Hawaii Five-O Discussion Forum -- November 2014

The Hawaii Five-O Discussion Forum -- November 2014



The following are archived comments from November, 2014. After looking around, please add your own comments!

Links back: Main PageDiscussion Forum Main PageDiscussion Forum Archives



Submitted by: Good grief
From: Canada

Get rid of Carol Burnett esp her singing - - - SUCKS BIG TIME :p

Added: Friday 28 November 2014 21:00:33 MST


Submitted by: Mr. Mike
From: Vancouver

Man of the West, which starred Jack Lord along with Gary Cooper, was released on Blu-Ray a few weeks ago:

http://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/s4643west.html

"Jack Lord's smiling creep Coaley is a precursor of spaghetti western villains to come. "

Added: Friday 28 November 2014 09:07:03 MST


Submitted by: Mr. Mike
From: Vancouver

Just doing my best to start an Internet rumour, Michael! :)

Added: Friday 28 November 2014 08:03:01 MST


Submitted by: Michael T
From: Palatine IL

Mr Mike, to clarify: This is a photoshopped model kit box that was intended to represent what a model kit of the 1968 Mercury Park Lane might have looked like, had one been issued 45 years ago. I believe the artist made about 10 of these-there are no more, I was fortunate enough to get one, and the artist is no longer with us.

Added: Friday 28 November 2014 00:45:09 MST


Submitted by: Mr. Mike
From: Vancouver

Michael Timothy sends along a couple of photos of a model kit available in hobby stores now:

http://mjq.net/fiveo/images/model1.jpg
http://mjq.net/fiveo/images/model2.jpg

Added: Thursday 27 November 2014 20:15:08 MST


Submitted by: Mr. Mike
From: Vancouver

Vrinda, this is to let you know that your access to this forum has been terminated. If you want to return, the first thing you can do is apologize to Ringfire. Since I doubt this will happen, I wish you well in your future endeavours. Regards, Mike

Added: Wednesday 26 November 2014 23:08:34 MST


Submitted by: Vrinda
From: NJ

Joe,

Oscar von Hemel is another loser who only comes around here to bully me whenever I defend Jack. He’s another know-nothing who makes himself look dumber the more he talks. The last he was here, I told him off and he disappeared, only to come around for Round 2.

Oscar,

Why is it you can’t even use your own damn name when you comment? You’re an insult to the Dutch organist of the same name. You’re only making yourself look like a coward. You think you’re saying or proving anything with your stupid remarks? You and Ringfire are the biggest hypocrites. You support all that bull that Jack was mean to everyone, yet look at both of you. Insults come from your fingertips very quickly, but not intelligent thought. You’re a jealous, worthless lowlife, like a lot of the people Jack worked with. You never amounted to anything, so you have to pick on someone who did.

You only come around here to fight with me and never for anything else. Does that say something? Yes, that you have nothing of value to contribute to the discussion because you don’t want to be bothered with it. It’s easier for you to come here and hurl insults at me than to give your position and defend it. That’s what you do all the time, and it’s never changed.

Maybe you went through life thinking the world is a Utopia where everyone will cater to you and treat you like you’re something special. That’s the mindset of those people who trash Jack all the time. Guess what? None of you are anything special, and in fact, you and those others are the real problem. It’s not my fault your age and your shoe size are one in the same.

Yes, Al Michaels is a loser. I’ll tell him on his face. I’m not afraid of him. You people think nothing of calling Jack names, but it’s blasphemous to say that about anyone else? Like I said: HYPOCRITE! You act like those ninnies on the New Five-O board who got into an uproar because a poster compared the Victoria Secret models to prostitutes!

Added: Wednesday 26 November 2014 22:47:27 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

Vrinda is not going to listen to you Oscar

Added: Wednesday 26 November 2014 21:35:10 MST


Submitted by: Oscar van Hemel
From: Seattle

Rainbow, I agree with you 100% regarding Jack Lord. No matter what people may say about Lord, and there are a lot of nasty things that have been said, none of which I will repeat here, he was the right man at the right time and no matter what anyone says about him, we should give "thanks."

That said, I am appalled by the attack which Vrinda just launched on Ringfire, who is one of the oldest regular contributors to not only this Five-O forum, but others like IMDB. What the heck is she talking about: "I know you hate him [Jack Lord] and think the worst of him [Jack Lord]"? Is she confusing Ringfire with someone else like me? (Cue up the inevitable tirade...)

She actually suggests Al Michaels is a "loser" and Ringfire is "pathetic"! This is unbelievable. No wonder there are so few people other than hard-core fans contributing to the forum here because they have to be constantly afraid of some bullying attack like this.

Added: Wednesday 26 November 2014 21:27:30 MST


Submitted by: Eric
From: Paddon

When it comes to being whiny I suggest you take a look in the mirror. To be this hypersensitive and then smear Al Michaels for simply giving an honest recollection from an experience in his life may rank as one of the silliest things I've ever seen. He doesn't see this as one of the most important events in his life, but because of the unique situation of his later fame in broadcasting it isn't surprising that people will *ask* him about this experience so he just gives an honest version about it. That's not having a vendetta as part of some anti-Jack Lord campaign, it's just being honest about what happened.

Al also talked in his book about how LA Lakers announcer Chick Hearn snubbed him and treated him like a non-entity when he got his first professional job as the color announcer on Laker games, but he added that years later when he got to meet Hearn again after he'd become famous, they could kid about it. I'm sure if he ever crossed paths with Lord again in some other context he might have had the same kind of experience. But he never got that chance. That happens in life. The story was nothing more than an interesting anecdote and should be treated as such. Treating it as something else for the sake of then unloading some cheap shots on Michaels is really ridiculous.

Added: Wednesday 26 November 2014 21:26:37 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

I'm not trying to start a war here, Ringfire can you leave Vrinda alone? She will defend Jack Lord at all cost so it's no use talking to her like that so just take it easy.

Added: Wednesday 26 November 2014 21:10:01 MST


Submitted by: Vrinda
From: NJ

Could it be that Ringfire doesn't know what he is talking about, as usual, and is trying to put words in my mouth?

I think so. Was I talking to you? No, I wasn't. Every time a loser who works with Jack says something negative about him, you take their side. I knew you'd come out of the woodwork and pick a fight with me. Nothing new.

You're accusing me of making up what I saw? Was I writing about you? Did you work with Jack and have something to hide?

I know you hate him and think the worst of him. You've said so over and over and over. You also look the other way when his co-stars act like jerks, and there's evidence of it. That only shows how pathetic you are.

You want to respond with more insults go, ahead. It's nothing I haven't heard from you before. I'm not taking back what I wrote.

Whiny little Al Michaels is grumbling that Jack asked for hand makeup, the poor baby! He's still angry that Jack didn't talk to him! No wonder Jack didn't talk to him.

Added: Wednesday 26 November 2014 18:57:11 MST


Submitted by: ringfire211
From: Philadelphia

" In 2012, he told the hand makeup story to the American Archive of Television, sans the part about Jack not talking to anybody, acting like he was in charge, and the gruff exterior."

Point being what exactly? Does Al Michaels need to repeat the same exact words every single time like a parrot? Otherwise his story lacks credibility? Come on! Be serious!

When you recount something do you always repeat the same exact stuff each and every time? Never leave anything out?

Besides, as was already mentioned, Al isn't even bad-mouthing Jack. He's merely recounting events that happened. It seems that Vrinda is the one who takes a defensive stand against every comment made towards Jack. Seems like Vrinda is prepared for every comment about Jack to be negative. Could it be that Vrinda is beginning to believe all these negative comments about Jack? Yep, me thinks so.

Added: Wednesday 26 November 2014 18:08:39 MST


Submitted by: Vrinda
From: NJ

I read Al's story in more than one place, and even saw him talk about it on camera, so it's nothing new to me. I was stating what I knew about it. I never inferred that you're endorsing the story or believing it. There are other people who read this board but don't comment here, not just us who are, and for the benefit of those who don't know differently, I presented what I read and saw. What I saw and read from Al Michaels looked to me to be the words of a man with a chip on shoulder. He talked about it four different times, adding some details and leaving out others. The American Archive of Television specifically asked him about that guest appearance, when it was hardly anything significant to the show or to Al's career. He went as far as to add about Jack, "He was not a very warm person." In that interview, I saw a man who was still disgruntled about the incident more than 40 years later, and didn't look very warm to me, either.

I've seen a lot of comments from people who worked with Jack or claimed to work with him and expected him to drop everything for them as though they were something special. They sounded no different than Al Michaels in that they were expecting special attention from him and didn't get it, and are still bothered by it all these years later. What was odd was that they were not bothered by the other actors not talking to them, but expected Jack to do so. James, Kam, and the other guest stars went off and did their own things, and everyone was fine with that, but Jack kept to himself and people had a problem with it. With all this in mind, Al's story reminded me of these same comments, which is why I wrote what I wrote.

Added: Wednesday 26 November 2014 17:52:01 MST


Submitted by: Eric
From: New Jersey

With all due respect, I think there's a bit of an overreaction to Michaels' story going on here. I only shared it because I thought it was interesting since I honestly was not aware he'd ever appeared on the show (though "Run Johnny Run" was not an episode I saw more than once when I went through the set). I don't see much substantive difference in what you claim to be conflicting versions of the story, and I seriously doubt Al has any axe to grind against Jack Lord. He was simply recounting an interesting anecdote from his life in broadcasting which is the focus of his book and the Five-O story is just a small part of a larger chapter of when he was working in Hawaii. He comments on the fact that Jack never said so much as a hello to him, and if that's what happened I don't see why there has to be a reaction as if Al trashed his memory. It's certainly not going to affect how I regard Jack's performances or the series but for goodness sake, let's have a little more perspective.

Added: Wednesday 26 November 2014 16:59:20 MST


Submitted by: L.B.
From: U.S.A.

I agree completely with Rainbow's comments about Jack Lord.

There were many great character portrayals during that time, as that was the era of the dominant character. This was equally true with sitcoms, with characters such as Archie Bunker (O'Connor), Maude Findlay (Arthur), George Jefferson (Hemsley), and Fred Sanford (Foxx). In addition to the cops others mentioned, I would add Cannon (Conrad), Barnaby Jones (Ebsen), and Mannix (Connors) as well. There are countless others that could be recognized in this regard.

