HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: maire@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
Subject: Re: The problem is...
Date: 19 Nov 92 01:11:45 -0500
Distribution: usa
Organization: Carnegie Mellon Computer Club

In article <1992Nov18.204219.9448@csi.jpl.nasa.gov>, cub@csi.jpl.nasa.gov (Ray Miller) writes:
> It seems to me that the problem with the show as it stands now is that it is
> a soap opera style almost solely dealing with relationships. It seems to me
> that the writers have forgotten that the show is about law. I would love to
> see some more protracted trials like the corporal punishment case Cusak had a
> couple of seasons ago. There is far too little trial time, and far too much
> interpersonal relationship stuff. Might just as well tape "All My Children"
> and watch it Thursday nights.
> 
> I have made a call to NBC about it, and I think if more people did, we might
> just be able to effect a change. Couldn't hurt could it?

It could help a lot.  I wrote them a letter last year to praise a couple
of specific episodes, and the reply which I got was not a form letter
and did mention that they read every letter and care what the fans think.
I'll be glad to dig up the show's address if no one has it handy.  I'll
be watching to group to see....
> 
> 
> |         Ray Miller           |            DISCLAIMER               |
> |  cub@chopin.jpl.nasa.gov     |  All opinions are strictly my own   |
> 								     
>  "I once spent a year in Philadelphia, I think it was on a Sunday" WCFields
-Tina M. Wood
 maire@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu
 maire@drycas.bitnet
From: tom@spud.kludge.com (Tom Lemos)
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
Subject: Re: The problem is...
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 10:38:57 PST
Organization: TTLF - Free News & Mail System, San Francisco, CA

cub@csi.jpl.nasa.gov (Ray Miller) writes:

> interpersonal relationship stuff. Might just as well tape "All My Children"
> and watch it Thursday nights.

 Some of us do. what's yer point??  :)


Tom@Spud.Kludge.COM             Tater Tot Liberation Front-Free news & mail!
                                                            San Francisco,CA
"Jesus saves! He shoots! He scores! What a game!"            +1.415.255.8340
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: english@ssdslc38.asl.dl.nec.com (Kim English)
Subject: November 19th Show
Followup-To: english@asl.dl.nec.com
Organization: NEC America, Inc Irving TX
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 15:48:38 GMT



   I don't know about anyone else, but I thought last
night`s show was pretty good compared to what we have
recently been subjected to.  I liked that Roxanne picked
Tommy to be the father of her child, and loved his 
shocked reaction.   I was glad that Stewart actually
could pick out the 2 guys from the line-up that beat
him up.  It may be just me but it seems like one minute
he is like his old self, then the next minute he is 
acting like a kid again.

   I liked Leland showing his integrity by refusing to 
be the lawyer for the deaf woman because of her recent
business "ethics".  And I liked that the show ended with
a twist!

   Of course, it wasn't perfect though.  This second get-
together with Qwen and the new lawyer(guy from Santa 
Barbara) didn't even make sense.  After she embarrassed
herself last time, *why* would she walk in and kiss him
again, without *first* asking if he sent the slipper??

   Who has kissed Qwen only once besides Stewart??  The
person sending the stuff said he`s kissed her once.
Anybody else got ideas?

   And does anyone know who the new associate will be?

Just my $.02.

Kim

-- 
|* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *|
| KIM English @  NEC America Advanced Switching Lab, Irving, TX             |
| (214)518-3435  english@asl.dl.nec.com  || My opinions are for sale...cheap|
|* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *|
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: tdawson@iphase.com (Tim Dawson)
Subject: Re: Who sent the flowers?
Organization: Interphase Corporation, Dallas Texas
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 00:32:15 GMT

epstein@cs.uiuc.edu (Milt Epstein) writes:

>In <1992Nov14.094730.1576@netcom.com> madhaus@netcom.com (Maddi Hausmann) writes:

>>Pretty obvious to me.  It has to be that dweeb prosecutor who was
>>fawning all over Gwen in episode #2.  Mostly because she's ruled
>>everyone else out.

>He gets my vote too.  Who else could it be?  It must be their way of
>introducing a new character (interesting after they went to so much
>trouble to get rid of everyone else :-).


>>I don't think Stuart would have sent flowers; he would have invited
>>her to play hooky with him and Benny if he had a revived interest.

