<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Guilty Feat</title>
	<atom:link href="http://guiltyfeat.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://guiltyfeat.com</link>
	<description>A source of dubious pride</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2011 16:29:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on What is Guilty Feat? by Ben Garman (@alienvariety)</title>
		<link>http://guiltyfeat.com/about/#comment-247</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ben Garman (@alienvariety)]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2011 16:29:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://guiltyfeat.wordpress.com/?page_id=2#comment-247</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hey ho, only just discovered your blog and it looks like you&#039;ve given up on it! Enjoyed what I&#039;ve been reading though, so I hope you&#039;ll pick it up again sometime...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey ho, only just discovered your blog and it looks like you&#8217;ve given up on it! Enjoyed what I&#8217;ve been reading though, so I hope you&#8217;ll pick it up again sometime&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Apologies by Ben Garman (@alienvariety)</title>
		<link>http://guiltyfeat.com/apologies/#comment-246</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ben Garman (@alienvariety)]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2011 16:28:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://guiltyfeat.com/#comment-246</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I totally agree - Rubicon was fantastic and deserved at least two more seasons, let alone a fucking conclusion.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I totally agree &#8211; Rubicon was fantastic and deserved at least two more seasons, let alone a fucking conclusion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on One Day I&#8217;ll Never Get Back by Kieran</title>
		<link>http://guiltyfeat.com/2010/07/10/one-day/#comment-234</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kieran]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 May 2011 22:00:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://guiltyfeat.com/?p=44#comment-234</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Great book,really loved it. But then I  happened to catch a popular tv series he had written on and discovered he had lifted the ending and only real major plot twist from it almodt completely. He has also borrowed the lost letter scenario from tess,which he was adapting for the BBC at the time he wrote one day.

Still fond of the novel but these things really took the shine off it for me. if you take out the plot twist at the end it&#039;s a book about two people who fancy each other for years before they finally get it on. And that&#039;s just a bit silly.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great book,really loved it. But then I  happened to catch a popular tv series he had written on and discovered he had lifted the ending and only real major plot twist from it almodt completely. He has also borrowed the lost letter scenario from tess,which he was adapting for the BBC at the time he wrote one day.</p>
<p>Still fond of the novel but these things really took the shine off it for me. if you take out the plot twist at the end it&#8217;s a book about two people who fancy each other for years before they finally get it on. And that&#8217;s just a bit silly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Just Not Funny by JoeSchmoe</title>
		<link>http://guiltyfeat.com/2010/09/26/just-not-funny/#comment-233</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[JoeSchmoe]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Mar 2011 00:33:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://guiltyfeat.com/?p=618#comment-233</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[95% of everything is crap. The other 5% is gold. No exceptions.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>95% of everything is crap. The other 5% is gold. No exceptions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why Nikita? by JoeSchmoe</title>
		<link>http://guiltyfeat.com/2010/09/12/why-nikita-2/#comment-232</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[JoeSchmoe]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Mar 2011 00:30:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://guiltyfeat.com/?p=525#comment-232</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Pretty sure Nikita was her real name in the original too. As for the person who hates one man army fiction, it&#039;s kinda been a running theme since Ancient times, guys like Hercales, Achilles, Odyssus, Gilgamesh, etc It&#039;s pretty absurd to compare a film like Blood Diamond that tries to be topical and semi-realistic vs. something like Die Hard. Then again said person was around for the 2nd James Bond so they&#039;re probably ancient.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pretty sure Nikita was her real name in the original too. As for the person who hates one man army fiction, it&#8217;s kinda been a running theme since Ancient times, guys like Hercales, Achilles, Odyssus, Gilgamesh, etc It&#8217;s pretty absurd to compare a film like Blood Diamond that tries to be topical and semi-realistic vs. something like Die Hard. Then again said person was around for the 2nd James Bond so they&#8217;re probably ancient.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Apologies by paul</title>
		<link>http://guiltyfeat.com/apologies/#comment-210</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[paul]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Nov 2010 18:02:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://guiltyfeat.com/#comment-210</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I don&#039;t agree with your assessment of Rubicon. I&#039;ve now watched the whole series (with my wife) and both of us have found it wonderfully intriguing and engaging - a whole lot better than &quot;24&quot; which got insultingly tedious - dragging out the plot a whole 5 years! At the very least Rubicon had the decency to wind up the plot inside the first season, and yet left enough to wish for a follow-up season. I liked the characters, the plot-lines, and the paranoia that lets you believe that maybe, just maybe, the gov&#039;t does, indeed, plan nefarious acts in secrecy (big surprise), and that many of these are the result of power-hungry &quot;patriots&quot; who have the hubris to believe they&#039;re acting in the &quot;national interest.&quot; Your review is narrow, and leaves little room for the enjoyment of the entertainment value afforded Rubicon, which I believe is richly deserved.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t agree with your assessment of Rubicon. I&#8217;ve now watched the whole series (with my wife) and both of us have found it wonderfully intriguing and engaging &#8211; a whole lot better than &#8220;24&#8243; which got insultingly tedious &#8211; dragging out the plot a whole 5 years! At the very least Rubicon had the decency to wind up the plot inside the first season, and yet left enough to wish for a follow-up season. I liked the characters, the plot-lines, and the paranoia that lets you believe that maybe, just maybe, the gov&#8217;t does, indeed, plan nefarious acts in secrecy (big surprise), and that many of these are the result of power-hungry &#8220;patriots&#8221; who have the hubris to believe they&#8217;re acting in the &#8220;national interest.&#8221; Your review is narrow, and leaves little room for the enjoyment of the entertainment value afforded Rubicon, which I believe is richly deserved.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Just Not Funny by Derek Burns</title>
		<link>http://guiltyfeat.com/2010/09/26/just-not-funny/#comment-209</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Derek Burns]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Oct 2010 12:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://guiltyfeat.com/?p=618#comment-209</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mike &amp; Molly is a hoot!   I completely do not get your prejudice re this show. It is coarse and it hits the jungular of a humour which the character-likened will appreciate - and there are many!   It may not appeal to the food snobs but it will attract and satisfy the open-minded who want to giggle, laugh and belly out with the show, not at the show.  Indeed you need a healthy sense of humour to enjoy the show and that&#039;s why shows are made like this - to allow us with that sense to be entertained, guilt free!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike &amp; Molly is a hoot!   I completely do not get your prejudice re this show. It is coarse and it hits the jungular of a humour which the character-likened will appreciate &#8211; and there are many!   It may not appeal to the food snobs but it will attract and satisfy the open-minded who want to giggle, laugh and belly out with the show, not at the show.  Indeed you need a healthy sense of humour to enjoy the show and that&#8217;s why shows are made like this &#8211; to allow us with that sense to be entertained, guilt free!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Crossing Off The Rubicon by Lewis</title>
		<link>http://guiltyfeat.com/2010/08/04/crossing-off-the-rubicon/#comment-197</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lewis]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Oct 2010 23:55:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://guiltyfeat.com/?p=271#comment-197</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Well, you convinced me to give it a few more episodes.  It took a while for my early impressions to change, but I&#039;m glad I hung in there.   I was actually only three episodes in when I commented in September.  The first time I had the sense that Rubicon had done something right was the Spangler/Travers trip to D.C. (and the assassination decision being made back at API) in episode four.  I am now on eleven.

