>Which "Superman" movie was it that Clark Kent was looking for a phone booth >to change in, but, finding none, used a revolving door instead?
I just noticed that the phone booth in Amish country in Southern Maryland is gone :-( Cell phones outside the house are now accepted practice by the Amish there. They have wind generators to charge farm equipment (and buggy lighting) so I guess they charge them there or maybe off the buggy battery. They were early adopters of LED bulbs because the battery recharge frequency goes way down. Mark On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 5:40 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Today's Topic Summary > > Group: http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv/topics > > - NotTV: LA Times to follow... <#13639c78fe362030_group_thread_0> [3 > Updates] > - Obligatory Shannen Doherty > question...<#13639c78fe362030_group_thread_1>[1 Update] > - PoliticsTV: John Fugelsang > sighting...<#13639c78fe362030_group_thread_2>[2 Updates] > - TV Phone History [Was: Sitcoms introduced to whole new > generation]<#13639c78fe362030_group_thread_3>[11 Updates] > - Sheen Returning to '2.5 Men' (Sorta)<#13639c78fe362030_group_thread_4>[1 > Update] > > NotTV: LA Times to > follow...<http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv/t/1dac5a698e1f20b9> > > PGage <[email protected]> Mar 21 06:32PM -0700 > > > > ...several other papers, including its NY namesake, into paywall-land > > next month: > > > http://goo.gl/yFSIw > > I was not worried about this at first, since my experience with the > NYT has > been that the wall is very porous. I am sure I read several articles > per > day there, and only rarely have I been locked out (partly I guess > because I > often leave a window open, and it seems as though once I am on the > site, it > does not count clicking within it to other articles as a separate > visit). > There are weeks when I click on Nate Silver's column probably 7 - 10 > times, > and don't get dinged. > > But I got locked on the wrong side of the pay wall last week (Ides of > March) from the LA TImes in what I guess is the first month. Having > grown > up in Los Angeles, I do still think of the LAT as my home newspaper, > and I > guess it is a main go-to, not to mention I am a passionate Laker fan, > and > read their sports page a lot. But I thought the other small tricks I > had > used with the NYT would work. > > In principle I am not against daily papers finding a way to monetize > their > internet presence - in fact I am in favor of it. I think the idea that > some > how the free information that frolicks on the internet has made > professional journalism obsolete is absurd. Professional journalism > provides real value, and we should be willing to pay for it. In > practice of > course, this is mildly irritating. > > What I would like is to pay something like $10/month and get unlimited > access to some bundle of newspapers, but I guess that would not > generate > enough revenue. > > > > > calwatch <[email protected]> Mar 21 07:54PM -0700 > > There is no lock on the mobile version of the site - m.latimes.com. > > > > > > PGage <[email protected]> Mar 22 12:17AM -0700 > > > the site, it does not count clicking within it to other articles as a > > separate visit). There are weeks when I click on Nate Silver's column > > probably 7 - 10 times, and don't get dinged. (SNP) > > And now I notice (maybe it has been there a long time) a warning on > the NYT > that "Beginning in April, visitors to NYTimes.com will have access to > 10 > free articles per month instead of 20." > > 99 cents for first month as a trial subscription gets you past the > paywall, > but then $15.00/month. > > > > Obligatory Shannen Doherty > question...<http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv/t/42949f001b0a4dfc> > > "Kevin M." <[email protected]> Mar 21 07:25PM -0700 > > Yes, a Shannen Doherty episode guide is coming fast and furiously, but > the particular Shannen installment is modestly off track by the > (airquotes) film's (airquotes) lack of a director. I've seen more than > a few Alan Smithee films in my day, and I can recall a project > produced by a former boss wherein the director's name was replaced by > the name of his dogs, but can anyone else recall an instance of a film > absent a director? > > http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1684936/fullcredits#cast > > -- > Kevin M. (RPCV) > > > > PoliticsTV: John Fugelsang > sighting...<http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv/t/a186166173dae818> > > Bob in Jersey <[email protected]> Mar 21 05:20PM -0700 > > The ex-AFV cohost, a "political comedian" by some folks' description, > was > on a CNN panel with Soledad O'Brien today (21), and hits a Romney > senior > adviser with a question whose response has been awl over the news > media... > > http://goo.gl/MziXT > > > > -- > BOB > > > > > David Bruggeman <[email protected]> Mar 21 06:31PM -0700 > > The occasional Tweets I see from Fugelsang suggest he's at least > trying for political comedian. > > https://twitter.com/#!