>The way they're portraying Stuart right now, I don't think he has any
>interest in those kinds of things ...

I guess maybe I am alone on this - what about the possibility that Leland sent
the flowers as a congratulations on winning her first case, although anonymously
since he had to chew her out for "questionable" ethics?
-- 
================================================================================
The optionions expressed above do not neccesarily represent those of my 
employer - as a matter of fact, sometimes they wish I would shut up!

Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: mdm@bnr.ca (Diane MacMartin)
Subject: Re: "It don't pass the smell test"
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 18:14:52 GMT

In article <1ejc0iINNgtt@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> cb031@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Jerome R. Koch) writes:
...
>But why Tommy?  Why now?  What we're missing here
>is motivation.  Where has ANYTHING transpired between Tommy and Rox
>to this point that would lead her (after careful consideration) to
>choose him?

I don't think she was asking for a relationship.  She was asking him to
be a sperm donor, no?  This COULD be artificially-introduced.  I think
Tommy has a lot of qualities that Rox appreciates and values.

If she wants to let him take part in the (post-natal) parenting, I don't
think that that implies that she wants a relationship with him.
-- 
Diane MacMartin       Bell-Northern Research, Ltd     Ottawa, Canada
mdm@bnr.ca            Any opinions are my own and do not represent BNR.
=========>> If this is printed on paper, please recycle it <<==========

Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: lewkowicz@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
Subject: Re: The problem is...
Reply-To: lewkowicz@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
Organization: Brandeis University
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 13:20:18 GMT

In article <1992Nov19.011147.2605@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu>, maire@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu writes:
 
>> I have made a call to NBC about it, and I think if more people did, we might
>> just be able to effect a change. Couldn't hurt could it?
>
>It could help a lot.  I wrote them a letter last year to praise a couple
>of specific episodes, and the reply which I got was not a form letter
>and did mention that they read every letter and care what the fans think.
>I'll be glad to dig up the show's address if no one has it handy.  I'll
>be watching to group to see....

Could you post that address?  I, too, am not at all happy with the way the show
is going -- I remember a time when I wouldn't answer the phone during LA Law
because I didn't want to miss anything.  Now, I'm feeling really indifferent
towards the show, and didn't even tape it when I couldn't watch it.

Thanks!
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: doel@bae.bellcore.com (Michael Doel)
Subject: Re: November 19th Show
Followup-To: english@asl.dl.nec.com
Organization: Bell Communications Research
Distribution: alt
Date: 20 Nov 92 13:35:00


I thought I posted a reply to this, but I guess I just emailed instead.
Please excuse if this shows up twice.

Kim English writes:

> shocked reaction.   I was glad that Stewart actually
> could pick out the 2 guys from the line-up that beat
> him up.  It may be just me but it seems like one minute
> he is like his old self, then the next minute he is 
> acting like a kid again.

I thought the writers really blew it here.  This was the perfect opportunity
to bring Stewart back to normalcy.  When he finally sees his attackers, the
emotion comes back to him, he remembers the incident, and whamo his memory
is back.  After that, he's treated as the normal lawer the firm so
desperately needs and we go on with interesting case stories again.

But no.  No look of realization on Stewart's part.  No flashbacks.  Just a
cold emotionless choice without giving us any idea that he was confident
with his choice.  He then goes and buys a gun giving us the impression that
this godawful story line will continue.

Major fumble on the writer's part if you ask me.

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mike Doel				<doel@bae.bellcore.com>
444 Hoes Lane RRC 1B-209
Piscataway, NJ 08854

"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat
 and wrong." - H.L. Mencken
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: sas010@acad.drake.edu
Subject: Re: Comments on 11/19 show & this season
Organization: Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa, USA
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 07:07:04 GMT


[stuff removed]
>Maybe it's just that the show is lacking some of the vitality it had with
>'Grace Van Owen' and 'Kusak', and 'Vincent'.  I also miss the sleazy guy, what
>was his name',...he was intriguing.  The show seem to missing a certain spark
>that it had before. I miss Vincent the most, because he seemed to really care
>about people and events.  So far on this show, no one really seems to care
>about anyone.
 [stuff removed]
>-Pamela Cho-

Assuming you are referring to 'Victor' when you say 'Vincent'...(hispanic
character played by Jimmy Smits) I agree with you 100% of the way.  The
characters now just don't seem to have the same depth as Michael, Grace, and
Victor.  Of course, we did have several seasons to get to know these
characters...but the development of Tommy, Gwen, and Jonathan seems to have
stalled.  The have not grown into PEOPLE that we, the viewer, can associate
with....mostly 'cause the way they act seems so 'out of character'.  This is
all IMHO of course, but don't you all agree?  


