From: Administrator@LAWNET-PO.LAW.UIOWA.EDU
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.tv
Subject: (none)
Date: 15 Oct 92 13:22:00 GMT

Not deliverable to: dcowherd
Subject: Message not deliverable
Received: by ccmail-gateway.uiowa.edu for cc:Mail translation to SMTP
          on Thu Oct 15 08:42:01 1992
From: Administrator@lawnet-po.law.uiowa.edu
To: SF-LOVERS-TV@rutgers.edu

----------------------------------- Returned -----------------------------------
From: SF-LOVERS-TV@rutgers.edu at internet
Date: 9/30/92 1:24PM
To: dcowherd at lawnet-po
*To: SFLOVERS-RECIPIENTS@gandalf.rutgers.edu at internet
*To: SFLOVERS-RECIPIENTS@gandalf.rutgers.edu at internet
Subject: SF-LOVERS Digest   V17 #496
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Saul Jaffe (The Moderator) <sf-lovers-request@rutgers.edu>, Saul Jaffe (Th
Sender:sfl@gandalf.rutgers.edu
Errors-To:sf-lovers-errors@rutgers.edu
Sender:sfl@gandalf.rutgers.edu
Errors-To:sf-lovers-errors@rutgers.edu
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


SF-LOVERS Digest          Wednesday, 30 Sep 1992      Volume 17 : Issue 496

Today's Topics:

                    Television - Quantum Leap (11 msgs)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 23 Sep 92 04:55:45 GMT
From: thomasc@ms.uky.edu (Thomas Campbell)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-tv@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: Re: QL: Success of leaps?

asweeney@camelot.sw.stratus.com (Andy Sweeney) writes:
>Twice now they have made a statment "The success of the leap has nothing
>to do with leaping again." I don't understand, I did miss some episodes
>but when did Sam fail in a leap and still leap? From the pilot and the
>intro to all episodes they say he must make right what went wrong in order
>to leap.

I've wondered this as well.  I have begun to think that it's not so much
that's he's not going to leap if he doesn't do what he's there for but,
that he's been given a *chance* to do it.  Of course, we all know that he's
*going* to complete it.  It seems to me that if he missed on a leap though
he'd be given another chance. I don't know. That particular part of it has
always confused me.  I'm hoping with the new evil character that this might
get a little more explained.  (Of course, the evil character will probably
just leap in and out at will that's how that kind of thing always works..)

------------------------------

Date: 23 Sep 92 04:34:17 GMT
From: kibo@world.std.com (James "Kibo" Parry)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-tv@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: reasons #593, #594 why tonight's Quantum Leap sucked [MAJOR SPOILERS]

   In 1957, when Lee Harvey Oswald is reading the Communist Manifesto, it's
printed in ITC Souvenir, which wouldn't be available until 1970.

   In 1963, when he's passing out "Free Cuba" flyers, they're printed in
ITC Garamond, another typeface which wouldn't be around until the
seventies.

   I'm simply shocked and horrified at the lame attempts at period
typography on this show.  What's next?  Sam as Adolf Hitler in front of a
sign printed in Emigre Modula and ITC Zapf Dingbats?

------------------------------

Date: 23 Sep 92 08:14:03 GMT
From: djredick@bluemoon.rn.com (Darrin J. Redick)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-tv@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: QL: 5th Season Premiere thoughts (*POSSIBLE* SPOILERS!)

SPOILER warning!

Well, the title of this was changed yet again, to "Lee Harvey Oswald,
October 5th, 1957-November 22nd, 1963".

I would have to agree with the USA Today article, as it was mostly flat.  I
think they attempted to show what motivated Oswald, and it failed a bit.
Good acting, but the way the story was written wasn't.

The ending sequence, though, is INTENSE, not to mention a bit of a
tear-jerker.  My eyes were watery, anyway.

But the actor who portrayed Oswald could have done a better job, though,
IMHO.

And I don't like the new title music.  The new sequence is fine, but the
music has to go.  Go back to what I LIKED, at least.

djredick@bluemoon.cmhnet.org

------------------------------

Date: 23 Sep 92 08:31:07 GMT
From: peter@techbook.com (Peter Sarrett)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-tv@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: QL: Thumbs down on season premiere

At the risk of uttering heresy, I have to admit that I was disappointed by
the season premiere of Quantum Leap.  It was one of the most poorly written
episodes I can recall - a confusing jumble that barely justified an hour,
let alone two hours of prime time.