I've heard many say that Hawaii itself was really the star of 1.0, but that really can only be the view of someone who has not really watched the show that much. Island scenery could not carry a series for twelve years; only a great series with a strong lead actor and supporting cast can do that. In fact, 1.0 almost always downplayed Hawaii's splendor, with the main emphasis being on the stories and characters.

As for Lord being difficult, one has to remember that he had more responsibilities than many lead actors had. I remember reading that when they went to Singapore to film an episode that he handled many of the logistics of that trip, and he also was involved in the selection of scripts and the hiring of actors for roles in most episodes. Nothing against Alex O'Loughlin, but I doubt that he has that sort of responsibility. I doubt Telly Savalas or Peter Falk did either. Furthermore, given that the show was set in Hawaii, many actors probably thought they were going there to vacation first, which meant the whip had to be cracked at times. And, as mentioned, the way Jack treated his wife Marie was very admirable.

Added: Wednesday 26 November 2014 16:38:00 MST


Submitted by: Vrinda
From: NJ

P.S. Marie was invaluable to Jack in getting his career off the ground. She was a tough lady who took no flack from anyone. You can't be married to someone in the entertainment industry and not have a thick skin. She helped Jack with his lines, discussed roles with him, took photos of him in his costumes, and handled correspondence with his agents and producers. Jack called her his right hand man, and with good reason. She was Jack's rock, and she helped him to maintain a solid foothold in a world where everything can come tumbling down at any moment. Even when Jack became ill, she stood by him. Jack was crazy about her and would do anything for her, according to those who knew them. He quit smoking cold turkey when she asked him to, and never did location filming without her coming along. That doesn't happen unless there is some deep love between the two of them, and it takes quite a man to earn that kind of love and respect from a woman.

Added: Wednesday 26 November 2014 13:59:26 MST


Submitted by: Vrinda
From: NJ

Al Michaels does not have a reputation for being a nice guy himself. Who knows if he's even telling the truth. The scene took five takes, when many associated with the show said Jack was a stickler for getting scenes done in as few takes as possible? Michaels had told at least four versions of this story with different details. In 2009, he told USA today that he was nervous and Jack asked for hand make-up, in 2011 he told another magazine that Jack didn't talk to anybody, acted like he was in charge, and had a gruff exterior, things he did not mention in 2009. He said his monthly royalties totaled $1.79 in the 2009 interview. In 2012, he told the hand makeup story to the American Archive of Television, sans the part about Jack not talking to anybody, acting like he was in charge, and the gruff exterior. Plus, he’s telling all this long after Jack died. He never spoke about this when he was alive.

Jack didn’t have to talk to anyone. He was coming there to film a TV show, not socialize. This gripe from Michaels that Jack never spoke to him sounds childish and egotistical. If you watch Al's scene in "Run, Johnny, Run," you'll see that Jack gets one second of screentime after Al Michaels enters the jail cell. There are no close-ups of Jack's hand. Jack just rests his chin on his hand. There would be no need for hand makeup.

My point is that you have to take these stories with tons of salt. People read these things and see only what is on the surface – that someone did not have a good experience working with Jack and that proves the negative things said about him. Given the negative press Jack got over the years, it’s easy for someone who was on the show to come forward and say such things and people will believe it. For close to 45 years, the media has trashed Jack to the point where people believe everything negative said about him, and never question the source. Because so many bad things were said about Jack, people began to believe they were the truth, without any question. It got to the point where people saw the authoritative character Jack played on Hawaii Five-O and assumed he was like that in real life, and the characterization of Steve McGarrett was a result of Jack’s behavior off-screen. All of this has done Jack a great injustice over the years, and that fact that it’s still going on is disturbing and scary.

What Rainbow said might also explain why there is so much badmouthing of Jack all these years later. He landed a role which gave him immense fame long after the show ended, created an iconic character and made the actor who played him into an icon – all of which gave Jack enduring fame long after the show ended and long after he died. Along with that enduring fame, comes enduring criticism. Writers and viewers remember the rumors spread about Jack during that time and dredge it up. You can’t last for 12 years on a hit TV series if you are a nasty person and mistreat everyone around you, and if you worked with the thousands of people that Jack worked with, stories like Michaels would be more common – if they did happen.

Fate had all its cards in a row when Jack got the chance to play Steve McGarrett. Someone at CBS recommended Jack for the role. Lenny Freeman knew Jack and knew he would be right for the role. Jack liked the part and decided to do it. It was as though Steve McGarrett was created for him, even though he wasn’t. Jack took the role and made it his own, to the point where no one else could possibly be pictured in the role. That is a testimonial to Jack’s talents. The state of Hawaii and many outside it benefited greatly from Jack’s time on earth. For everyone who had something mean to say, there are many more who can say the direct opposite. That speaks volumes more about the kind of man Jack was than any one naysayer ever can.

Added: Wednesday 26 November 2014 13:35:33 MST


Submitted by: honu59
From: New York

Wonderful comments about Jack Lord, Rainbow, and wonderfully written. Thank you! You're right on the money about Lord as an actor and about his portrayal of Steve McGarrett. Also, the fact that he treated his wife like gold says volumes about Jack Lord as a man and makes my respect for him soar off the charts. Happy Thanksgiving, everyone!

Added: Wednesday 26 November 2014 13:07:40 MST


Submitted by: ringfire211
From: Philadelphia

Well said, Rainbow! But also don't forget Peter Falk as Columbo!! Fantastic characterization there!!

Happy Thanksgiving!!

Added: Wednesday 26 November 2014 09:27:28 MST


Submitted by: Rainbow Warrior
From: New York, NY

There has often been many comments about what Jack Lord was like off camera during the filming of Hawaii Five-O, but the one thing I will say is this. His portrayal of Steve McGarrett was one of the greatest, most iconic performances in the history of television. What he did with that character and the force of nature that he made it is one of the truly great performances in television acting history. His performance alone was one of the main reasons that show lasted a legendary 12 years, and it takes true talent to do that. I would even say that the only other TV acting performances of the era that even equaled it was Telly Savalas as Kojak, or James Garner as Rockford, maybe Robert Urich in Vegas, but all of them are not as remembered as Lord in the old Five-O. Even people that don't like his performance remember it. The man simply found what every actor hopes to find at least once in his career, a role that he can dominate, call his own, and make people remember forever. He did that, he treated his wife like gold, and nothing else really matters. Look at Bill Cosby, he talked to everybody and look what is going on with him now. I'll take Lord any day.

Happy Thanksgiving to Lord's memory and everyone here, even Mike up in Canada who celebrate their own Thanksgiving at a different time of the year. Ciao!

Added: Wednesday 26 November 2014 08:41:53 MST


Submitted by: Eric
From: New Jersey

Sportscaster Al Michaels just published his autobiography and he talks about the time in 1970 when he was the voice of Hawaii's AAA baseball team and ended up getting a small part in the S2 episode "Run Johnny Run" as a lawyer. He talks about how Jack Lord never said a word to him until the cameras started rolling for the scene and then abruptly he stopped it in the middle of filming and Michaels was afraid he'd done something wrong, but then Lord demanded to a production assistant, "I need more hand makeup!"

The scene took five takes overall and he said Lord never said a word to him afterwards. He recalled getting paid $85 for his effort, the only time he ever appeared on television in a long and distinguished career not as himself! Al left Hawaii in 1971 to become the play-by-play voice of the Cincinnati Reds.

Added: Tuesday 25 November 2014 22:17:13 MST


Submitted by: EliseB
From: Montana

The link worked, Kevin. Thank you.

Added: Monday 24 November 2014 20:33:28 MST


Submitted by: Kevin


From: I apologize , I thought everyone knew about the syndication deal . It was in the online Entertainment section of my news paper weeks ago,
Variety was the one that reported it first.
I just thought fans knew but that they didn't want to post about it. I can imagine CBS didn't put a big Press Release out as they did when they announced the deal years back.

Hope the link works,

http://bit.ly/1sXXOsH

Added: Monday 24 November 2014 09:40:41 MST


Submitted by: Mr. Mike
From: Vancouver

Rainbow, I can't find anything via Google News that suggests TNT wants to stop paying $2 million per episode for Five-Zero syndication rights or to stop showing it altogether. Maybe Kevin, who posted this rumour a few days ago, would like to elaborate?

The TV By the Numbers WWW site has some stats for syndicated shows, but only the top 25, and info only goes back three weeks. If anyone knows where there is info from before that or some kind of anal-ysis with graphs for individual shows, I would like to hear about it.

Five-Zero does not appear in these recent top 25 lists, though Blue Bloods is down near the bottom. I don't know why people would watch the show in syndication, given the crazy story lines which feature these mini-soap operas like the visit of Danno's mother that span across multiple episodes.

The main TV By the Numbers WWW page says it is a toss up as to whether Five-Zero will be renewed or cancelled at the end of this current season, which has 25 episodes ordered (up from the standard 24, if that has any special significance). The show's recent ratings on Friday night appear to be good, but that is because the competition is junk. As well, the "young people's" demographic for the show is not good. But as TV by the Numbers says, "CBS isn't keeping any of them [shows, including Five-0] on their schedule because of their ad revenue, but because they make CBS Studios money in the lucrative syndication market."

Added: Monday 24 November 2014 08:53:21 MST


Submitted by: Rainbow Warrior
From: New York, NY

Is that true?..The TNT syndication deal is gone?

The moment that really made me cringe is when Steve crashes through the skylight at the apartment complex and lands straight up and shoots and kills Barber, and after Barber is dead Steve doesn't have a scratch on him despite having bare arms and crashing through heavy duty glass, but yet not one speck of blood on him. Amazing.

"Scorpion" on CBS is a terrific show. It has basically taken "The Mod Squad." , "Mission Impossible" and wrapped it around a heart and sentiment. It is nicely done.

Added: Monday 24 November 2014 08:00:24 MST


Submitted by: Vrinda
From: NJ

Mike,

That the sons had to make it clear that they didn't know about the insurance and wanted no part of it, so the mother's actions seemed like they were for nothing.

They went after Tai based on circumstantial evidence - he had the motive, lived in Hawaii, and Travis and Jake spent the night at his house the night of the murders. They arrested him without even checking the forensic evidence, which may or may not have proven that Tai committed the murders.

No mention was made of forensics - fingerprints, DNA, blood, etc., except for the victims' blood being on the dog.

