avallyee

This episode offered keen and necessary examination of the college protests in 1968.

It's also illustrated the sharp contrast to the noxious behavior on many campuses worldwide since October 7 2023.

Not sure how many people watch Adam-12 these days.

It's available on FreeVee.

I don't think the cultural or stylistic differences between 1968 and 2023 hamper the unvarnished telling of this story. Regardless of viewpoint, the struggle to resolve conflict defines drama. Of course, many try to dismiss conflict by simply re-defining it. Or suppressing it...by any means necessary.

Then again, some don't want to resolve conflict.

Big business is conflict.

.

This was not at all Fluffy's best performance. It seems Mr. Inglesias is still suffering from his recent health trauma. I think this i another example of how fragile we humans are. A very talented and tormented soul. I'm grateful for the few laughs offered in this special. Perhaps he should take some more time for reflection.

That's the intent of this movie. It was clothed in an amalgam of New York humor types, Marx Brothers chaos, and Hollywood sentimentality. Still, it had a unique flavor.

Funny how many people have commented on the 80's categorization of this movie. I wonder how many of these self-declared cinematic scholars were even alive at that time. Yet they presume to claim knowledge of the era's style(s) and motivations.

I am a first hand witness of that time and the release of this film. I can tell you two things: One, it was far more successful at the time than Wikipedia, IMDb, or the Razzies seem to want to report. Two, it resonated with many who were alive at that time - and still does.

This is not a complex film. No deep philosophical message. No vitriol. Maybe that's why current reviewed can't "relate: to it.

In fact, it's quite a superficial piece. Still, I'd place it's flawed middling dialog against most movies produced since. Especially the critically-acclaimed ones.

Some have denounced its unlikely plot. I agree with that assessment. This is no suspense piece or thriller. I felt the story is a scaffolding for eclectic comedy mixed with homage to people who are too often dismissed as silly or frivolous. So many people have talent which is never realized or appreciated. These are the people of Terry and Jimmy Lynch's life. And yes, NY is and always been home to many of these folks. I believe they used to be called non-conformists. Sociologists categorized them that way for decades. Not sure if anyone even bothers with that term anymore.

I'm sure the sage cinematic critics understand that film, like all art forms, continuously blend reality and unreality. So there will be unlikely scenarios like the one Terry Lynch put himself into concerning his off-duty fire rescue. I'm sure many actual fire fighters dismissed that plot device. I know I found myself agreeing with the mayor when Jimmy shouts his fragmented account of Terry's situation. I'd say Terry totally mishandled his presence at that fire. So I had some failing in the suspension of disbelief while my viewings. But I also know that sometimes there's more than a single incident. The Lynch family back story helped a little. Ultimately, I allowed the film to tell me what it wanted to say. I didn't agree with some of its premises - including the romanticization of Jimmy's destruction of property. Still, it was fun. A guilty pleasure - fanticization of one person's battle against a perceived cruel, cold, de-humanizing institution.

This was unique to the 80's ?

Arguably, there's more pseudo-history now than ever. One tweet can be taken as fact by millions of "followers" - how I loathe that use of the term. Way way too much "following" - far too little originality. Once upon a time - originality was the goal of expression. Now anything that is not exactly as deemed "sweet" is summarily rejected.

If this films represents the 80's, so be it. At least there was some courage to protect a single person's right to differ.

There are still those who value individuality and will defend it. Snide, spoiled kiddies be damned.

I'd take Turk 182 as champion over any of the cheesy, faint "literary" heroes or heroines of today.

First, I'd like to thank all those who submitted critiques of the so- called "corny, stilted, preachy. boring" Dragnet series.

I admit - for you, Dragnet is indeed insufficiently...stimulating. Very few explosions in Dragnet. Little gun play. Worst of all: no narcissistic affirmation. No airtime given to the viewer that everyone else is wrong and stupid and that you are the superior creature.

Incidentally, there's no obligatory male-bashing. Women are portrayed as imperfect human beings, therefore they can be unflattering characters and even - gasp - CRIMINALS! And not very romanticizible anti-heroes (anti-heroine could be misinterpreted in the Dragnet style book). Lots of gray hair and wrinkles too. The target demographic doesn't like "old men".

Funny - so many "reality" shows reject the kind of realism Dragnet attempted.

Dragnet - and most of Adam-12 and Emergency! - were staunchly counter- counter-culture. Even in the 1960's, Dragnet was an antidote to most of the cultural tumult of its era. Interesting that NBC broadcast these shows: NBC even then was the most left-leaning of the 3 networks.

