|
 |
New Short from RiffTrax…
American Thrift Part 1 debuted back in October and featured Veronica Belmont as a guest riffer. Veronica is long gone as they pick up where they left off in this weird Jam Handy production for Chevrolet (note that everybody drives Chevys in the short). 21 Replies to “New Short from RiffTrax…”Commenting at Satellite News
We are determined to encourage thoughtful discussion, so please be respectful to others. We also provide an "Ignore" button ( Comments are closed. |
|
Satellite News is a fan site for the Mystery Science Theater 3000 television and Netflix series. It is an independent publication written and compiled by Chris Cornell (msampo@aol.com) and Brian Henry (erhardt4@aol.com). Satellite of Love, LLC does not maintain this web site, nor is it responsible for this site's content.
All content posted on Satellite News is copyright © 2024 by Chris Cornell and Brian Henry, except where otherwise noted. This Date in MSTory is written and compiled by Steve Finley, Chris Cornell and Brian Henry. Copyright © 2024 All rights reserved. Please do not reproduce This Date in MSTory items in any form without express written permission from the authors. Items of MST3K news may be duplicated or reposted, as long as Satellite News is cited as the source. The views and opinions expressed herein are not necessarily those of Satellite of Love, LLC. No warranty is expressed or implied that the information given herein is completely accurate, and in fact this information can and will change at any time. So there. Mystery Science Theater 3000, its characters and situations are copyrights and trademarks of Satellite of Love, LLC. Banner image created by Larry Lee Moniz. |
|
) to help our users cope with "trolls" and other commenters whom they find annoying. Go to our
No Veronica? Makes me wonder if they were holding off recording this until all four got together. But to lose a riffer (even a guest) is just another reason I’d prefer paying more for a complete work, rather than two uneven and unnecessary halves.
So, it’s back to being a sausage fest? :lol:
Anyway, I’ll just wait for the next DVD compilation.
Rifftrax should have done the whole short in one sitting. If was longer than most of the shorts then all they had to do was charge a little more for it. In the end, its going to end up like that anyway.
“and springs are important in gold, too -whistle-”
Great call-back.
Finally! They’ve really got to stop this habit of releasing things in two parts, not so much because of the extra cost–I don’t mind losing the extra couple dollars a month–but because, almost every time they divide a short into two halves, we end up waiting around for the second half. We still haven’t seen the second half of the service-station short.
Yeah, I’m not keen on breaking the shorts into two parts. I’m not sure I even understand the financial logistics of that. If the first part stinks, then nobody is going to probably buy the second part. Just make them $2 and have the full riff. Plus, I’d almost completely forgotten about part I of the two parters, because its been so bloody long since they released the first halves (over 2 months, I think?)… If you are going to split them up, release the next half the following week (or 2), so people don’t lose interest. RT are usually sharp and cater to the fans but they blew it on this decision. Shorts FAIL!
That being said, as mikek (#2) said, lets make with some new Shorts DVD action! They have plenty for a new disc or two! I’d like to see a new Shorts volume and Maniac both released on DVD in the next couple of months. Snap, snap, fellas. Make it so… You must obey the whims of every fan. :razz:
I frankly wish they’d have a re-do of the first part of this short, with just the three of them . . . both for consistency and, with all due respect to Ms. Belmont, because her line reads were terribly flat. Her involvement unfortunately added nothing to the enjoyability.
Now if they could have gotten Mary Jo involved . . .
@3 i agree great callback!
No new DVD releases shown on Amazon unless you haven’t bought Shorts Vol.1 or Night Of The Living Dead 3 riffer version. Mar 2 shows a double feature release of those in one pack. I would think there’s something cookin though. Looking at the numbers on the DVDs, 488-498, 506-509 and this double feture says 512, I imagine 510 & 511 may be Maniac and Xmas Live, and 499-505 maybe reserved for shorts releases. You think??
I like it!
@6: I totally agree. A re-do of the first part of this short (sans Veronica Belmont) would be most welcome.
“@6: I totally agree. A re-do of the first part of this short (sans Veronica Belmont) would be most welcome.”
Thanks. I do want to add that she didn’t really *detract* from it as such . . . maybe *dis*tract, given her intonations – but hey, it’s not the Riffer’s best material either. The second part was funnier either way.
Geez what nerds. I mean I’m a HUGE nerd, but even I think it’s beyond all reasonable nerdiness to want them to actually redo the first part for “consistency sake”.