Added: Sunday 23 November 2014 17:58:36 MST


Submitted by: EliseB
From: Montana

My local PBS station just ran the movie "Call Northside 777". Plencov and company take notice! This is how it's done.

Added: Sunday 23 November 2014 10:07:01 MST


Submitted by: Kevin


From: Only reason I watched an episode last season was Carol Burnett . Only reason this season, Carol Burnett.
Take her away and this show is a big zero . Plot and acting .
CBS is the home of procedurals and I enjoy their shows , Blue Bloods , Scorpion , CSI , NCIS ....But this remake is crap. That's why the TNT syndication deal is gone , who will want to watch this show over and over? LMAO.

Added: Sunday 23 November 2014 06:18:35 MST


Submitted by: Mr. Mike
From: Vancouver

You are quite correct, Vrinda. Once again we have some vital piece of plot information on which the entire story depends, but it gets FUCKED UP! To quote my finished review, which is accessible through the link below:

The Supercomputer can finally figure out that Goodman had power of attorney over his clients' funds and an old bank account of Kate Kealoha shows that $100,000 was paid to Greg Barber, a known hit man, to knock off the two parents.

But the computer doesn't seem to show exactly who paid out this money, because it later turns out it was not Goodman, but Kate. [At Barber's place, after he is knocked off, Grover suddenly finds a laptop which has e-mails from Kate to Barber with pictures of their house. Grover can figure this all out in a matter of seconds.] How she knew about or contacted the hitman is a big mystery, especially since he was an "old client of Goodman" and seemingly had no connection to her at all. The bottom line, according to Five-0 [specifically McGarrett at the end of the show], is: Kate arranged to have Barber kill both her and her husband so the boys could collect a $20 million double indemnity life insurance policy. I am not making this up! Talk about stupid writing!

(This is not as stupid as the revelation during this big final scene about how Five-0 did a blood test on the Kealoha's dog Riley to determine that it was out of commission while the murder was going on, having been doped up by some of Kate's sleeping pills.)

Considering there was no reason for Kate to have both herself and her husband killed, inasmuch as the insurance policy was just on David, a more plausible explanation [which the writer didn't consider] would be she hired the hitman to just kill David, but when Barber found the two of them together, he decided to knock her off as well because she was a witness who could finger him for the crime.

But, overriding this logical explanation, this still leaves the question: Why would she, in effect, use the hitman to commit suicide? According to Patti Gable [the MILFy mother of the sons' best friend who was "doing it" with Travis, the older boy], Kate did try to commit suicide previously when she found out about her husband's financial dealings, but there is a big difference between swallowing some pills and having someone blast you with a shotgun.

UGH!!! As McGarrett says when describing Patti: "What a hot mess."

Added: Saturday 22 November 2014 23:02:47 MST


Submitted by: Vrinda
From: NJ

The good things about yesterday's show:

Carol Burnett
Frankie Valley
Andy Williams's "The Hawaii Wedding Song."

The bad things:

Everything else. What reason would the mother have for allowing herself to get killed? Did she want to die so she wouldn't risk the hit man pointing the finger at her later on? No one can be that depressed that they want to die that way.

Added: Saturday 22 November 2014 18:01:55 MST


Submitted by: Mr. Mike
From: Vancouver

Review of last night's show (presliminary):

http://www.mjq.net/fiveo/2010-log5.htm#8

Added: Saturday 22 November 2014 09:02:01 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

This episode gets a one star from me :!mad:

Added: Friday 21 November 2014 20:39:50 MST


Submitted by: Vrinda
From: NJ

The bottom line is someone wanted the action and darker nature of police work toned down. It doesn't happen accidentally. Just like LB pointed out with Starsky and Hutch at the time that Hawaii Five-O was in its 10th season, there was larger movement towards curbing violence on TV. Even if a cast and crew is tired of doing a show that had been on the air for 10 years, that doesn't mean the writers will be worn out and out of ideas. They were working with different writers through the years, so it was not as though the burden to come up with newer and fresher ideas fell on the shoulders of one group of writers during that time period.

The show was taking time to develop in its first seasons, which was reflective of the time. TV networks were more willing to give shows time to find their footing. They would not cancel them after one show or 6 shows, like they do now. As a result, TV shows took longer to establish the characters' in terms of personalities and relationships.

McGarrett was more rough around the edges in Seasons 1 and 2, and that changed in Season 3 on down. The change was gradual to the point where you had to watch closely and pay attention to his words and mannerisms. He softened little by little, but not in a complete 360-degre turnaround. Jack even mentioned this in an interview at the beginning of the show's 9th season.

They were certainly not running out of ideas or losing their freshness from the beginning of the series. They were doing a lot of things cop shows of the time were not, and in different ways. Some resorted to typical cops-and-robbers stories, and whodunnits, and clichéd lovers triangles. Often, the victims and suspects were uninteresting. H5O was using storylines which went against or beyond these rehashed storylines, often using victims and criminals were given center stage, being given as much importance as the detectives. All these elements made for more variety and enabled Hawaii Five-O to deliver more interesting shows and remain the at the top till Season 10.

Added: Wednesday 19 November 2014 19:12:49 MST


Submitted by: Ray
From: Portsmouth, NH

Elizabeth Logue trivia -- For the first time since a rare film, Nude Odyssey, first appeared on 35 mm in the early 1960s, a digital color trailer for the film has now been released online. I have no idea if this is a precursor for a digital release of the film online, but I have seen a few references to the film possibly being available under an Italian label, which may require a subscription to watch -- not sure. The trailer may simply be an initial marketing tool to gauge any potential interest, and if economically feasible, the entire film itself may one day be available for viewing online or on DVD. The soundtrack, however, is now available on CD. This film represents the very earliest video images you will ever find of the beautiful Elizabeth Logue, who appeared in the opening sequence of Five O. Released circa 1961 or so, and based on her date of birth, I would guess Elizabeth had just finished college and was now on location in Tahiti, age 20 or 21. Without going into a lot of detail, which you can find on your own by googling the film title, Elizabeth appeared as a romantic love interest opposite Enrico Salerno, a famed and very prolific Italian actor who appeared in over 120 films before his passing in 1994. He was the Italian voice dub for one or several Clint Eastwood movies. Described by actress Dolores Donlon as another Marlon Brando, he can be seen in this trailer clip, opposite Elizabeth Logue, in several flirtatious exchanges, just before the video suddenly ends -- this trailer is definitely a good teaser, if there are plans to commercially release the film.

This film, although hardly of any known interest to most of us, does have a few European cultists, who ostensibly are trying to expose us to something uniquely fascinating, rare, and widely overlooked. The rarity of the film however does not detract from the fact that it actually garnered several award nominations, including a Silver Ribbon for best cinematography. If you ever google movie posters for this film, you will notice just how expensive they are, due to the rarity factor, and obscure content. Elizabeth is figured prominently on many of this poster art, as well as in the trailer to follow.

Nude Odyssey, otherwise known as:

1. Oddisea Nuda
2. L’odyssee Nue
3. Diary of a Voyage in the South Pacific
4. Love — Tahiti Style

Its not hard to pick out the stunning Ms Logue, but if you are lost, then she appears precisely at these minute intervals: 3:21, 5:38, 7:15

Enjoy!

http://tinyurl.com/k9wvmtb

Added: Wednesday 19 November 2014 16:49:21 MST


Submitted by: John Hall
From: Canada

My take on the last few seasons is similar to the aggregate of what everyone else has said; no longer in sync with the times, everyone tired after years and years of brutal TV filming schedules etc.

I remember seeing an interview with one of the executives from The Simpsons a few years back where he was talking about the challenges of a long running show. He explained it by asking the interviewer to tell him a funny joke or one liner, then he told him to write down 24 other new ones just for one episode. Then he said you will have to repeat this each week for the next six months and then repeat that for 25 years, 16,000 funny skits!

Four cops in Hawaii can only have so many different adventures before they all start sounding a bit too familiar.

In my opinion the feel of the show was in steady decline overall right from the beginning. Don't get me wrong the story lines peaked in the middle years but the youthful energy of the cast and the complexities of the characters slowly slipped away with each passing season.

The show became less about action and the dark nature of police work and more about speeches. The story was being told less by the cinematography and non-verbal acting and more by talking.

my 2 cents

Added: Wednesday 19 November 2014 13:56:23 MST


Submitted by: Mr. Mike
From: Vancouver

Micki, the fact that the background music and sound effects on the show often overpower the dialogue has been an issue ever since the pilot episode over 4 years ago. Unfortunately, this web site site has nothing to do with the production of the show. You should contact those people who are in charge of the show and let them know what you think -- for example @plenkov on Twitter, Peter Lenkov, the show's executive producer.

You might want to consider using the closed captions on your TV if available. (You can also stream the show on cbs.com [if you are in the USA] which has subtitles.) Sometimes even I have to do this!

Added: Wednesday 19 November 2014 09:20:44 MST


Submitted by: Micki
From: Corning CA

My husband and I love Hawaii Five-0, but the background music is so loud we have a hard time hearing what is being said. Any way to tone it down a few decibels?

Added: Wednesday 19 November 2014 09:13:38 MST


Submitted by: ringfire211
From: Philadelphia

I think you could see in McG's fashion the change of times in the late 70s. I'm thinking primarily his black/blue leisure suit which was introduced in season 11. The dress code of the late 70s was very relaxed. Disco and bell bottoms were in ("Number One With a Bullet" played right into this) and Five-0 followed suit. I guess it had to change with the times.

All things considered though I think the show stayed fairly true to its origins and its formula. There were no drastic changes to the basic premise of the show. A little fashion change here and there. Some cutesy/cheesy endings here and there. But the basic premise remained the same. It wasn't like in the 5th season of THE A-TEAM where the whole premise changed - the team was no longer being chased by the military and they were no longer freelance soldiers of fortunate but instead working covertly for a shady C.I.A. operative (Robert Vaughn) who sent them on missions of national importance. The show immediately tanked of course because this was a drastic departure from the initial premise. Sometimes when a show's ratings begin to drop the producers decide to reinvent the show which often ends up being the final nail in the coffin. This never happened with Five-0. They never really messed with the show's premise. I think L.B. is right. A show can only stay popular for so long before it begins to lose steam. 9 years is a damn good run. The writers began to run out of ideas, producers/writers came and went, and the show began its inevitable decline. The premise remained the same in season 12 as it was in season 1. It's just the execution and the writing that suffered. Everyone was ready to call it quits by then. But certainly things like the anti-violence stance on TV and the silly humor of the late 70s were contributing factors as well. Thankfully Five-0 never really embraced all these things as fully as other shows did at the time. Hence why I can still watch an episode from season 11 and enjoy it.