Like every series, Dragnet has its good and not-so-good episodes. Of all the good Dragnet episodes, Night School always stood out to me. Not all of the show, though. Most of the episode was actually a typical illegal drug debate with an extra helping of police antipathy.

What resonated with me was the final standoff between the "professor" and a student.

I won't reveal the resolution. If you haven't seen the episode, I suggest you watch it for yourself.

If you do watch the episode, I ask you: Did this happen in 1969 - or 2013?

No surprise that people would try to extract every dollar from a successful idea.

Unfortunately, this version taints that previous success.

The real sorrow generated by this "product" is how accurately it represents its target audience.

The line muttered by the pseudo-teacher was a trite but apt summarization of this film, its producers, and its target audience:

"There's only one story: Who Am I?"

If Who You Are is determined within the single dimension of self, that might be true.

Strange how "students" so eagerly accept that teacher's edict.

Is it possible there are other teachers who profess diametrically opposed doctrines?

If it's comic book philosophy that molds your mettle, why not consider that of The Avengers"? Or X-Men? Or The Superhero Formerly Known As Superman.

My response to you , teacher/producers/pop-culture-Nazis, is: I reject your premise.

I've known and related stories beyond who I am. Even beyond who you are.

Isn't that what telling and hearing stories is about? Going beyond ourselves?

Apparently the producers of this sub-par artistic tar pit don't think so. Acting, writing, sound ( including "music"), even effects - all vacuous. A consistent theme: I am , therefore I am.

This theme saliently captures current society: I'm perfect right now. Don't ask questions. Don't explore, don't experiment, lest I discover I need to grow. That would mean I'm not perfect after all.

Way to stifle posterity, teach. We don't need no education. Nor any more Anesthetized Spider-Kiddies.

A quick checklist for anyone considering this movie:

1. Coenheads - if you are one, proceed to checkout 2. Hollow humorist - if you like to be force fed your humor, you're in luck. 3. Bicoastalism - plenty of middle/Southern/Western stereotypes here 4. Amateur Auteurs - Watch this film so you can earn your "I'm-more- sophisticated-than-you" pin.

All others should bypass this cinematic desert.

It has been said that much art is devised to impress other artists. I think that attitude is central to Coeney Island, and this film certainly falls into the category euphemistically called "quirky". Products such as this can't be blamed for aiming squarely at their intended audience. If you like this kind of pseudo-intellectual fare, bully for you. There are plenty of vendors for this kind of ware.

All others who will try to find anything substantial will be sorely disappointed. You won't experience wildness, depth, sentiment, wonder, fury, intrigue, edginess, insight, lasciviousness, or even a good joke. In fact, what's really missing is honesty.

You will be served up mounds of pretense and self-important contrivance, infused with long-expired sophomorism, and powdered with clip art humanism.

Package above with ,uh, quirky dialogue (hard to assign that term since the characters don't express anything to each other or the audience) and you have all the haughty form-over-substance. cookie-cutter originality that the anesthetized soul craves.

It was finely-crafted bubble-wrap, I admit that.

Did you find funny any film involving characters named "Focker"? How about "The Hangover"? Did you think "Avatar" was well-acted or well-written? Was any "Lord of the Rings" or "Harry Potter" film silly? Was "Titanic" without historic inaccuracies? Just curious. The above questions embody the primary criticisms of Wellville. Leaving out, of course, the obligatory "poop jokes are gross" remarks. I'm certain those who lodge this complaint never were amused by scatological humor. Or ever told such a joke. Of course not.

If someone you liked told you a joke, then, presuming the delivery was similar, were told the same joke by someone you despise, would you laugh both times? Be truthful.

Point being this: Is the movie really as bad as you say, or are you unable (or maybe unwilling?) to suspend your disbelief because you're pre-programmed so to do? Taste may be subjective, but is also subject to manipulation.

So now ask yourself: What was the last movie you thought was great, whether others liked it or not?

Well here we are, more than a year after the general release of "Avatar". Most of the hype has finally dissipated, exposing it to be a wasteland of ultra-liberal elitist fantasy fueled by some of the most pernicious corporate greed. Cameron would call it "film promotion". Let's call it what it really is: propaganda. An example of Madison Avenue manipulation at its worst. Marketing research - not to discover what audiences (a.k.a target market) need or want - but to ascertain their weaknesses and exploit them. No need to assess this film's shortcomings - most have been adroitly expressed on this site and elsewhere. At this point, I'd like to consider the possible re-purposing of this cinematic Edsel. Is it possible to use this film to make Avatar anti-toxin?

