ALT.SF4M Gulliver's Travels • s******j@**.com 06/02/1996 00:00:000 UTC Amazing! The adaption of Swift's Gulliver's Travels that ran the last couple of nights on NBC was surprisingly good and true to the book. The framing device (Gulliver returns home and is thrown in the booby hatch by wife's suitor) was a bit melodramatic, but worth wading through for the delightfully well-done fantastic bits. It probably took a lot of balls on the part of the producers to sell this one to network TV. I mean, social satire through fantasy with a 17th century flavor? On prime time? Opposite _Married with Children_? And -- I hesitate to say this -- I think Brian Henson has surpassed his late lamented dad as a filmmaker. I knew this kid was something special back when _The Storyteller_ was running. _Gulliver's Travels_ is a masterpiece. Jeez . . . if this kid ever tackles science fiction! • s******j@**.com 10/02/1996 00:00:000 UTC In article <4falqe$***@n******.*****n.edu>, Kevin Sterner wrote: >I also enjoyed it, but there was one thing I couldn't get around: >Ted Danson! He was completely miscast. Aside from his limited >acting ability, what sort of accent is that for an Englishman? At >least he didn't attempt to don a fake one, but please! Were no true >Englishmen available? Pee-wee Herman would have been only slightly >less appropriate. Gee, I wish you didn't post that. Now I'm going to have this image of Pee-Wee, in a waterlogged grey suit, giggling as the Liliputians tie him down. AURGGGGHHH! MMY BBBRAIINNN! >I hope and pray that this was a big ratings winner. I don't think >that any amount of success would make quality TV the norm, but it >might go some way to quashing the belief that anything intelligent >and interesting is a guaranteed loser. I'm stunned that this was >put on the air. My thoughts exactly. They were rewarded with excellent reviews; this might mean SOMETHING to NBC. Enough to get them to try another project like this, I dunno.