Added: Tuesday 18 November 2014 12:52:09 MST


Submitted by: L.B.
From: U.S.A.

With respect to the last three seasons (1977-1980), I believe that the reduction in quality was not related in a major way to societal changes going on around that time, though it certainly would provide for a great discussion.

My feeling regarding the reduction in quality was that many of the writers who had written some of the earlier episodes had disappeared by this time, and there were subtle changes in the cast. For example, after season nine, we did not see minor characters such as Che Fong, Doc Bergmann, or AG Manicote nearly as much. Furthermore, if you look closely at season ten, Chin Ho made what amounted to cameo appearances in most episodes. Even more noticeable was that Wo Fat did not appear in the last three seasons until the final episode in 1980. The storylines seemed to lack the imagination and pacing of prior years, with many more average to lame episodes than in years’ past. Changes in producers and writers vs. the early years along with the series entering its’ tenth season in the fall of 1977 probably had more to do with the quality falling than anything.

Vrinda made a good point about the violence. Around 1977, there was a huge crackdown on television violence (I believe they instituted a family hour or something similar to that). One series that also decreased noticeably in quality from 1976-1977 to 1977-1978 was Starsky & Hutch. The first two seasons had some unbelievable car chases and shootouts (for that time), but the last two seasons began to emphasize the detectives’ friendship more to the detriment of the ratings. As for Baretta and Kojak, the last seasons for these series were also in 1977-1978. I believe these two series ended then more due to having run their course rather than any other issue. Both shows drew heavily on the quirky personalities of the lead characters, and that can only carry a series for so long.

Rainbow Warrior makes a good point about the late 1970s time period vs. the early-mid 1970s though. Most cop and P.I. series still running in the late 1970s were in the lighter vein, such as Vegas, Charlie’s Angels, Quincy, and the Rockford Files. This could be seen even more in sitcoms of the time. While the early to mid-70s had funny but realistic shows such as Mary Tyler Moore, All In The Family, Maude, Sanford & Son, and Good Times, the last few years of the decade were more known for Happy Days, Laverne & Shirley, Three’s Company, and Mork & Mindy. Quite a difference.

Finally, Vrinda was right about cop series in the early-mid 1980s, which were some of the worst of all time.

Added: Monday 17 November 2014 18:09:25 MST


Submitted by: ringfire211
From: Philadelphia

Yep, I think 1977 was a "turning point" year. Gritty and tight writing was being replaced with more humorous and silly stories coupled with more emphasis on stunt work and action. 1977 was also the year of SMOKEY AND THE BANDIT. Even though I'm a fan of the film it definitely gave rise to "action TV". The fall of 1977 saw the premiere of CHiPs where we got treated to motorcycle stunts. Then in the spring of 1979 we got THE DUKES OF HAZZARD. Other light-hearted fare included CHARLIE'S ANGELS, LOVE BOAT, HART TO HART, FANTASY ISLAND, and other such stuff. Then you had those prime time soaps like DALLAS and DYNASTY. It carried over into the 80s with more action-based stuff like THE FALL GUY and THE A-TEAM (even though I still love the latter). Basically it was either romantic fluff or silly action. The gritty stuff was gone. Folks in the 80s wanted to just be entertained and to watch easy-going stuff on the tube. Hence shows like MAGNUM and SIMON & SIMON and REMINGTON STEELE and MURDER SHE WROTE. I think it was towards the mid-80s when things started turning gritty a bit - with MIAMI VICE and THE EQUALIZER and HUNTER. But from the late 70s until the mid-80s it was all about light-hearted entertainment.

P.S. Legendary TV producer Glen A. Larson (often criticized for some of the cheesy fluff on TV at the time) has passed away. He gave me my favorite childhood show KNIGHT RIDER so I will forever be grateful to him for that precious part of my childhood. Sure, it's a bit cheesy watching it these days (naturally I own all 4 seasons on DVD) but it sure brings back some fantastic memories. Those were the days!

Added: Monday 17 November 2014 20:39:29 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

I always thought the team has ranks such as Detectives or Lt. or something like that. I guess I have to re-watch the whole series again.

Added: Monday 17 November 2014 15:26:43 MST


Submitted by: Vrinda
From: NJ

You're welcome!

I saw the same things on the cards. I don't know if it was intentional on the producers' part not to give them ranks, but it's too minute a detail for them to intentionally overlook it, so it must have been something they never thought of because it was not central to the storylines.

Rainbow,

I think your analysis of the changing attitudes and how they coincide with the change in Hawaii Five-O's storylines best describes it. By 1977, when it was in it's 10th season, most of the cop shows that were on when H5O was in its prime were off the air. Only Kojak and Baretta remained. The gritty cop show was on the way out and TV was being taken over by fluff. It continued into the eighties with tamer, often boring crime shows, and continues to this day, with cop shows that have too much silliness and too much grittiness to the point where both elements are represented in unrealistic proportions.

There was also some new executive at CBS who made them cut out all the violence on cop shows. He was there from 1977-1979, when Seasons 10 and 11 were in production.

Added: Monday 17 November 2014 14:32:00 MST


Submitted by: honu59
From: New York

Thanks for your comments, Vrinda! That's interesting about the Spanish dubbing.

I just thought of something else - business cards. If they had ranks, surely their ranks would have been on their business cards. Danno's card simply read "Dan Williams", Kono's read "Kono Kalakaua", and Steve's read "Steve McGarrett" and "Officer in Charge." So maybe they didn't have ranks. I don't think they did. HPD had ranks.

Added: Monday 17 November 2014 11:44:51 MST


Submitted by: Vrinda
From: NJ

Honu,

I don't remember any of them having ranks, either. I used to think that Steve was a captain and Danno was a lieutenant, but that was when I had not seen the show in years. When I started watching it again, I noticed that no one introduced themselves or the others with a rank. Steve just referred to himself as "Steve McGarrett, Hawaii Five-O." Danno was sometimes called "officer Williams," but no one was referred to as sergeant, lieutenant, captain, etc. In the Spanish dubbed version on the DVDs, Steve is called "Capitan," the Spanish word for captain, instead of Steve or Esteban, the Spanish equivalent of Stephen. It might be cultural since in Spanish-speaking countries, government and police officials might not be as familiar with one another as they are in the U.S. and Canada.

Added: Monday 17 November 2014 10:54:00 MST


Submitted by: honu59
From: New York

Here's a question: Does anyone know if the Five-O team (the 1.0 version) had ranks as police officers like captain or sergeant? I just remember each team member being called "detective.” I haven’t seen this addressed on any of the Five-O sites I’ve read. Thanks for any information you can provide.

Added: Monday 17 November 2014 09:59:13 MST


Submitted by: Rainbow Warrior
From: New York, NY

Thanks everyone for your season five favorites and stinkers. I will refer to them all as I go through the season. I now have a philosophical question for everyone. Many on here have said that seasons 1-9 are their favorites, and that there was a drop off in seasons 10-12. I have noticed that season nine ended in spring 1977, which then led into the summer of "Star Wars" and "Saturday Night Fever" as well as "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" etc. Do you think that Five-0's first nine season were great because it matched the tough grittiness of American society as it existed from 1968-1977 and as personified by films like "Death Wish" and "Dirty Harry." Coupled that with Vietnam, Watergate, and the social tumult of the early 1970's and mid 1970's, so the old show was in it's element. Then in the late 1970's starting with 1977, American society changed. Vietnam was over, Nixon was gone, Carter was honest but lightweight and America turned inward to fantasy blockbuster movies, disco, "Charlie's Angels" like eye candy, coupled with Studio 54, and just all together party time like thoughts, and as a result Five-o was forced to change and it was out of it's element in the last three years because of the switch in American society. Thoughts anyone?

Added: Monday 17 November 2014 08:41:40 MST


Submitted by: Rick
From: Newport Beach

Rainbow- Season 5 other than Vashon my favorite would be I'm a Family Crook -- Don't Shoot. Great scene when the bagman tries to explain what happened, Charlie Walters sitting behind his desk blows the guy away and his goon asks, "Suppose he was telling the truth?" and Charlie says calmly, "Then I made a terrible mistake"

I'd give an honorable mention for The Odd Lot Caper purely for the performance of Ron Hayes as Laughlin. One of my all time favorite Five-O bad guys.

I agree with others for least favorite, Little Girl Blue.

Added: Saturday 15 November 2014 16:58:48 MST


Submitted by: L.B.
From: U.S.A.

Season Five in the original series was one of my least favorite seasons. It just didn't have as many good episodes as some of the previous ones. My favorite episodes from this season are:

Pig In A Blanket
V For Vashon
The Jinn Who Clears The Way
The Listener
Engaged To Be Buried
Little Girl Blue
The Clock Struck Twelve

The only bad thing about Little Girl Blue is that is very similar to ...And I Want Some Candy, even using many of the same stock shots. There were several episodes in this season where the story was weaker than normal or had some premises that were out there, such as Journey Out Of Limbo and Death Is A Company Policy.

My favorite seasons of the series are two, three, and six through nine.

Added: Saturday 15 November 2014 16:08:31 MST


Submitted by: ringfire211
From: Philadelphia

Yes, Nicholas Colasanto from CHEERS directing 4 episodes if FIVE-0 is old news.

3 of those episodes are classics - "A Thousand Pardons - You're Dead", "Just Lucky, I Guess", and "Most Likely to Murder". The one stinker was "To Hell With Babe Ruth".

He also directed some COLUMBO and BONANZA episodes too. He started out as a TV director. Then moved on to acting. I think Scorcese's RAGING BULL was where Colasanto made his move to acting. Then 2 years later he landed on CHEERS - he was great as Coach! I liked him more than his other dim-witted replacement Woody Harrelson (though he was good too).

Added: Saturday 15 November 2014 10:39:05 MST


Submitted by: John Hall
From: Canada

This is probably well known but new to me (don't recall hearing about it); Nicholas Colasanto (Coach from Cheers) directed 4 H5O episodes in season 2.

I was watching the 1st episode of season 2 (with Loretta Swit from MASH) and thought the directors name meant something to me. Two minutes of googling answered the question.