The quick-leaps were confusing (at least to this viewer).  Especially the
first one, which was not accompanied by the usual electric blue
pyrotechnics.  This may have been intentional, but it didn't enhance the
story or the ambiance of the tale - it merely left me baffled.  And I
stayed baffled as they failed to provide a decent reason for why Sam was
bouncing around in different periods of Oswald's life.  Did he have a task
to perform at each point?  It certainly didn't seem like it.  He appeared
to leap completely at random, which would be fine, if the writers would
play straight with us and give us a better reason than "the plot demanded
it."

And what of the plot?  Boring, meandering, pointless.  One of the problems
of leaping into someone as famous as Lee Harvey Oswald is that the viewer
KNOWS how the story is going to end.  We all know we'd wind up in Dallas,
and we all knew he wouldn't stop the assassination.  But the episode took
TWO HOURS to get us there, when they could have easily done it in one.  The
extra hour didn't add anything of value.

For instance: was there ANY point to the whole Russian sequence, especially
the suicide attempt?  If all Sam was doing was reliving Oswald's life, then
why not just fast-forward us to the part we're all waiting for?

"Lee Harvey Oswald" was clearly a program with an agenda.  It screamed
loudly of a man (Bellisario) with an opinion he wanted to present.  Fine.
But in giving us his opinion, he forgot to weave a compelling story -
disappointing, because good stories and good characters have been the
hallmark of the show.  It's why I keep watching.  This was NOT a good
episode.  It was an interesting biography, a passable psycho-history.  But
it had no PLOT (no pun intended).  They played out their hand with Oswald's
taking over Sam's mind far too early, so much so that I was bored with it
midway through (and WHY did Oswald stay in Sam's mind?  We're never told.
The "plot" demanded it).

Bellisario's done better.  MUCH better.  Especially given the hype this
episode has received, I was majorly disappointed.  And I look ahead with
some trepidation at the upcoming leaps into the lives of Marilyn Monroe,
Dr. Ruth, and other celebrities.

Quantum Leap worked quite well with ordinary people in sometimes
extraordinary situations.  It wasn't broke.  I wish they wouldn't try to
fix it.

Peter Sarrett
(503)579-0873
peter@techbook.com

------------------------------

Date: 23 Sep 92 12:56:05 GMT
From: eah4@po.cwru.edu (Elizabeth A. Hlabse)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-tv@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: QL: LHO--Oh, Brother! (SPOILERS)

My turn.  And I really don't believe this episode.  I wish Don would stop
writing the season openers and just stick to producing.  It would make a
lot of us a lot happier.  Anyway, on to the episode.

What the hell was Bellisario thinking of when he wrote this piece of
tripe?!  There was absolutely no rhyme or reason to Sam's leaping in and
out of different periods of LHO's life and parts of it were so incredibly
boring that I almost fell asleep.  Of course, there were parts that I
liked, but they were few and far between.

Why did Sam leap out of LHO's life when he did?  What did he accomplish in
each of those scenes?  As far as I could tell, absolutely nothing.

The opening with Marina?  He spoke a little Russian, kept apologizing for
yelling or hitting her.  And he began to realize that whoever he had leaped
into was taking over his mind.

The scene where he met Sgt. Bellisario?  That was just Don's ego at work.
It had absolutely no bearing on the story, whatever that may have been.

And give me a break!  If I figured this out correctly, the whole reason
that Sam was leaping around in LHO's life was so that when he leaped into
the Secret Service guy in Dallas he would save Jackie's life.  When Al said
that I nearly lost the contents of my stomach.  Don had written himself
into a corner and had no idea how to get himself out of it.  He ought to
stick to fictional characters.  Like what was said in an earlier post: we
knew how this had to end so he couldn't change anything.

Okay, a few good points.  Al at the Project (Stallion's Gate?!?).  It was
great to see Al at the office, so to speak.  And when he was interrogating
LHO in the Imaging Chamber (wouldn't he have been in the Waiting Room?),
that was great.  When he pulled the gun on him, I nearly fell out of my
seat, although I knew that there was no way that he'd shoot him.