/JohnFugelsang > > It doesn't hurt that the Santorum campaign has run with the response. > > David > > > > ________________________________ > From: Bob in Jersey <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 8:20 PM > Subject: [TV orNotTV] PoliticsTV: John Fugelsang sighting... > > > The ex-AFV cohost, a "political comedian" by some folks' description, > was on a CNN panel with Soledad O'Brien today (21), and hits a Romney > senior adviser with a question whose response has been awl over the news > media... > > http://goo.gl/MziXT > > > > -- > BOB > -- > TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "TV or Not TV" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected] > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en > > > > TV Phone History [Was: Sitcoms introduced to whole new > generation]<http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv/t/1cda3225d8b1847f> > > "Brad Beam" <[email protected]> Mar 21 08:04AM -0400 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: PGage > > >This is a bit of a tangent, but I have been wondering if there is > some > >summary of when changes in phone technology began showing up in > television > >and movies? > > To continue the technological march, I flipped by "General Hospital" > last > night, and noticed that characters were reading not a paper, but their > tablet with the home page of the paper prominently displayed. > > _ _ > |_>|_> Brad Beam- Belle WV > |_>|_> http://www.facebook.com/74bmw > > > > > stannc <[email protected]> Mar 21 07:20AM -0700 > > In the Seinfeld episode "Thr Alternate Side", Jerry talks to the > person who stole his car via the installed cell phone. This episode aired > in 1991. > > -Stan > > > > > Wesley McGee <[email protected]> Mar 21 02:52PM > > > > In the Seinfeld episode "Thr Alternate Side", Jerry talks to the > person > > who stole his car via the installed cell phone. This episode aired > in 1991. > > > -Stan > > I think that was a car phone, though. I'm not sure they were ever as > popular as they were quite expensive and had to be installed into the > car... the equipment was about the size of a tape deck. (Kids reading > this, ask your parents what a tape deck was.) I think they were a bit > more > popular than satellite phones (big as a suitcase) among the very well > off > professionals. > > Anyway, by the time Bowfinger came out in 1999, car phones had been > reduced > to a punchline of a joke (Bobby Bowfinger tries to use this to fool > people > into thinking he has a cell phone, too.) > > -- > Wesley McGee > http://www.ambivi.com > http://sterlingnorth.vox.com > http://drawing-a-blank.tumblr.com > > Twitter: @westwit > G+: http://plus.google.com/113413697748381364954 > Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/wesleymcgee > > > > > David Lynch <[email protected]> Mar 21 11:09AM -0500 > > > calling individuals, not specific locations. I remember my > colleagues and I > > laughing afterwards. Because at that time we couldn’t grasp the > > significance of what he was talking about. > > A lot of what I remember about that concept, up to the days when cell > phones were beginning to really take off (some time circa the mid 90s) > was not a prediction that you would take your primary phone with you, > but that the telephone network would route calls to your physical > location, and we've never really gone there beyond things like Google > Voice and the occasional tech firm that uses it as a whiz-bang feature > to show off how cool they are. > > -- > David J. Lynch > [email protected] > > > > > Tom Wolper <[email protected]> Mar 21 12:43PM -0400 > > > an early adolescent was my mother's passionate commands to never > leave the > > house without, and never spend, my last dime, so that I could always > call > > her and tell her where I was). > > There is a lag between the introduction of a technology and its > mainstream adoption. When a new technology is used for the first time > in a movie or TV show, it has to be done at a time when the viewer can > recognize the object and know what it's used for, and if the writer > waits to long to adopt the object, the viewer will think, "Why's (the > character) doing that? Doesn't he have a cell phone?" > > Years ago I saw a documentary about telecommunications where they > showed old footage of a rotary phone switching station and described > how it worked. There were long rows of vertical rods and when you > picked up your receiver and got a dial tone, you enabled a rod. There > were seven wheels encircling the rod and as you dialed a wheel would > turn according to the number of pulses. When you finished dialing the > number the wheels would be aligned for the number you were calling and > the connection would be made. When the rotary telephone was first > introduced, most telephone exchanges did not have this infrastructure > and Bell Telephone (who had a phone monopoly and rented phones to > households, for you young'uns) would not make rotary telephones > available in an area until they installed the new exchange. So if New > York had rotary phones, it would not be in movies if people in > Cleveland could not recognize the technology. > > Touch tone, or push button, phones used electronic switches instead of > mechanical ones which were much less expensive, much faster, and more > reliable. > > > > > Dave Sikula <[email protected]> Mar 21 11:50AM -0700 > > If I can go slightly off-topic, I'm reminded of the 1955 "Kiss Me > Deadly," which features Mike Hammer's answering machine, a reel-to- > reel device that seems to take up most of one wall. > > --Dave Sikula > > > > > > Ed Dravecky <[email protected]> Mar 21 04:57PM -0500 > > > using corded films around 1994, but not in 1996 and after. I > probably don't > > have enough real evidence to give different dates for the routine > use of > > cell phones and cordless phones). > > This feels wrong. I remember quite a lot of cordless (landline, not > cellular) phones from TV and movies from the mid-to-late 1980s. I know > the technology had spread to my decidedly middle-class neighborhood by > the mid-'80s. Indeed, I found a 1986 article that says the "fad" of > cordless phones was "on the ropes". > > > > http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=z1spAAAAIBAJ&sjid=k6UEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6723%2C2642658 > > > This is far from exhaustive, but there are mentions of "cordless > phones" in reviews for 1986's 'Down and Out in Beverly Hills' ("...at > home among hot tubs, cordless phones and animal psychologists."), > 1991's 'Julia Has Two Lovers' ('Not even the mobility provided by > cordless phones can prevent tedium from setting in."), 1992's 'Patriot > Games' ("...a smashing kitchen and squadrons of cordless phones and > computer terminals."), and 1993's 'The Beverly Hillbillies' ("Erika > Eleniak is fun as Elly May, especially when she tries to acclimate > herself to Beverly Hills High, where all the girls pack cordless > phones.") > > > I did find a few fun related articles: > > San Jose Mercury News (CA) - March 12, 1986 - 1A Front > PHANTOM CALLS HAUNT POLICE PHONES DIAL 911 ON THEIR OWN > > Something is making cordless telephones dial 911, the nationwide > emergency number -- and it's not human fingers. Whatever it is, it's > driving police and emergency personnel crazy here and across the > country. A study done in Santa Clara County suggests that when their > batteries get low, cordless phones pick up frequencies given off by > household appliances such as microwave ovens, vacuum cleaners, > blenders and refrigerators... > > > The Advocate (Baton Rouge, LA) - September 27, 1996 > IN PRAISE OF CORDED PHONES > > Perhaps I belong to the last generation that will be able to remember > a time when telephones were strictly stationary objects. Now that > mobile and cordless phones are commonplace, children of today will > grow up in a world where telephones can routinely be found in gardens > or cars, in patios or garages, on porch swings or the side of a tub. > They will need to be reminded that it was not always so... > > > -- > Ed Dravecky III > http://www.fencon.org/ > > > > > PGage <[email protected]> Mar 21 03:42PM -0700 > > > Eleniak is fun as Elly May, especially when she tries to acclimate > > herself to Beverly Hills High, where all the girls pack cordless > > phones.") > > Right - a little more searching today (another batch of exams on my > desk > that I am trying not to grade) turned up some similar mentions from > mid 80s > to early 90s, like this one ( > http://thisisntthe90s.com/2010/06/14/watched-she-devil/) in which a > reviewer in 2010 is saying how much she loved the 80s touches in 1989's > "She Devil": I love her Zenith Laptop, the shiny V12 Jag convertible, > the > computer systems, the monstrous Satellite dish, the massive cordless > phones". and this one (http://actionmoviez.com/reviews-darkman-1990) > noting > a "good" in the orientation of the position of a cordless phone in > 1990's > Darkman. > > Based on Ed's report, and my search today, I am going to revise my > timeline, thusly: > 1955: Rotary Phones > 1984: Push Button Phones > 1990: Cordless Phones* (now putting the routine appearance of cordless > phones in between push buttons and cells, which seems more intuitively > accurate) > 1994: Cell Phones > > Still not a lot of data points to support this, but at least a working > hypothesis. > > One nuance is distinguishing between when a new technology routinely > appears, and when it routinely and completely replaces an old > technology. > For example it seems that cordless phones appear in movies in