He directed a mix of very good and very bad episodes. Hard to connect the dimwitted character he played in Cheers with him being a director, I guess that's why the call it acting.

Added: Friday 14 November 2014 13:55:45 MST


Submitted by: ringfire211
From: Philadelphia

Season 5 had some great episodes!

Obviously the Vashon trilogy is the best from season 5. It's also quite possibly the best from the entire show's run.

My other favorites are:

- Journey Out of Limbo
- The Listener
- Thanks for the Honeymoon (a bit of a rehash of season 1's "Deathwatch")
- Will the Real Mr. Winkler Please Die?
- Here Today... Gone Tonight
- Death is a Company Policy
- The Child Stealers
- I'm a Family Crook - Don't Shoot

The 2 stinkers would have to be:

- Percentage
- The Diamond That Nobody Stole

Both are dull and convoluted. "Diamond" had some potential - it started as a caper-type episode with a cat-burglar theme but then got all confusing with espionage and some royal family and infidelity I think. Or something like that. I can never remember what it's really about.

Added: Thursday 13 November 2014 18:14:57 MST


Submitted by: Raymond
From: Burbank, CA

Season 5:
Episodes I especially liked:

"Death is a Company Policy"

"Chain of Events" - I like the way McGarrett says to Chin, "Get an APB on the girl. And, Chin. Lean on it."

"Percentage"

Episodes I didn't like:

"Little Girl Blue"

"Thanks for the Honeymoon".

Added: Wednesday 12 November 2014 19:18:52 MST


Submitted by: John Chergi
From: Pittsburgh PA

My favorite Season 5 episodes would include the Odd Lot Caper, Journey Out Of Limbo, and The Clock Struck Twelve. I think Season 5 is weaker than my Fav Seasons 3 & 6. The Winkler episode was a strong one too but one too many twist and turns. I think the worst episodes were Little Girl Blue and The Child Stealers. Here Today,Gone Tonight was an intelligent episode. The problem he still would have to go through the elaborate security system in his name or he would not have been let through. John

Added: Wednesday 12 November 2014 19:01:28 MST


Submitted by: Mr. Mike
From: Vancouver

Lenkov talks about why Wo had to go...

http://www.tvguide.com/News/Hawaii-Five-0-Wo-Fat-Death-Peter-Lenkov-1089100.aspx

Added: Wednesday 12 November 2014 18:22:51 MST


Submitted by: honu59
From: New York

Season 5 episodes I like include:

Pig in a Blanket
The Jinn Who Clears the Way
Journey Out of Limbo
The Clock Struck Twelve
The Listener (really creepy!)
Engaged to be Buried

Episode I didn't like so much:

Death Wish on Tantalus Mountain
Little Girl Blue (too much reused footage)

Loved the Vashon episodes!

Added: Wednesday 12 November 2014 13:02:00 MST


Submitted by: Vrinda
From: NJ

Favorite: Too many to name, but if I had to narrow it down to one, it would be "Will the Real Mr. Winkler Please Die."

Least Favorite: "Little Girl Blue."

I had the pleasure of interviewing Monte Markham and Nehemiah Persoff. Both had a wonderful time working on Hawaii Five-O and have only fond memories of Jack. When I mentioned the helicopter scene in "Here Today, Gone Tonight" to Monte, he laughed. He's still trying to figure that part out.

Added: Wednesday 12 November 2014 12:27:56 MST


Submitted by: Mr. Mike
From: Vancouver

Very good:

Pig in a Blanket
I'm a Family Crook -- Don't Shoot

Very stupid:

Here Today ... Gone Tonight

Added: Wednesday 12 November 2014 09:18:48 MST


Submitted by: Rainbow Warrior
From: New York, NY

I am about to dive in to my brand new Season Five dvd set of the old show, and I wanted to take a survey. Eliminating the Vashon trilogy which everyone loves and knows about, which Season Five episode of the old show is your favorite?....Then which Season Five episode of the old show do you dislike or hate the most?

Added: Wednesday 12 November 2014 08:58:47 MST


Submitted by: Vrinda
From: NJ

"McGarrett told his detectives that he was flying to San Francisco to tend to family business, not that he was really flying out, at all, but that's what he said.” – H5O 1.0

That could be explained around. People can have relatives living in more than once place, and never mention it to anyone.

Though Mary Ann and Tom were living in Los Angeles, they could have been from anywhere.

It was because of modern technology that we know where McGarrett was born and where he went to school but even then, that information was not meant to be taken as canon. Because of DVD players with pause and zoom in features, we can read the information on that slide show in Death is a Company Policy. Steve’s birth certificate gives his date of birth as March 10, 1927 – though he refers to himself as a Capricorn goat in the same show. That shows that we weren’t mean to see those records and take them literally.

His birth certificate also gives the name of the hospital as Metropolitan Hospital in Los Angeles and his report card is from Valley High School. There is no Metropolitan Hospital in LA, but there is a Metropolitan State Hospital in Norwalk, California. Valley High School is in Sacramento, 384 miles north of LA. A school enrollment form gives his address as being in Van Nuys. None of this was meant to make sense since none of that information was meant to be seen.

Character development would evolve over a grander scale, involving a change in that character’s psyche as a result of the events around him or her, and that doesn’t happen overnight, and would require several episodes to do. It works with serialized storytelling, rather than contained episodes. The new show does not do a good job in that department. One week, Steve and Danny are willing to risk their lives for each other, and the next, they are bickering like children. Chin has remained the same person, managing to remain strong even when faced with tragedy, and I don’t see much change in Kono, either.

Added: Monday 10 November 2014 19:25:42 MST


Submitted by: L.B.
From: U.S.A.

Character development as we think of it today was not done in series of the 1960s and 1970s when 1.0 aired.

Backstories about any characters's family were only incorporated into the script when necessary to advance the plot of the episode or if those family members were involved in the story. Furthermore, ongoing story arcs such as the toolbox and Danno's custody battle in 2.0 did not exist then. Storylines were generally resolved in one hour (or the occasional two part episode). If a character was wounded in an episode, that didn't carryforward to the next few episodes.

For the most part, we had supercops played by strong character actors and those who assisted them. Hill Street Blues was probably the first cop series to have more of an ensemble, team effort, but that didn't premiere until 1981.

This is why it is hard to compare shows of today to those of yesteryear when it comes to characters, storylines, the level of violence or anything else.

Added: Monday 10 November 2014 17:48:54 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

You must've mean 1979 as they cease production in December 1979.

Added: Monday 10 November 2014 11:59:42 MST


Submitted by: H50 1.0 FOREVER
From: Under the Live Oak Trees

Colorado Supermax did not exist in 1980. Re-read my post. I said "the real McGarrett."

Added: Monday 10 November 2014 06:30:18 MST


Submitted by: John Chergi
From: Pittsburgh PA

Good discussion on HFO Classic & the New HFO personal lives. I like the Classic HFO because there was good old fashioned shoe leather & detective work. You think about the Ten Thousand Diamonds & A Heart howMcG and HFO searched for the Turkish ash of cigar and traced the marble dust. Or Didn't We Meet At A Murder? where McG had nothing but 3 good Americans with no criminal history and had to use surveillance and dig for something. I think what hurts new HFO is they have all these modern gadgets like cell phones, weaponry, computer technology etc. We really can't determine the extent of their investigative work since they can go on a computer or do a quick facial recognition search. Chin could have used a cell phone in the Classic HFO when Nicole Fleming changed clothes. Kono couldn't get down to tell Chin she switched clothes. Great discussion by Mr. Mike & the forum crowd. John

Added: Monday 10 November 2014 01:46:11 MST


Submitted by: Mr. Mike
From: Vancouver

Wo Fat was in the Colorado Supermax prison (not Leavenworth), and, as I pointed out in my review of the latest episode (link at the top of the page), there was still no explanation as to how Wo managed to get out of there and get to Hawaii. Getting out of this place (see review of last show of season four) is not particularly easy.

Added: Monday 10 November 2014 00:03:43 MST


Submitted by: H50 1.0 FOREVER
From: Under the Live Oak Trees

I agree. The tool box should have been passe long seasons ago.

I'd like to see more of William Sadler. I like him as Gino Fish in the Jesse Stone movies and liked him a couple of weeks ago, when he was on the remake.

Added: Sunday 09 November 2014 23:00:08 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

What is more unrealistic is the stretch the entire champ box thing for 5 seasons. They should have ended it back in season 1 but they did not. and Steve has to investigate mystery that his parents left behind in episode to episode to finish it so it's not TOO far-fetched but extending it for 5 seasons, really? And yeah that does seems like abuse of power yet he gotta do it.

Added: Sunday 09 November 2014 20:39:57 MST


Submitted by: H50 1.0 FOREVER
From: Under the Live Oak Trees

I don't watch the remake, except for the occasional episode on cbs.com after everyone gives it high ratings; e.g., the episode about Japanese internment during World War II. They lost me in Season 1, when they ran rampant in Washington Place, etc. They came across as being as crooked as the criminals they were trying to capture. A complete turnoff to me.

But you're asking about characterization. If the personal information is crucial to the telling of the story, fine. BUT!!! The story should not be about the character's personal life.

For example, a couple of seasons back, we were dragged through Kono's relationship with that man who was on the other side. Compare that to the original, at the end of "Cry, Lie," when McGarrett says, "I have a date." Enough said! We imagined the rest for ourselves. We're not allowed in today's media to imagine anything for ourselves. Are we no longer able to take the hint when a couple with a come hither look in their eyes walks into a room and closes a door?

Having AOL's character spend episode after episode solving the mysteries his parents left behind is completely unrealistic. He should do it on his own time. Five-0 has enough cases to solve for him to use their time and resources to solve his own problems. In real life, that would be abusing the power of one's position, which is a very touchy issue in government work. If they want to devote one episode each season to AOL's character taking a week of leave time to work on his parents' mysteries, that works. Otherwise, give us solid cases to watch the team solve.

An example of their handling this well was a couple of weeks ago when AOL's character solved a mystery that William Sadler's character had been unable to solve in years past about the murder of a friend. They showed the solution of a cold case that had baffled the HPD, but they did not go through all the sordid details of Sadler's character's life to do so. That's the only episode I've watched this season, by the way.

Nor do we need to be dragged through all the sordid details of Scott Caan's character's divorce problems. He's divorced. Enough said. A statement of "Don't forget. I'll be with Grace this afternoon" is enough!

