the time and it generally gets plenty of

> comments.

> http://www.mst3kinfo.com/

> I usually download the short films (99 cents each) and they have one

> or two live shows which are broadcast across the country in selected

> movie theaters. The "Twilight" effort represents a big change for them

> as they usually do public domain stuff (Plan 9 for example).

>

> Cinematic Titanic started out as DVD or download-only and then adding

> live performances. Joel just announced that this would be the last

> year for Cinematic Titanic, at least in terms of performing live.

>

> Rifftrax is part of a larger corporation, but they have a staff of

> writers and even guests who do commentary on their voice-overs from

> time to time. One of their latest coups was getting "Cool as Ice", the

> disastrous Vanilla Ice film from the early 90's as a VOD...not just a

> commentary track, but the video itself can be downloaded with the

> commentary track.

>

> Ken



Thanks for all the information in your two posts. I really appreciate
it.
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #42341 is a reply to message #42327] Mon, 11 March 2013 23:04 Go to previous messageGo to next message
anim8rFSK is currently offline  anim8rFSK
Messages: 210
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
In article <513e6e3b$0$52767$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

> On 3/11/2013 6:13 AM, anim8rFSK wrote:

>>

>> One big problem is that the creators kept leaving (and new ones came in)

>> and everybody got a piece of the pie. They usually cite this as the

>> reason they can't bring the show back; too many controlling interests.

>>

> So many people in control that no one is in control?


Yeah. And you get stuff like, Joel owns Gizmonic, so the Mads had to
operate out of somewhere else (enter Deep 13) and oopsie that means a
new theme song and now you have to keep track of who came up with Deep
13 and if you lose that when *they* leave and it quickly spirals out of
control.

--
"Every time a Kardashian gets a TV show, an angel dies."
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #42342 is a reply to message #42327] Tue, 12 March 2013 00:04 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Dano is currently offline  Dano
Messages: 11
Registered: March 2013
Karma: 0
Junior Member
Forever is a very long time.
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #42370 is a reply to message #42342] Tue, 12 March 2013 05:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Chris \&quot;Sampo\&amp;q is currently offline  Chris \&quot;Sampo\&amp;q
Messages: 46
Registered: November 2012
Karma: 0
Member
In article <khm9ec$dkk$1@dont-email.me>, "Dano" <janeanddano@yahoo.com>
wrote:

> Forever is a very long time.


It's a ridiculous question. All TV shows end. But its final cancellation
had nothing to do with a decline in quality (some individual opinions to
the contrary). MST3K never jumped the shark. Joel's brilliant concept
simply became too expensive for network TV. That's why it will never
return to TV. (For more info on why MST3K will never return to network
TV, visit http://www.mst3kinfo.com/mstfaq/syfy.html.)

As for it never becoming a "thing" -- I beg to differ. For proof, I only
need to point out that the show was cancelled 14 YEARS AGO and here we
are talking about it. Go to Twitter and search for "MST3K." You'll find
HUNDREDS of conversations about it daily. How many other TV shows that
have been off the air for 14 YEARS can you say THAT about?

The right people still get it.

Sampo (who never crossposts...doh!)
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #42371 is a reply to message #42370] Tue, 12 March 2013 05:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Professor Bubba is currently offline  Professor Bubba
Messages: 8
Registered: November 2012
Karma: 0
Junior Member
In article <msampo-CC0F52.05242812032013@news.individual.net>, Cornell
<msampo@aol.com> wrote:

> In article <khm9ec$dkk$1@dont-email.me>, "Dano" <janeanddano@yahoo.com>

> wrote:

>

>> Forever is a very long time.

>

> It's a ridiculous question. All TV shows end. But its final cancellation

> had nothing to do with a decline in quality (some individual opinions to

> the contrary). MST3K never jumped the shark. Joel's brilliant concept

> simply became too expensive for network TV.


I have to point out here that your own contrarian opinion to the
contrary is an opinion, not a fact. The show jumped the shark when the
work got sloppy; I picked Invasion U.S.A. as the jump point because
that's when the problems became too large for me to ignore. I know
that many stuck it out to the end without much if any problem.

MST3K was never on network TV. I remember they tried a syndicated
version of their library on broadcast stations, but it didn't do well.
Maybe cutting it to an hour (and running the films in two parts) hurt
it. Maybe the larger audience just wasn't interested. I don't know.
They went to the effort of making new wraparounds, which was
impressive.

> That's why it will never return to TV. (For more info on why MST3K

> will never return to network TV, visit

> http://www.mst3kinfo.com/mstfaq/syfy.html.)

>

> As for it never becoming a "thing" -- I beg to differ.


Who said it hadn't? I think you're conflating the comments on MST3K
with the ones about Cinematic Titanic and Rifftrax.

> For proof, I only need to point out that the show was cancelled 14

> YEARS AGO and here we are talking about it. Go to Twitter and search

> for "MST3K." You'll find HUNDREDS of conversations about it daily.

> How many other TV shows that have been off the air for 14 YEARS can

> you say THAT about?


Many, and some of them have been off the air for much longer, but no
one was saying that MST3K didn't belong in the pantheon of "past shows
people still talk about a lot."

> The right people still get it.

>

> Sampo (who never crossposts...doh!)
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #42484 is a reply to message #41895] Tue, 12 March 2013 16:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Doug Elrod is currently offline  Doug Elrod
Messages: 402
Registered: September 2012
Karma: 0
Senior Member
It's inevitable that people will want to move on at some point. But even if "Mystery Science Theater 3000" doesn't survive, itself, it's amazing comedy-amplification ought to find a home, in some way, in future media. (I'm thinking of the way that the movie itself becomes like a "straight man" to the jokesters, or, occasionally, vice-versa.... It's just an amazing way to deliver a HUGE number of jokes to the viewing public!)

I just hope there never is *too* long a gap without this sort of comedy!

-Doug Elrod (dre1@cornell.edu)
Re: Should MST3K Have Continued Forever? [message #263333 is a reply to message #41895] Sun, 03 August 2014 13:28 Go to previous message
Barb May is currently offline  Barb May
Messages: 3
Registered: March 2013
Karma: 0
Junior Member
Yes

--
Barb
  Switch to threaded view of this topic Create a new topic Submit Reply
Previous Topic: Happy (belated) birthday, Marrissa Picard!
Next Topic: [MiSTing] Your Fund Is Save [0/1]
Goto Forum:
  

-=] Back to Top [=-
[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Thu Dec 03 11:58:23 EST 2020

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00718 seconds