Oh, and the 'sleazy guy'...that was Frank Kittridge(sp?)

					-=Sean

+-----=====-----=====-----=====-----=====-----=====-----=====-----=====-----+
|     Sean A. Santiago  ~~~  sas010@acad.drake.edu / sas010@dunix.drake.edu |
|     Ethics Consultant                                                     |
|        @>--}-----                  "Information is the most valuable      |
|     Drake University                commodity I know of."                 |
|     Des Moines, Ia                                  -Gordon Gekko         | 
+-----=====-----=====-----=====-----=====-----=====-----=====-----=====-----+
From: ecrjbruce@economics.adelaide.edu.au
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
Subject: Re: "It don't pass the smell test"
Date: 24 Nov 92 11:04:00 ACST
Organization: Economics, University of Adelaide
NNTP-Posting-Host: eco.economics.adelaide.edu.au

In article <1ejc0iINNgtt@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, cb031@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Jerome R. Koch) writes:
> 
> With regard to Tommy and Rox - I thought it was cute, too, especially
> "Tura Lura Lura."  But why Tommy?  Why now?  What we're missing here
> is motivation.  Where has ANYTHING transpired between Tommy and Rox
> to this point that would lead her (after careful consideration) to
> choose him?  Not that I don't think it has interesting possibilities,
> but, as Tommy himself would say, to this point "it don't pass the
> smell test."

After Arnie perhaps she wants to go for the idealist type?  Let's face it,
Tommy is a "nice guy", even if he is hungup on Zoe.  He's probably the most
considerate and caring of all the big name players, he's definitely very smart
and logical, he's not afraid of his emotions (seems to handle them VERY well)
and isn't deformed in every way.  He may not be every womans idea of
Chippendale material but if you wanted a guy to inherit genes from who else
would you choose?  Arnie???  Bzzt, thanks for playing, Leland (would he even be
in it?), Brackman (sucked in kid!!) or maybe we could get Rox to cohabit with CJ
and bring a new sort of lifestyle into the open, with one of CJ's gay friends
providing the semen etc.  Seems to be happening out there now, so it will get
covered sometime.  Besides it's a way to get CJ back, maybe Abbie can drop in
for "group therapy" every now and again..... :)

Rob
From: mla@pilot.njin.net (Marc L. Appelbaum)
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
Subject: SPELLING!! & Other stuff
Date: 19 Nov 92 17:16:13 GMT
Organization: NJ Intercampus Network
Cc: mla


Kusak is spelled like KUSAK not Cusak!!!!!!!!!  I'm glad I got that
off my chest.....

I also think that Leland could have sent the flowers, but I'm not 100%
positive.  It could have been the prosecutor....hmmmm.........

Anyway, I too used to love the show for its legal issues.  I do agree
that now it's just a prime time soap opera about a law firm and the
sex partners.

Marc
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------
Marc L. Appelbaum, mla@pilot.njin.net 908-277-6039
From: cho@ucbeh.san.uc.edu
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
Subject: Re: Who sent the flowers?
Date: 19 Nov 92 10:05:20 EST
Distribution: world
Organization: Univ. of Cincinnati

In article <1992Nov18.131202.6673@porthos.cc.bellcore.com>, jackie8@dasher.cc.bellcore.com () writes:
> In article <tdawson.722046735@coolcat> tdawson@iphase.com (Tim Dawson) writes:
>>
>>I guess maybe I am alone on this - what about the possibility that Leland sent
>>the flowers as a congratulations on winning her first case,although anonymously
>>since he had to chew her out for "questionable" ethics?
> 
> You're not alone!  This was my first thought the second the flowers
> came into view. Seems like something Leland would do.
> 
> Jackie

I think that Leland would have included an explanatory note like
'congratulations, keep up the great job you're doing'.... I think that the
person who sent this anonymously is some flaming admirer, like that guy at
Doug's trial.  -Pamela Cho-
From: cb031@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Jerome R. Koch)
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
Subject: "It don't pass the smell test"
Date: 20 Nov 92 18:49:54 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