As I said in my last post, they should dial the personal stuff back by about 50%. As I said in this post, they should make sure the personal stuff only comes into focus if it has a direct relationship to the solution of a bonafide case.

By the way, how'd Wo Fat get out of Leavenworth after the real McGarrett put him away for everything from murder to espionage to kidnapping to . . .???

Added: Sunday 09 November 2014 18:54:49 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

I was talking about the reboot Virigina, how do you want the Reboot to handle character background and relationships?

Added: Sunday 09 November 2014 17:38:07 MST


Submitted by: Vrinda
From: NJ

Thanks, Honu. I didn't remember that one.

Added: Sunday 09 November 2014 16:44:10 MST


Submitted by: H50 1.0 FOREVER
From: Under the Live Oak Trees

Well, Joe, if we consider the original, which had very little personal character development, much of which changed from one episode to the next, I would recommend consistency. The Iron Brain in "Death is a Company Policy" (Season 5) said McGarrett grew up in Los Angeles. Was that because his sister lived there in "Once Upon a Time" (Season 1)? In "A Short Walk on the Long Shore" (Season 10), McGarrett told his detectives that he was flying to San Francisco to tend to family business, not that he was really flying out, at all, but that's what he said. In short, no one ever really knew where he was from. It would have been good if McGarrett had been given a consistent background and much sooner than either Season 5 or 10. Perhaps, it was because of McGarrett's speech, but I always pegged him as being from somewhere back East. In "Number One With a Bullet" (Season 11), he said his father was run down and killed by someone escaping from a supermarket holdup. Was his father walking home from work? Was his father a policeman participating in a stakeout? Why was his father there? We don't know, but it would have been nice if we could have known -- and much sooner than Season 11.

Added: Sunday 09 November 2014 16:02:51 MST


Submitted by: honu59
From: New York

"Sometimes, we didn't find out more about these characters until Season 2. In Cry, Lie, we find out that Chin was married with 8 kids."

We actually found out that Chin was married in the season 1 episode "Twenty-Four Karat Kill". When Chin is hospitalized after his attack in an alley, his wife is with him in the hospital. We don't see her, but Steve and Danny talk about her so we know that she is there. And Chin did wear a wedding band.

It was very subtle, but believable. When a husband is injured, his wife goes to the hospital to be with him. We knew that Mrs. Kelly was there. The show provided that information through the dialogue, and that was all that was necessary and didn't distract from the focus on the investigation.

Added: Sunday 09 November 2014 14:47:32 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

Yeah, I figured Vrinda. Too bad Mr. Mike did not set up the edit button for the guestbook. Many people in the IMDB and the proboards that I visited don't want characters to act like real detectives. Otherwise it would be like the Original series. Despite fans being born in the 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, and 90's they love the way the remake is and say that the Original series is boring and tame while the new series is far better. Otherwise no one would be watching the series as so they claimed. ands Virginia, how would you want them to do? like scaled back to 50 percent, how does that work?

Added: Sunday 09 November 2014 13:03:27 MST


Submitted by: Vrinda
From: NJ

The backstory saturates the storyline. Everything in these characters' personal lives becomes an issue in a case they are investigating. The crime of the week becomes incidental.

Writers resort to serialized storytelling and emphasizing the characters' background in an effort to have viewers coming back week after week. Networks also expect to see such things when these shows are first pitched by the studios. However, they get carried away with it when they start bringing in characters' siblings, old flames, parents, aunts, uncles, etc. With McGarrett, his family practically created the story arc with Wo Fat, and with Danny, his family problems either make for sitcom scenarios or another mini story arc, as was seen with his irresponsible brother.

Giving background information and involving the characters' personal lives is fine in bits and pieces. We don't need to know everything about them in the first episode or over the course of the first season itself. Many viewers don't start watching a show from the pilot, but come in one quarter of the way into the season or halfway, so any information given on that character in the first few shows will be unknown to them. Even viewers who watch a show from the beginning may forget everything as time goes by. I saw this with the new show where some viewers forgot that Steve had a sister or that his father was murdered, though they were watching from the first episode of Season 1.

On the original show, background information was given out sparingly. In the pilot, we find out about Steve's background in military intelligence - through Jonathan Kaye's rant about Steve being an "organizational misfit", etc. and was friends with an intelligence agent who got killed. In King of the Hill, a newscaster says that Danno is a local boy who went to college in Hawaii for a year and then transferred to USC Berkeley.

Sometimes, we didn't find out more about these characters until Season 2. In Cry, Lie, we find out that Chin was married with 8 kids. In Most Likely to Murder, it's revealed that Danno played baseball in high school. All of this information came out in dialogue and when the storyline called for it or, in Chin's case, when an individual storyline revolved around it. It wasn't info that was brought up continuously to the point where it made for side stories which took up screen time, which is what modern shows resort to.

Added: Sunday 09 November 2014 12:48:28 MST


Submitted by: H50 1.0 FOREVER
From: Under the Live Oak Trees

Some personal life adds to a show, letting us know who the characters are, but it seems like the remake overdoes it. Scaling it back by 50 percent should be about right.

Added: Sunday 09 November 2014 11:55:04 MST


Submitted by: Vrinda
From: NJ

Joe, you are not reading my comment properly. I didn't say the new characters should work with the old characters. I know fully well most of them are dead. I said the new characters should be working like the old ones did, as detectives who operated within the law and not acting like criminals themselves. So what if others shows focus on backstory and character relationships? That doesn't mean every show has to. Such writing pads each episode and infers the writers cannot come up with a concise story to fill 45 minutes.

Added: Sunday 09 November 2014 11:40:27 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

Vrinda, modern police shows always do the relationships and character backgrounds. This Hawaii Five-O is trying to follow suit. And how can old characters work with new characters? Most of the Original cast is dead. It would work if Jack Lord, Kam Fong, James MacArthur and Zulu are still alive. The only best way was to change the title with different sets of characters with a settings in Hawaii would that work.

Added: Sunday 09 November 2014 10:49:31 MST


Submitted by: John Chergi
From: Pittsburgh PA

Season 5 Episode 7 Hawaii Five O Review Man In The Box. 3 stars out of 6. McG spends the episode being systematically tortured through various means:IV drug administration,noxious gas, & waterboarding type maneuvers. McG suffers terribly through these ordeals having flashbacks & hallucinations to prior aspects of his life. I thought the Grace Jones like Dr. Criminal was a good villainess & there was some excellent fight scenes with Wo Fat. It was too jumpy for me as reality cut in & out through the flashbacks. Always like scenes with McG's dad who is a fantastic actor. I wish I could say I enjoyed this episode but I didn't. It had elements of the Classic HFO Nine Dragons with McGarrett tortured by Wo Fat. I liked the Kono commercial with the lip balm. She looked very attractive. John

Added: Sunday 09 November 2014 09:09:44 MST


Submitted by: Vrinda
From: NJ

It's not as though the only options are to make the new show a clone of the old show or make it the mess that it is now. They could have kept it in the same theme with new characters continuing the work the old characters did with the same focus on cases rather than the characters' personal lives and relationships.

Added: Saturday 08 November 2014 22:02:45 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

It pains me when I hear people say that Lenkov's writing is brilliant when his writing is full of flaws and mostly horrible. But no matter, the Reboot was not suppose to be a clone of the Original anyway

Added: Saturday 08 November 2014 18:47:42 MST


Submitted by: honu59
From: New York

I thought the similarity to "Nine Dragons" was fairly obvious. I've been saying this for a couple of years now, but the recent trend of showing horrible torture scenes on network television greatly disturbs me. Makes me wonder what this steady visual diet is doing to young and impressionable minds. My other thought last night was that it seemed like the show was written specifically to cater to the fans. I kept thinking "I'll bet they love this and think it's the best show ever." Me? Not so much. Good thing I have my DVD collection of the masterpiece that is and always will be the original series.

Added: Saturday 08 November 2014 09:55:43 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

bit.ly/13WvUnu 10 news on the 100th episode of Hawaii Five-O

Added: Saturday 08 November 2014 10:39:53 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

Personally I see tonight episode good, but not the best. Many people loves this episode and Mr. Mike ranked this 4 and a half stars so...

Added: Saturday 08 November 2014 10:23:02 MST


Submitted by: Mr. Mike
From: Vancouver

I didn't get any Lost connection, seemed to me the usual "vague similarities" were to Nine Dragons, where Wo Fat kidnapped McGarrett and tortured him horribly, except the new show's torture was 21st century style, very nasty. There were some still-unanswered questions carried over from last season as to how Wo Fat got out of the Supermax prison and Wo seemed to be a lot less scarred than before. Maybe he spent some time in the Honolulu Dermabrasion Clinic. I thought the script by Lenkov showed imagination, something sorely lacking recently, and the way that many things were backwards from normal (i.e., Danno loving Hawaii, wearing an aloha shirt, being happily married, etc.) was pretty funny.

Added: Saturday 08 November 2014 08:48:57 MST


Submitted by: EliseB
From: Montana

Regarding last night's episode - What the eff was that mess.

Added: Saturday 08 November 2014 08:23:01 MST


Submitted by: Jason
From: Dallas

I don't know if anyone saw the similarities with Lost in tonight's episode? Of course the flashbacks and alternate universe and such but the big one is when McGarrett opens his eye in a close up shot in the opening teaser like Jack on Lost. I'm really interested to see what kind of review this episode gets from Mr. Mike.

Added: Friday 07 November 2014 22:36:56 MST


Submitted by: Vrinda
From: NJ

This episode has proven that the producers can't come up with any original ideas and have to rely on speculation from fans online.

Tonight's show was a waste of time.

Added: Friday 07 November 2014 22:17:25 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

Great, they killed Wo Fat. What do you guys think of this?

Added: Friday 07 November 2014 21:00:02 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

Well I'm not going to jump the gun with this episode. I'm going to be very careful

Added: Friday 07 November 2014 13:01:00 MST


Submitted by: Mr. Mike
From: Vancouver

[from Facebook]

Peter [Lenkov] (who wrote the 100th episode of ‪#‎H50 [airing tonight]‬), the writers and Mark will live-tweet with fans while H50 airs on CBS.

Here are the relevant Twitter accounts:
https://twitter.com/PLenkov
https://twitter.com/H50_Writers
https://twitter.com/mark_dacascos

This is all very neat, but which time zone does this apply to? If it's EST, there are going to be some very pissed off people in Hawaii because of all the potential spoilers.