the late > 80s > and early 90s, but during this period there were also a lot of films > that > only showed corded phones, and this probably reflected an overlap in > real > life of both technologies in many US homes. Bu the 21st C though, > probably > most US homes had given up corded phones, and this is probably > reflected in > the media. Similarly, while cell phones appear in TV shows in the mid > 90s, > for most of that decade there probably was no depiction of any home > relying > exclusive on cell phones, or even primarily on them when at home. I > remember laughing less than 10 years ago at my sister who had given up > her > land line to rely exclusively on her cell, only to see that become a > standard practice for many (at least many young adults). So I guess I > should also be asking "when did specific telephone technologies stop > being > routinely represented in popular media?" in addition to when they > started. > > Still, it seems that if all you knew about America was from films and > TV > shows before 1955 you would think that most people made calls by > connecting > with an operator; if only from 1955 to 1984 that all Americans did > direct > dial with a rotary phone; if only between 1984 and 1990 that most > Americans > used push button corded phones. Starting in the early 1990s you would > see a > diversity of telephony, with corded phones, cordless phones and cell > phones > being used; I suspect somewhere by the end of the 1990s you would have > not > seen many corded phones, and somewhere in the late 00s you might have > seen > very little cordless phones, with more and more characters using cell > phones exclusively. > > > > > Jim Ellwanger <[email protected]> Mar 21 03:49PM -0700 > > On Mar 21, 2012, at 2:57 PM, Ed Dravecky wrote: > > > Eleniak is fun as Elly May, especially when she tries to acclimate > > herself to Beverly Hills High, where all the girls pack cordless > > phones.") > > Seems like the "Beverly Hillbillies" review is actually talking about > mobile phones/cell phones rather than cordless landline phones -- it > wouldn't make any sense for students at a high school to be "packing" the > latter. > > Although the "Down and Out" review probably is talking about cordless > landline phones. > > I can't tell about the other two -- seems like it could be either one. > > So now we need to figure out when movie reviewers finally got their > terminology straight! > > -- > Jim Ellwanger <[email protected]> > <http://www.ellwanger.tv> > > > > > "Brad Beam" <[email protected]> Mar 21 08:56PM -0400 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: PGage > > >This is a bit of a tangent, but I have been wondering if there is > some > >summary of when changes in phone technology began showing up in > television > >and movies? > > Which "Superman" movie was it that Clark Kent was looking for a phone > booth > to change in, but, finding none, used a revolving door instead? > > _ _ > |_>|_> Brad Beam- Belle WV > |_>|_> http://www.facebook.com/74bmw > > > > > PGage <[email protected]> Mar 21 06:21PM -0700 > > >> and movies? > > > Which "Superman" movie was it that Clark Kent was looking for a phone > > booth to change in, but, finding none, used a revolving door instead? > > It looks like that is the 1978 "Superman the Movie) (1st Christopher > Reeve). But as this guy ( > http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Phonebooth) says: "Even > before > cell phones took over, they were being replaced by the more > space-efficient > standalone pay phones. Today they are almost entirely > gone<http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TropeBreaker>, > although the booths themselves are seeing a resurgence in upscale > theaters > and restaurants to reduce public cell phone chatter" > > So, that scene is probably not a comment on cell phones replacing phone > booths. > > > > Sheen Returning to '2.5 Men' > (Sorta)<http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv/t/952cef84402a5ffb> > > Ed Dravecky <[email protected]> Mar 21 04:12PM -0500 > > > On Apr. 30, the ghost of the late Charlie Harper appears on the CBS > > sitcom--in the form of Kathy Bates. Yes, Kathy Bates: > > Meh, it's been done and by funnier shows.. The UK "Coupling" brought > back Jeff as a woman for one episode,for example. > > -- > Ed Dravecky III > http://www.fencon.org/ > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group > tvornottv. > You can post via email <[email protected]>. > To unsubscribe from this group, > send<[email protected]>an empty message. > For more options, visit <http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv/topics>this > group. > > -- > TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "TV or Not TV" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected] > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en > -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
