|
|
Post by Doctor Tull-eus S. Venture on Dec 24, 2009 8:41:10 GMT -5
Sam is hardcore(Sorry Roxie). So where does Gibby fit in to all this? X-Division. It's not about Weight Limits, it's about NO LIMITS! "My mom thinks I'm AWESOME." Wow, who knew there were this many iCarly fans here. Although I cannot speak for others, speaking from my own plate, I'm a father of two, 10 and three, so it's not as much a case of "me, the iCarly fan" as "me, the conscientious father who wants to be a part of his kids life, but to be fair, has a soft spot for family-safe comedy" Besides, I'm less of a Nick fan and more of a Disney channel fan, with "Sonny With A Chance" and old "Lizzie McGuire" reruns dominating my share of the PVR... Having said that, Sam's eternal affection for food does strike a familiar and pleasant chord  [/quote] I don't necessarily care for Carly and Sam, but if they made a show that focused just on Freddie, Gibby, and Spencer, I'd totally watch it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2009 13:46:49 GMT -5
I don't necessarily care for Carly and Sam, but if they made a show that focused just on Freddie, Gibby, and Spencer, I'd totally watch it. I do think that Jerry Trainor (Spencer) does have a good career ahead of him. He routinely gets a chuckle out of me. |
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,125
|
Post by Mozenrath on Dec 27, 2009 12:50:18 GMT -5
I don't necessarily care for Carly and Sam, but if they made a show that focused just on Freddie, Gibby, and Spencer, I'd totally watch it. I do think that Jerry Trainor (Spencer) does have a good career ahead of him. He routinely gets a chuckle out of me. Agreed. I think the other actors on the show are well cast and written for, too. It's not every kid's show that manages to have good actors, so luckily iCarly paid off for Nick. |
|
AriadosMan
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Your friendly neighborhood superhero
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by AriadosMan on Dec 27, 2009 15:27:44 GMT -5
I'd just like to point out that the Torch constantly over analyzes Impact's rating, and would give out an in-depth report as to how each segment did. Here's how they analyzed RAW's rating from this past week: www.pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_37614.shtmlHilarious. Every time RAW does a bad number or gets a lower rating than the previous week, they attribute it to something else on television. While, there's absolutely no excuse for the decline in Impact's rating. One of the things I personally don't understand is why ECW is in danger of cancellation with 1.0s, yet TNA gets expanded and gets to go on Mondays for specials? |
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Dec 27, 2009 15:56:23 GMT -5
I'd just like to point out that the Torch constantly over analyzes Impact's rating, and would give out an in-depth report as to how each segment did. Here's how they analyzed RAW's rating from this past week: www.pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_37614.shtmlHilarious. Every time RAW does a bad number or gets a lower rating than the previous week, they attribute it to something else on television. While, there's absolutely no excuse for the decline in Impact's rating. One of the things I personally don't understand is why ECW is in danger of cancellation with 1.0s, yet TNA gets expanded and gets to go on Mondays for specials? TNA started with a 0.7 or so, and grew to the 1.0-1.1 range. ECW started with 2.6 or so, and dropped to the same point. |
|
Jimmy
Grimlock
Posts: 13,317
|
Post by Jimmy on Dec 27, 2009 16:57:15 GMT -5
Also WWE is the name brand, the number one wrestling company (and a huge corporation) that's been on cable TV for almost 30 years. TNA is only 7 years old.
|
|
[/quote]