Speaking of spoilers, as I have done with other episodes this season, I have tried to avoid any of the pre-show BS for this one, so if you are gonna jump the gun later and post something, do so with extreme caution...

Added: Friday 07 November 2014 07:59:12 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

Dennis Chung on his facebook

"As we mark the 100th episode of Hawaii Five O I want to take a second to thank Peter Lenkov and Alex O'Loughlin for all they have done to make this moment possible. 

"Mr. Lenkov's creative vision, leadership and hard work has brought Hawaii Five- 0 to a whole new generation of fans. I know that Leonard and Rose Freeman are proud of all his efforts to keep the legacy of Five - 0 alive and well.

"And a special nod must go to Alex. It is not easy to carry the lead in a television series. It is both physically and emotionally demanding. Alex has done this successfully for five seasons and I personally appreciate his professionalism and support. Having worked with Jack Lord I know that Alec, like Jack, has deep commitment to excellence. I am blessed to have worked with both of them. He along with Scott, Daniel, Grace, Masi, Chi and Jerry have successfully faced a difficult challenge and doing do so entertained millions.

"On this very special week we, in Hawaii,extend our deepest and most sincere aloha and mahalo to the H50 ohana."

Half of me is pained to read this but it's his opinion. Let's hope he's right. Again who is pumped up for the 100th episode?

Added: Wednesday 05 November 2014 16:22:41 MST


Submitted by: John Chergi
From: Pittsburgh PA

Hawaii Five O Season 5 Episode 6 Ratings & Review Tom & Jerry or Jerry & The Counterfeiters 4 stars **** out of 6 stars. Two good stories in one with Jerry becoming a kidnapped by Vintage Books owner Thomas Farrow. Farrow inexplicably allows Jerry to leave after killing his associate Helms on Halloween. Helms death was faked and HFO arrive at Farrow's place looking for evidence of a kidnapping. They can't obtain a search warrant because Jerry's activities were considered illegal. There's a good Diary of a Gun type search of the box crates but HFO find nothing but old books. Farrow did this as a diversion to have Helms meet with the IRA and finalize moving the counterfeit money onto an Irish ship. There's also another story with somebody re-creating deaths from the 1984 slasher film Jack Knife. Both victims were 48 and Chin brings out the old yearbooks. Kamekona remembers 30years ago a bully Weiss who picked on a kid named Sam Cole. With the other perpetrators of the bullying Chung and Lerner dead, HFO team races to Weiss place. Jack Knife escapes just in time slicing Weiss ear off and running. Turns out the killer is not Sam Cole but Aaron Cole who is Sam's son. He heard the horrible story how his father was bullied and left in the field like the Jack Knife movie. He got revenge on the bullies but nearly killing his father Sam for being weak and blaming the cycle of poor was lame motivation in hurting GIS father. The Jerry uses his contacts to find out Farrow was really William Corrigan a British Major who supposedly committed a wartime atrocity in Iraq while leading a mission there. 5 innocent Iraqis killed. There is good give and take by Farrow & McG about war and the split second decisions a leader must make in that situation. He escaped court martial trial and became Farrow. HFO stop Helms and a few men from off loading the money to the IRA after a brief gun battle. Think The Usual Suspects or Up The Rebels. John

Added: Wednesday 05 November 2014 09:43:29 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

bit.ly/1oitIzq I made a new message in my proboard talk about characters and violence in the show.

Added: Tuesday 04 November 2014 18:53:36 MST


Submitted by: L.B.
From: U.S.A.

Another thing that distinguished Five-O 1.0 from other series of the era was its’ creativity.

While it is commonplace today, can anyone remember another police series from the ‘60s and ‘70s that killed off a regular character (Chin Ho)? I watched all of the ‘70s crime dramas and cannot remember another one that did that. This was very daring (even unheard of) for that time. And to dump his body from a running car outside the Iolani Palace would be ruthless by today’s standards. Obviously, this changed the way this issue would be dealt with in future series.

Five-O 1.0 had some storylines that were very different from other series of that time and that haven’t been tried on current series. Every series had psychopaths, but not quite like the ones that Jack Lord’s team faced. How many times have we seen someone with hooks for hands as the villain? Someone who murders people who resemble adversaries of his favorite comic strip character? Women who rob busloads of tourists? Facing three generations of a ruthless crime family? Or maybe the best one, someone who recreated murders that the Five-O team had solved in the past? Not to mention the fact that all of these villains were played to perfection by those who portrayed them. Have CSI’s various detectives ever faced villains like these?

While much has been written about the opening theme and the great music in the series, another original touch has to be the cut to the wave prior to a commercial. This built tension in the episodes in a way that you simply can’t with your ordinary wind down at a commercial break. One of them that was particularly memorable (not to mention chilling) to me was in "Nightmare In Blue” at the first break where the unsuspecting victim allows the cop into her home to ask questions. No other series to my knowledge has ever had anything like that.

These things among many others are why people are still talking about this series more than three decades after it went off the air.

Added: Tuesday 04 November 2014 18:25:47 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

Oh, I forgot to point out, most people who watched the Reboot lived when the Original series ran on CBS. So they say they are fans of the Original but prefer the Reboot so they can enjoy it more.

Added: Tuesday 04 November 2014 12:34:11 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

Very well said Vrinda. People just looked at the Original and said how tame it was so it must be a bad show. Well it's not.

And just imagine Leonard Freeman creating the show today.

Added: Tuesday 04 November 2014 09:16:39 MST


Submitted by: Vrinda
From: NJ

Rainbow,

I don’t remember off the top of my head, but that does sound like something I read in Karen’s book.

The amount of violence in a show does not make it better, nor does the presence of violence indicate it will be a good show. In a cop show, you have to have violence because it is a part of fighting crime. Though in real life, cops rarely get into shoot outs, car chases, or fist fights like they do on TV, some suspension of disbelief has to be employed when incorporating these actions. Shows overuse the violence to the point where it becomes noticeably unrealistic, as opposed to being just a cut above realism, but still not so far-fetched that the audience cannot accept it.

Jack even said himself in 1976 that violence is needed on a cop show, but that the violence has to have a context. It cannot be violence for violence’s sake. Modern writers - not just on H5O 2, but other shows – use violence to the point where it saturates the storyline. The violence has no purpose except to excite the short attention-spanned, shallow viewers. It becomes out of place in the storyline and just a way to pad the time so the writers don’t have to work on a well-constructed story.

LB,

You said it well. Every time I watch the original series, I come away with something new I never saw or knew before. It’s obvious this was a show made and set in a different time and place but, at that time, it was a contemporary setting. Yes, time has gone by. Hairstyles, clothing, technology, social, and political issues will have changed, but to whine because a show set in the ‘70s doesn’t reflect the 2010s or whenever the present era might be is being shallow and ignorant. That implies that anything before the modern day is irrelevant and the world never existed before today.

Modern audiences have become desensitized to violence because they have been bombarded with it from TV and films right and left. For all the excessive violence put into TV shows to give the audience a jolt, it accomplishes nothing.

What I find very hypocritical and shallow are the older folks who were there when the original series was first on who make these comments about the fashion and technology being outdated, talking as though they never experienced these things when they lived through that time.

As for the supporting characters, for people to complain that such characters on the original show didn’t get much to do and Jack kept them from getting more screen time shows that they are prejudiced, don’t know how TV shows are made, and want to perpetuate lies. The modern model for TV crime dramas of large casts with everyone getting an equal amount of screen time and their own individual story arcs didn’t exist in the ‘70s. It didn’t come about until the ‘90s. They also have no clue as to the role of the supporting cast and how it would make no sense to give them more screentime beyond what they had.

How can you do an entire episode with Doc Bergman at the center when his job was to examine corpses and diagnose causes of death? It doesn’t take 50 minutes of a TV show to do that. How much more screen time can they give Che Fong when his job was just to analyze forensic evidence? They’d have to set the episode in the lab for the majority of the time with other characters coming and going to get information and make the arrest at the end. That makes the investigation from the detectives’ side incidental and makes for uneven story writing.

The only way these guys can get more screen time is if they were at the center of an investigation, and that might work for one episode each, but not several. They could not go out and question suspects, argue with the governor and the DA, or make arrests. Staying behind the scenes as they did, they made few – if any – enemies, so no one will have a vendetta against them. There’s one possible storyline gone right there. The more people a character’s job allows him or her to come in contact with, the larger their part will be.

How often in TV history, until the CSI shows came out, did you see the criminals going after the forensic technicians? On CSI, that happened only because the writers suspended disbelief with a very heavy cable by allowing the detectives to double as forensic technicians.

What made the original interesting and exciting was that the characters used their intellect, logic, deduction, and analysis of the evidence to solve crimes, not some touchscreen computer or 5-second DNA test.

Added: Monday 03 November 2014 23:38:00 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

It's no use wishing for the Reboot to be cancelled. it's going to last 7 years unless Alex, Daniel, Grace and Caan renew their contracts

Added: Monday 03 November 2014 17:39:53 MST


Submitted by: Mr. Mike
From: Vancouver

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2014/10/28/cbs-predictions-csi-is-likely-to-be-canceled/318137/

Five-0 is predicted to be a "toss up between renewal or cancellation by May, 2015."

So are Blue Bloods, The Good Wife and Madame Secretary. CSI is definitely predicted to be cancelled because the episode order has been cut from 22 to 18.

The repugnant Stalker, on the other hand, is "more likely to be renewed than cancelled."

Added: Monday 03 November 2014 08:45:00 MST


Submitted by: Rainbow Warrior
From: New York, NY

Great post L.B. You have echoed what Ringfire and I have said many times.

I was reading a few pages of I believe, Karen Rhodes book "Booking FIVE-O" and she wrote that by the time of the originals fifth season that the old Five-o was considered one of the most violent shows of its time, and many people complained that the only time period it should be on was the 10 pm show. People were concerned about how violent the original was, so it proves your point that people today looking back at the old show and saying it was too tame, simply don't know what they were talking about.

Vrinda and Mike correct me, if I have referenced the wrong book above that I read that in.

Added: Monday 03 November 2014 07:32:36 MST


Submitted by: Mr. Mike
From: Vancouver

S05E06 reviewed:

http://mjq.net/fiveo/2010-log5.htm#6

Added: Monday 03 November 2014 00:12:20 MST


Submitted by: ringfire211
From: Philadelphia

"With regards to Five-O 2.0, I'll conclude with a simple question: will anyone be discussing that series on a board like this one 30 years from now?"