With regard to Tommy and Rox - I thought it was cute, too, especially
"Tura Lura Lura."  But why Tommy?  Why now?  What we're missing here
is motivation.  Where has ANYTHING transpired between Tommy and Rox
to this point that would lead her (after careful consideration) to
choose him?  Not that I don't think it has interesting possibilities,
but, as Tommy himself would say, to this point "it don't pass the
smell test."
From: heinlein@fireball.stanford.edu (John Heinlein)
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
Subject: Nov 19th Episode
Date: 20 Nov 92 13:23:30
Organization: /roadkill/rk3/heinlein/.organization
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: fireball.stanford.edu


In article <1992Nov20.154838.6203@asl.dl.nec.com> english@ssdslc38.asl.dl.nec.com (Kim English) writes:
      Of course, it wasn't perfect though.  This second get-
   together with Qwen and the new lawyer(guy from Santa 
   Barbara) didn't even make sense.  After she embarrassed
   herself last time, *why* would she walk in and kiss him
   again, without *first* asking if he sent the slipper??

Yes. She ought to be a little more careful.  But she's so confused:
she wants the new guy, but she is so excited by the gifts.  She's going
to lose it when (as I speculate) the sender is someone she didn't expect.  
Hard call...

      Who has kissed Qwen only once besides Stewart??  The
   person sending the stuff said he`s kissed her once.
   Anybody else got ideas?

Could be Stuart, but that doesn't feel right (that would be such a reach for
him to be romancing her).  Could it be the sleaze lawyer from last season?
Doubtful (they must have kissed more than once).  Seems like it could be the
weenie new DA, who had some random little kiss with her years ago which she
forgot, and now he's infatuated with her.  That's probably the best guess, but
we could be in for a shocker.

      And does anyone know who the new associate will be?

Didn't Douglas hire the older lady who just was divorced (or widowed)?
Remember, they had bonded on the loss of their spouse, and even though she was
out of experience, he hired her.  Well, haven't seen her, so I only assume
she's finally starting.   Unless he hired her to some other position, but I
thought it was an associate they were interviewing for...

John.


--
  ---------------------+--------------------------------
  John Heinlein        | 
  Computer Systems Lab | heinlein@fireball.stanford.edu 
  Stanford University  | 
  ------------------------------------------------------
From: davida@bonnie.ics.uci.edu (David A. Andersen)
Subject: Re: The problem is...
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
Reply-To: davida@ics.uci.edu (David A. Andersen)
Organization: Univ. of Calif., Irvine, Info. & Computer Sci. Dept.
Date: 19 Nov 92 14:46:39 GMT
Distribution: usa


>Could you post that address?  I, too, am not at all happy with the way the show
>is going -- I remember a time when I wouldn't answer the phone during LA Law
>because I didn't want to miss anything.  Now, I'm feeling really indifferent
>towards the show, and didn't even tape it when I couldn't watch it.

Even Sam Donaldson and Diane Sawyer are becoming a more interesting couple
than the characters on LAL (tell me that you missed the thing about Food
Lion.....)



David A
UC Irvine




Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: andy@b30.ingr.com (Andrew Brezinski)
Subject: Re: The problem is...
Organization: Intergraph
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 19:36:05 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.204219.9448@csi.jpl.nasa.gov> cub@csi.jpl.nasa.gov (Ray Miller) writes:
>It seems to me that the problem with the show as it stands now is that it is
>a soap opera style almost solely dealing with relationships. It seems to me
>that the writers have forgotten that the show is about law. I would love to
>see some more protracted trials like the corporal punishment case Cusak had a
>couple of seasons ago. There is far too little trial time, and far too much
>interpersonal relationship stuff. Might just as well tape "All My Children"
>and watch it Thursday nights.
>
>I have made a call to NBC about it, and I think if more people did, we might
>just be able to effect a change. Couldn't hurt could it?
>

It seems to me that the court cases were not always the "stars" of the show
that they have been in recent years.  The only reason I say this is because
I used to have a nickname for the show:  LA Love.  I recall during the first
season or so, they concentrated heavily on the bedroom scenes.  Then, once
they had everyone's attention, they started giving more air time to court
cases.