I thought Veronica Belmont both added and detracted. Since a good part of the 1st half of the short centered about the American housewife, or rather “the woman American”, it strengthened the riffing to have a woman play-acting the part of the housewife. On the other hand, Belmont’s got her whole tiresome “tech-centric” shtick that isn’t funny anywhere ever and, while it didn’t corrupt the “American Thrift” riffing too badly, it was just enough of a problem (e.g. using “pwned” as a riff) that I’m not too sorry that Belmont wasn’t around for the second half.
But it should be noted that Belmont’s contribution to the first half wouldn’t have worked for the second for the bizarre reason that “American Thrift” stopped being about the “woman American” halfway through. There simply wouldn’t have been many opportunities for Belmont to play the housewife role in riffing because the short stopped being about American housewifery and started being about…****, I’m not quite sure yet what it was supposed to be about.
One more thing, for what it’s worth: Belmont contributed enough to the first half of the riffing that I prefer that 1st part to the 2nd part which was just released. Just saying.
“Geez what nerds. I mean I’m a HUGE nerd, but even I think it’s beyond all reasonable nerdiness to want them to actually redo the first part for “consistency sake”.”
Eh, I did need some justification beyond “she sucked.” That and I like the idea of a re-riff with better material, and especially, better delivery. I was disappointed.
And just to be clear, I do think it’s an awkward circumstance. Had this been a one-off short, it would have been fine, no questions asked. But it was a two-parter, and that makes it seem questionable as to why they had her particpate in the first half but not the second (which, indeed, forced them to spend an intro explaining that situation). It’s like having a two-parter in some show, where you introduce a character in one episode and then they’re just inexplicably gone in the next. It’s a weird hole to fill, if you take my meaning. An absence that makes you question the validity of the former presence.
And, as a geek, I completely agree with the techie-centric comments. That kind of material would have to be way more on-target to justify a laugh. “Pwned” in particular is not funny in this context; it’s 133tspeak, it’s pronounced “owned” in verbal conversation, and – as much as I enjoy the term – it’s terribly overused (and misused).
Raptorial Talon says: #15
So, this short is kind of like Riding With Death and that Veronica lady is like Abbie.
“So, this short is kind of like Riding With Death and that Veronica lady is like Abbie.”
That was awesome. Dead-on. :mrgreen:
“For instance,I prefer my ice cream served in a hollowed out monkey skull.” And here I thought I was the only one… :twisted:
@Raptorial Talon #15
As I said… NEEERRRRRRDDDDDDS! Nothing you said in your post makes any difference, because we are just talking about a couple of people sitting around making fun of a terrible old piece of jingoistic cold war era propaganda, not a character heavy two part episode of Star Trek Deep Space Nine. It is absolutely pants crapping insane to care about whether or not there is any continuity between the two halves of this short. It makes no difference at all. As for them “spending an introduction” explaining her absence… Well they only ever do introductions on the second part of a two-parters. All other shorts just start with no intro, so it’s not like they were wasting something they normally do something more meaningful with. And the intros they do do are brief, and only serve to connect the two parts in some humorous way. With this one they just did exactly what they’ve done on every other two part short, which was make a couple of jokes about the first part before they showed the second. And they tried to explain her absence in a humorous way to satiate the inevitable super-nerd complaints about her not being in this part, when in reality they shouldn’t actually have to explain it at all. IT’S NOT IMPORTANT. Really, if someone can’t handle watching these two parts of the short as they are now without becoming overly concerned with the continuity of riffers between them then that person has some issues that they should possibly be trying to deal with through professional therapy or other counseling.
Or if it is just that you simply didn’t like the first part then that’s a totally different matter. But again it’s just as pants crapping insane to expect that they would ever redo it just because you or anyone else didn’t think it was funny. It’s simply not going to happen.
@19:
Yeah, we get it. Enough of your over-reacting to Raptorial Talon’s harmless posts already. Sure, we’re all nerds. All I’m sayin’ is that a re-do would be welcome, NOT that I would expect one or make a futile attempt at requesting one. Continuity of riffing personnel on two-part shorts is really not an issue for me. I simply just didn’t like Ms. Belmont’s inclusion on the first part AFTER having watched it.
“Repeat to yourself: ‘It’s just a show. I should really just relax.'”
That goes for all of us.