Indeed. That's what I always say. The fact of the matter is that many people don't even watch network TV anymore. Back in 2000 when CSI came out it was something fresh and new and folks were talking about it. I think THE SOPRANOS was the big non-network TV show that everyone was talking about at the time. But most folks then were still watching network TV. Well, a lot has changed since then. You just don't hear folks these days talking about the latest CSI or LAW & ORDER episode that they watched. No, you hear them talking about BREAKING BAD and GAME OF THRONES and HOUSE OF CARDS and other non-network shows. I guess folks these days find network TV to be too tame or too bland and uninteresting. I know some folks here have mentioned network TV shows like BLUE BLOODS and PERSON OF INTEREST but even those shows no one seems to talk about. All the talk is about the cable shows.

If a show like CSI (which has had incredible longevity) doesn't get talked about then who's gonna talk about the new Five-0? It doesn't stand a chance. No way! If good network TV doesn't get talked about then who's going to talk about bad network TV?

Added: Sunday 02 November 2014 21:25:45 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

One would wish, we hasn't gotten a remake of "One Big Happy Family" :!thinking:

Added: Sunday 02 November 2014 18:16:35 MST


Submitted by: Mr. Mike
From: Vancouver

Juicy rumour of the day:

Five-0 is remaking Vashon Trilogy from the original show in multiple parts to be broadcast during sweeps, with Stacy Keach as Honore, boss of the crime family.

Remember -- you read it here first (assuming it is true, of course).

:!thinking:

Added: Sunday 02 November 2014 17:43:59 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

Never mind, how is the review coming?

Added: Sunday 02 November 2014 17:29:47 MST


Submitted by: Mr. Mike
From: Vancouver

It is moderated, by me. Is there something you have questions about? If it's the business about the car in the message below, I told the guy to post here.

Added: Sunday 02 November 2014 17:22:45 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

I thought this site is moderated?

Added: Sunday 02 November 2014 13:55:48 MST


Submitted by: Mike
From: Wausau, WI

I have a 1968 Park Lane Brougham that I am currently taking bids on. The car is in excellent condition and can be found on craigslist through this link

wausau.craigslist.org/cto/4708682869.html

Added: Sunday 02 November 2014 12:26:20 MST


Submitted by: Mr. Mike
From: Vancouver

Miscellaneous crap, stupid and otherwise, from Friday's show:

• Why did Jerry take an interest in the bookstore and its fishy activities in the first place? As per the first show of the season, the store had bought a bunch of antique books from a library in Europe, and the pages from these books had a 75% cotton/25% linen content and could be "melted down" and used to make counterfeit money. But why would Jerry take an interest in this? Even though Jerry is someone obsessed by conspiracies, there is a limit as to how many conspiracies and bad things in the world a person can be interested in. This counterfeiting business hardly seems like a "big deal" in the world of conspiracy freaks. This leads to further questions like "where did they "melt down" the paper, how did they convert it to sheets and print all the currency?" At the end of the show, we see the finished product and there is a LOT of cash. This would require a printing press, ink, and maybe other chemicals. You have to wonder why Five-0 couldn't have looked into who was ordering supplies of ink and so forth that could be used to print money, or where a press could be located that was capable of making so much moolah. This is not some minor league operation.

• Danno's comment that the IRA "died with the last Duran Duran album" doesn't make a lot of sense and is in kind of questionable taste. First, Duran Duran isn't an Irish band, they are English. They had albums in the 1980s and 1990s and all the way up to 2010. Second, the IRA ended in 1969 according to Wikipedia, then changed to the Provisional IRA (which is what most people would still call the IRA). It had a cease fire in 1997 and really ended in 2005.

• McGarrett and Danno go after the counterfeit money which, according to Jerry, is connected to "a freighter anchored four miles offshore" (in other words, not in international waters). This freighter is registered in Belfast. But the ship that the money is on right now is NOT the freighter, it looks more like a large tug. There are very vague similarities here to the original show's Up the Rebels, where explosives were being transported on a large tug all the way from Hawaii to Ireland. But I think most apologists for the new show would suggest that this new show's tug is just going to the freighter. Whatever. Seemingly under the auspices of the Coast Guard, McG and Danno fly to this tug by helicopter and then rappel down to its decks. The bad guys just sit there until the Five-0 duo have both landed on the decks, rather than shoot at them when they are descending. DUH!!

• The term "serial killer" is applied to the crime of the week in the PR for the show, but traditionally this refers to THREE people being killed, not two (though this is a matter of some dispute among FBI bigshots, who will accept two as qualifying a person for this category of killer).

• Why does bookstore owner Farrow dress up in a leather apron? Is this to scare Jerry into thinking he is going to dismember bodies like someone from the Texas Chainsaw Massacre? Farrow chooses a dumb time to deal with Jerry and Helms (the tall bald guy, identified in the credits of earlier shows as Browser, who is also tied up), since there are tons of kids outside on the streets for Hallowe'en. In addition to all his other talents, Farrow must be a special effects guy (using squibs to simulate where he shoots Helms) and a makeup artist (corn syrup and food coloring for the blood where he has supposedly beaten Helms).

• According to Jerry, Farrow came to Hawaii in 2012, but his driver's license was issued 06/14/2008.

• Why does McGarrett get all moralistic about the fact that Farrow killed members of a family when he was serving in Iraq, which resulted in Farrow's court-martial and the beginning of his attitude that he was betrayed by his own government? Is this consistent with McG's personality?

• Considering Farrow removes everything from Jerry's basement, and I mean EVERYTHING, including all of Jerry's research, files, his computer and so forth, how does Jerry get back into the swing of things investigating conspiracies for the rest of the show? Near the end of the show, Jerry is seen with a small computer, almost like a netbook -- is that sufficient?

• When McG and Danno look in a BARREL where all the counterfeit money is stored at the end of the show, didn't anyone else think that when they opened the barrel, maybe -- SURPRISE! -- Danno's supposedly dead brother would appear? I would have thought that the sight of the barrel would have at least produced some kind of traumatic reaction in Danno.

Added: Sunday 02 November 2014 10:20:54 MST


Submitted by: H50 1.0 FOREVER
From: Under the Live Oak Trees

Excellent evaluation, LB. Re: old technology, I find it to be an interesting study. In fact, I devote a whole page to advances in technology that were seen during the twelve seasons of H50 on my website. Take a look at the page "Five-0 and Technology." If you can add to it, please let me know. A lot happened during that time period.

Added: Sunday 02 November 2014 04:41:17 MST


Submitted by: L.B.
From: U.S.A.

The original series and its' characters were anything but boring.

Personally, I would much rather watch Jack Lord's McGarrett track down the bad guy than other TV characters portrayed by David Caruso, Dennis Franz, Jerry Orbach, Daniel J. Travanti, or Alex O'Loughlin any day of the week. Lord was as good an actor as any of those guys, and I wouldn't say that any of those five men would qualify as Mr. Charisma either. Think of some of the great scenes where McGarrett confronted the Vashons, Chin Ho's killer, or Wo Fat on several occasions. Honestly, could anyone have done it better?

Second, to get caught up in things like the dated clothes and technology or a perceived lack of violence in the original Five-O is totally missing the point. None of these things are what makes a great police series anyway. All of these things when presented on TV are products of their time period and cannot be held against any series when viewing it years later. By this standard, people will be saying the same things when viewing CSI, Law & Order, and NYPD Blue years later (if they are not already in some instances). Any current series will have more violence than their counterparts from the '70s and '80s did, as the level of violence now would have never been accepted back then. Five-O 1.0 was one of the most violent shows of its' time, and that is the prism that it must be viewed through on that issue.

Finally, with regards to supporting characters on police series, very few of them throughout TV history have been interesting or dynamic enough to be spun off into their own series as has frequently happened with their supporting counterparts in situation comedies. Most of them play solid, dependable characters in the mold of James MacArthur or Kam Fong, not loudmouths like Scott Caan. Furthermore, 1.0 aired in an era of shows dominated by larger than life characters such as McGarrett, Kojak, and Columbo than many of the more ensemble efforts produced today. This also lead to some of the supporting actors of that time being a little more reserved in their roles.

With regards to Five-O 2.0, I'll conclude with a simple question: will anyone be discussing that series on a board like this one 30 years from now?

Added: Saturday 01 November 2014 19:05:35 MST


Submitted by: Joekido
From: Colorado Springs

Tonight's episodes does not make any sense. Don't know why the proboard people thinks the episode is good. Look proboard people, there is nothing wrong with saying that an episode sucks, you don't have to praise it everytime. are you guys zombies? Whatever. The killer tortured his father, blaming the bullies for traumatizing his father... What?! That should be the other way around! And the reason is very weak (They pick on me because my life is poor), Should be (They pick on for no reason). I hope the next episode is good

Added: Saturday 01 November 2014 14:45:19 MST


Submitted by: Vrinda
From: NJ

It should be noted: Jack Lord was one of those people who took an audience bow, according to some internet sources. I have a picture I found on eBay with Jack talking to Ed on stage, so maybe he actually made a stage appearance.

Added: Saturday 01 November 2014 10:28:54 MST


Submitted by: Mr. Mike
From: Vancouver

I found last night's episode pretty bad, aside from one of its focuses being on Jerry's pursuit of the bookstore counterfeiters. The story was all over the place, with questionable motivation from the killer of the week. At the end, football great Eric Dickerson made a cameo appearance for no logical reason. This reminded me of the Ed Sullivan show (another CBS product, BTW) where Sullivan would get famous people to stand up in the audience and take a bow.

Added: Saturday 01 November 2014 08:23:44 MST


Submitted by: Mr. Mike
From: Vancouver

Third time for cartermatt.com!!! ‘Hawaii Five-0′ season 5, episode 6 review: Did Jerry help catch the counter-fitter? DUH!!!!

This week they are joined by Entertainment Weekly:

Farrow is actually Major William Corrigan, formerly of the British Special Forces who disappeared before his Court Marshall [sic] hearing ...

Added: Saturday 01 November 2014 08:19:55 MST


Links back: Main PageDiscussion Forum Main PageDiscussion Forum Archives


WARNING: FIVE-O (AND OTHER) DVDS SOLD THROUGH SITES LIKE THOSE ADVERTISED BELOW MAY BE BOOTLEGS.