Also good was the way that he pulled Sam out of it in the school book
depository - memories of what he was doing at the time, back home in
Indiana on the farm.

Oh, and did anyone else notice this?  Last year's season opener, Al said it
was September 1999.  This year's season opener, the date is February 1999.
If that means that time is not linear back at the Project, Sam could leap
back home the day he left.  Only one problem - AL REMEMBERS THE SIMO-LEAP!
And the idiot reminded Sam of it.  I thought that was forbidden.

And no leap in for next week.  <growl>

Oh, well, I've rambled enough.  It can't get much worse, can it?

Beth Hlabse
eah4@po.CWRU.Edu

------------------------------

Date: 23 Sep 92 13:16:53 GMT
From: cumming@pica.army.mil ("Robert C. Cumming", PEO)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-tv@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: Quantum Leap - Season Opener

***ATTENTION - SPOILERS FOR THE QUANTUM LEAP SEASON OPENER***

Greetings,

   Having spent the summer anticipating the QL season opener and the leap
into Lee Harvey Oswald I found the actual show last night to be somewhat of
a letdown - am I the only one, or did anyone else feel sort of cheated by
the following:

   1. The show pretty much followed the Warren Commission line that ol' Lee
was a lone sociopath who acted totally by himself.  Now I don't necessarily
buy every conspiracy theory about the Kennedy assassination (many of them
contradict each other after all) but I could never get over the feeling
that there was definitely something more going on in Dallas that awful day
than just a lone nut and his mail-order rifle.  I would have liked to have
seen QL do something more with this, even if only to drop some
non-specific, tantalizing hints of more going on.  In fact, I thought that
that was what they were going to do in the New Orleans sequence, but that
turned out to be pretty much a red herring.

   2. Having all this build up so that Sam could save Jackie just didn't
make sense.

Why not have him leap into a Secret Service agent in the first place?  Why
did he have to give us a mini-history of the short wretched life of Lee
Oswald? (I know, not as many people would have tuned in to the season
opener if the leap was going to be into Joe Smith, Secret Service).  Also,
there was no further exposition on what history was like before he saved
Mrs. Kennedy/Onassis While the saving of any human life is a worthwhile end
in itself, it would have added some depth if Al had been able to say
something about some dire future consequence - e.g. the erstwhile aimless
ne'er do well John (in the original universe) Jr. was now, thanks to the
influence of his un-assassinated mother a brilliant young politician in
1999 and working to end world hunger/strife/disease - well you get the
picture.

   Having said all this, I still enjoyed the show, and I'm still a QL fan.
I just think they could have delivered more on their promise.  What do
other folks think?

Regards.

Bob

------------------------------

Date: 23 Sep 92 14:24:37 GMT
From: tmw4r@fulton.seas.virginia.edu (Thomas Munroe Walsh)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-tv@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: QL: Oswald

SPOILER

Did they ever explain why Sam and Lee's minds initially got mixed together?
I realize later in the episode Sam got more of Lee stuck inside him when
they used the accelerator to try to set things straight (not realizing they
were sending back Oswald neurons).  "The Leap Back" required a lightning
strike to mix Sam and Al's minds but was any real explanation given this
time around?

T. J. Walsh
University Of Virginia
tmw4r@virginia.edu

------------------------------

Date: 23 Sep 92 14:35:20 GMT
From: jlredd@bach.udel.edu (Joshua Smith)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-tv@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: QL: LHO *SPOILERS*

SPOILERS for the season premiere to follow.

I have read a lot about the lameness of Jackie the person that Sam had to
go back in order to save, and how Bellasarius had to worm himself out of a
corner and throw Sam into a Secret Service agent.  I actually thought that
it was a great move.

That camera shot was almost identical to the the one where the SS guy is
climbing over the back of JFKs car and going to get Jackie in the car.  Who
knows what would have happened if Jackie continued to stay on the trunk.
Might Oswald (or others) have shot her too?  And the way Al tells Sam that
he actually did accomplish his mission.  The direction on that was great,
combined with the music, the script, the acting, and again, especially the
music, I can honestly say that I had chills going down my spine, and IMHO
anyone who was watching probably did as well.  Talk about totally
unexpected.  One more word about this show.