Millions of minions worldwide have drunk this hemlock and passed it to others, saying "Drink this - you'll be superior". The promise is as sophomorically volatile as the drink itself. There's never been a shortage of vapid impostors of spiritual truth gift-wrapped in gold foil. Maybe, this time, Avatar's industrial-scale superficiality has finally helped pop culture's implosion to reach critical mass. I cite the many reactions (no pun intended) on this very site as support for this hypothesis. There's witnesses a-plenty to this film's naked arrogance and, perhaps more importantly, realization that an attempt was being made to bilk and corrupt them with a mixture of sweet, salty, and sour distractions. Read these analyses. They're not simply whining about being cool or not enough skin or more blood. They recognize that the film is, at its core, a total VACUUM. After being told of its wonders, it's not simply inadequate - it is nothing at all. Many are realizing that not only was this a banal waste of effort, but it is built and based upon a ziggerat of nothingness. These victims of Avatar are awakening from being tranquilized - and it's not pleasant to realize you've been swindled while you were incapacitated. Powerful antidote is illumination...powerful antidote.

Thank you, Avatar. You probably never realized how effective a dispersant you are against the current trend of plot less, character- devoid, dialogue-deprived, humor-starved, anti-creativity films and theatre. Keep up the bad work.

I venture to say that if you ask most people today, "What do you know of the Hindenburg", most will mimic (poorly) the old Jim Carrey hyperbolic schtick "OH THE HUMANITY" .

A massive, ultra-dramatic catastrophe, occurring within the United States, much of which recorded on disc and film. Reduced to a smarmy punch line.

Welcome to some of the worst of pop culture.

No wonder this movie, which at the time was a huge box office success, is now virtually extinct, only to be stamped further into oblivion by self-appointed pseudo-historians.

I ask those who focus their criticism at the supposed "impossibilty" of the sabotage theory: Why do you dismiss sabotage so quickly? Why do you think it is impossible? Perhaps you should ask the victims of the recent London, Baghdad, and Madrid bombings what they think...

In any case, at the end of this picture, the four "most likely causes of the Hindenburg disaster" are outlined, one of which was sabotage. Yes, this story focused on that cause, but I shudder to watch any drama built around St. Elmo's Fire, structural failure, or flammable coatings.

While I am neither old enough to have experienced the time of this event, nor a scholar of the disaster, I think this depiction generates a believable, understandable re-creation of the people, politics, and technology of that time. There were many anti-Nazis in Germany and elsewhere in Europe, though their stories somehow have gone unheard. Is it so difficult to comprehend that a man, who lost a son to an malignant social subculture, quickly finds sympathy with another young man who is willing to die in order to boldly resist evil (the very evil which consumed his son)? You mean to tell me, in light of all the recent events, such a premise seems unrealistic? Wise's "The Hindenburg" is such an enriching if somewhat melodramatic telling of this tale. I would prefer to watch this movie -flaws and all - to the pathetic teeny romance "Titanic" or the moronic and soulless "Pearl Harbor".

Cast off your faux cinematic preconceptions. Forget CSI, The Matrix, MTV... in fact, jettison maybe 99% of current pop culture. Try to understand an event in the context of its time. If you do so , maybe films like "The Hindenburg" might be appreciated.

No, this movie was not based upon the Twilight Zone story "The Monster Are Due on Maple Street", although of course the themes are similar. In fact, as mentioned by another post, this film and its title are "inspired" by the initial episode of James Burke's brilliant award-winning BBC series "Connections" The poster was incorrect, however, in that the series IS available on DVD. I highly recommend either purchasing or renting the entire series. That first episode, named "The Trigger Effect", begins with a highly detailed and re-enacted recount of the 1965 New York blackout. Burke then postulates what would happen if a more cataclysmic power failure occurred now.

Back in 1978 when Burke's series first aired, audiences were unnerved by considering such a disaster. 27 years later, apparently most people are too sophisticated to seriously consider what they would do in such a situation.

Too sophisticated? Or too jaded?

Whether you want to acknowledge this or not, you are probably represented by one of the characters in this film. Perhaps this is why so many people seem to reject it. They either identified with a character and refused to accept that fact, or preferred to run away from the myriad of themes and topics raised by this story. If you are one of the former, you are definitely going to be uncomfortable, because screenwriter Koepp does not give you any comic book stereotypes with whom to identify. They're eerily real. But of course, you would act differently. Well, perhaps. I propose that the characters in the film probably would have thought just as you do if they were screening this film.

If you haven't seen this film, and if you are mature enough to handle its matter-of-fact approach, please view it in its entirety without prejudice or distractions (sage advice for viewing any "thinking" film). if you have seen it and didn't like it, I challenge you to face your own anxieties and see if you can sympathize with the characters' plight