I, too, enjoyed it more when they concentrated on the cases, especially
when they would pick some heated issue that was extremely current.  They
presented the case in such an emotional manner that you couldn't even
decide for yourself how you'd vote on a case if you were a member of the
jury.  It least I had trouble.

What's that address?  I'd like to send them a letter.

Andy Brezinski
Intergraph Corporation
Huntsville, AL 35894-0001
From: biddleco@mizar.usc.edu (Susan Biddlecomb)
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
Subject: Re: Who sent the flowers?
Date: 18 Nov 1992 09:34:58 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: mizar.usc.edu


Someone wrote ... (no names, I don't mean to embarass you)
>conclusion that you have, so if not Stuart, then Leyland.
                                                  ^^^^^^^
Please spell this right, it's Leland. I see it misspelled here
frequently. That's my grandfather's name, so I'm sensitive to it ...

Susan




Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: jackie8@dasher.cc.bellcore.com ()
Subject: Re: Who sent the flowers?
Organization: Bellcore - Piscataway, NJ
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 13:12:02 GMT

In article <tdawson.722046735@coolcat> tdawson@iphase.com (Tim Dawson) writes:
>
>I guess maybe I am alone on this - what about the possibility that Leland sent
>the flowers as a congratulations on winning her first case,although anonymously
>since he had to chew her out for "questionable" ethics?

You're not alone!  This was my first thought the second the flowers
came into view. Seems like something Leland would do.

Jackie
---
Jackie Brady/jackie8@cc.bellcore.com/908-699-5458 (insert usual disclaimer)     (do not reply to the address in "From:" section. Use id in .sig to reply)
[] Bell Communications Research / Piscataway NJ
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: mousktr@carson.u.washington.edu (Denise "Apple Lady" Lockner)
Subject: Re: SPELLING!! & Other stuff
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 19:41:35 GMT

In article <Nov.19.12.16.11.1992.2949@pilot.njin.net> mla@pilot.njin.net (Marc L. Appelbaum) writes:
>
>Kusak is spelled like KUSAK not Cusak!!!!!!!!!  I'm glad I got that
>off my chest.....
>
 before you *flame* other readers for their spelling errors, get       
 YOUR spelling right.  It is not "Kusak", it is "KUZAK."       
 
                                                                       
-Denise                                                              
********      
"If you can't say something nice...don't say nothin' at all." -THUMPER
From: mcsweinberg@memstvx1.memst.edu
Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
Subject: Rox and Tommy
Date: 20 Nov 92 10:07:41 -0600
Organization: Memphis State University

Thurs. Nov. 19, 1992

- I like the way Rox. asked Tommy to be the father. Do you guys think
he'll say yes. I hope he does. I think that Rox and Tommy are both good caring
people. 
- Did anyone else notice how nice Roxanne looked in the shot when she
asked him?

Rai.

Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: tmartin@nyx.cs.du.edu (Thomas Martin)
Subject: Re: Who sent the flowers?
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 14:47:52 GMT

tdawson@iphase.com (Tim Dawson) writes:

>I guess maybe I am alone on this - what about the possibility that Leland sent
>the flowers as a congratulations on winning her first case, although anonymously
>since he had to chew her out for "questionable" ethics?

	Since suggesting that Stuart may have been the one to send the
flowers, I have thought about this a little more and have come to same
conclusion that you have, so if not Stuart, then Leyland.

Newsgroups: alt.tv.la-law
From: cub@csi.jpl.nasa.gov (Ray Miller)
Subject: Address and Phone number
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 15:57:31 GMT

I have had numerous requests for the address and even one for the phone number
(sorry Maddi, now I know what you were talking about). I don't have them here
at the office, but I will bring them in tomorrow and post them. With any luck,
the show will go back to its' wonderful former self, Stuart will be allowed to
be a real character again, Arnie will become a real jerk, Roxanne will start
whining about everything under the sun (even things that are none of her
business), another Rosalind type character will come along so we have someone
to hate aside from Douglas, Leland will get his backbone back, and the firm
will hire good litigators with some personality like Victor and Cusak.

Other than that, I think the show is as good as ever. Nice to know they only need to fine tune things a bit!

|         Ray Miller           |            DISCLAIMER               |
|  cub@chopin.jpl.nasa.gov     |  All opinions are strictly my own   |
								     
 "I once spent a year in Philadelphia, I think it was on a Sunday" WCFields