WOW!

jlredd@bach.udel.edu

------------------------------

Date: 23 Sep 92 14:54:29 GMT
From: garvey@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu (Heather Garvey)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-tv@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: Re: QL: Thumbs down on season premiere

peter@techbook.com (Peter Sarrett) writes:
>The quick-leaps were confusing (at least to this viewer).  Especially the
>first one, which was not accompanied by the usual electric blue
>pyrotechnics.  This may have been intentional, but it didn't enhance the
>story or the ambiance of the tale - it merely left me baffled.  And I
>stayed baffled as they failed to provide a decent reason for why Sam was
>bouncing around in different periods of Oswald's life.  Did he have a task
>to perform at each point?  It certainly didn't seem like it.  He appeared
>to leap completely at random, which would be fine, if the writers would
>play straight with us and give us a better reason than "the plot demanded
>it."

   Agreed. A group of us were watching it and basically thought it was
"weird" and "boring". THe biggest question we had was

   WHAT'S THE POINT?

   He leaps through some of the most trivial and pointless points of
Oswald's life, does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in them and then moves on. Ok,
except for the Sergeant. Mostly we got to see Bellisario's fascination with
Oswald beating on women. Joy. Let's see; HOW many times did he slap a woman
around? HOW much senseless and random violence was there? "Hmmm, let's go
slap those people over there around a little!" "Let's taunt these folks
until they explode into violent acts!" Joy again.

>"Lee Harvey Oswald" was clearly a program with an agenda.  It screamed
>loudly of a man (Bellisario) with an opinion he wanted to present.  Fine.
>But in giving us his opinion, he forgot to weave a compelling story -
>disappointing, because good stories and good characters have been the
>hallmark of the show.  It's why I keep watching.  This was NOT a good
>episode.  It was an interesting biography, a passable psycho-history.  But
>it had no PLOT (no pun intended).  They played out their hand with
>Oswald's taking over Sam's mind far too early, so much so that I was bored
>with it midway through (and WHY did Oswald stay in Sam's mind?  We're
>never told.  The "plot" demanded it).

   If I wanted a lame bio of Oswald, I would have watched a PBS
documentary. I agree about Oswald taking over too early; we didn't even get
to watch the personalities take over slowly and eerily. It was just dumped
on us.
   And, yes, I had figured out he was there to save Jackie before the show
started from what someone here suggested after seeing a promo. :) So that
didn't make me go "Wow!".

   I hope Bellisario has had his fun and will go back to making decent
Leaps about ordinary people. Or at least decent stories. I was severely
disappointed with this one...

Heather Garvey
hlg@po.cwru.edu

------------------------------

Date: 23 Sep 92 15:36:17 GMT
From: humphrie@ssc.wisc.edu
Reply-to: sf-lovers-tv@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: QL Question: "Leaping on a String"

Glad that NBC moved QL to Tuesday nights so I can see what people were
raving about. My only disappointment was not seeing Kevin Costner in some
sort of cameo role when Lee/Sam was doing the Cuba Thing on the streets of
New Orleans, but other than that, very interesting. The lack of a
conspiracy was a nice bit. (Although I think Was/Not Was put forth the most
plausible theory in the tune "11 MPH" on the "What Up Dog?" CD).

Anyway, to the question. Lee/Sam's just leaped to some Marine outpost in
the California desert, and another Marine comes by looking for a duty
roster.

That Marine appeared to had have the name tag: Bellisario. I seem to recall
that Mr. Bellisario said that he had met Oswald. Is this true? Is the scene
based on that meeting?

Email me at the above address if you know.

Thanks.

Bill Humphries

------------------------------

Date: 23 Sep 92 15:40:30 GMT
From: eah4@po.cwru.edu (Elizabeth A. Hlabse)
Reply-to: sf-lovers-tv@Rutgers.Edu
Subject: QL: A talk with Harker Wade

A friend just got off the phone with Harker Wade, producer at Universal and
you're not going to believe this.

He said:

1) Don Bellisario didn't have an ending for the show so he made
   one up. As far as Mr. Wade was concerned, the end was a cop-out.

2) Don should _never_ have attempted this after JFK was made.

3) He didn't know about the change in the theme and is going to
   do his best to make sure that the music is changed back.

Beth Hlabse
eah4@po.CWRU.Edu

------------------------------

End of SF-LOVERS Digest
***********************