I&#039;ll get my critical thoughts out of the way first.  It shouldn&#039;t take four episodes to see characters give a shit about their profession.  Mad Men won us over immediately by making advertising irresistibly interesting &lt;i&gt;in the pilot&lt;/i&gt;.  Intelligence and analysis can be just as intriguing, but this is a hard sell when the players on screen are bored with their jobs week after week.  Fortunately that didn&#039;t last long.

Worse still, Will Travers&#039; repetitive behavior was one of the most infuriating things for me--the roof, the tail scenes, the motorcycle, the bugs, the conspiracy investigation.  I also didn&#039;t really buy his character.  Something about a tightly wound, obsessed genius who drinks beer and takes everything in stride seems a little off.  Katherine Rhumor&#039;s storyline was also very dull and repetitive.  Now that I&#039;m further along, it seems likely that the writers needed to stretch out her personal investigation to match Will&#039;s.  Fair enough.

I think we were completely clear of the clunky start somewhere around episode six.  Since then, every character has emerged into someone distinct, watchable, and sympathetic.  The intelligence/conspiracy side finally, thankfully, began touching on current events.  (The privatization of intelligence is, as you said, a highly worthy topic of exploration.)  It seems likely that the two will converge, which should be fun.

I&#039;m not sure about you, but I feel like I might have to eat at least some of my words.   After episode eleven, this might just be a show worthy of AMC.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, you convinced me to give it a few more episodes.  It took a while for my early impressions to change, but I&#8217;m glad I hung in there.   I was actually only three episodes in when I commented in September.  The first time I had the sense that Rubicon had done something right was the Spangler/Travers trip to D.C. (and the assassination decision being made back at API) in episode four.  I am now on eleven.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll get my critical thoughts out of the way first.  It shouldn&#8217;t take four episodes to see characters give a shit about their profession.  Mad Men won us over immediately by making advertising irresistibly interesting <i>in the pilot</i>.  Intelligence and analysis can be just as intriguing, but this is a hard sell when the players on screen are bored with their jobs week after week.  Fortunately that didn&#8217;t last long.</p>
<p>Worse still, Will Travers&#8217; repetitive behavior was one of the most infuriating things for me&#8211;the roof, the tail scenes, the motorcycle, the bugs, the conspiracy investigation.  I also didn&#8217;t really buy his character.  Something about a tightly wound, obsessed genius who drinks beer and takes everything in stride seems a little off.  Katherine Rhumor&#8217;s storyline was also very dull and repetitive.  Now that I&#8217;m further along, it seems likely that the writers needed to stretch out her personal investigation to match Will&#8217;s.  Fair enough.</p>
<p>I think we were completely clear of the clunky start somewhere around episode six.  Since then, every character has emerged into someone distinct, watchable, and sympathetic.  The intelligence/conspiracy side finally, thankfully, began touching on current events.  (The privatization of intelligence is, as you said, a highly worthy topic of exploration.)  It seems likely that the two will converge, which should be fun.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not sure about you, but I feel like I might have to eat at least some of my words.   After episode eleven, this might just be a show worthy of AMC.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Just Not Funny by Jehuda Saar</title>
		<link>http://guiltyfeat.com/2010/09/26/just-not-funny/#comment-196</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jehuda Saar]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Oct 2010 15:09:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://guiltyfeat.com/?p=618#comment-196</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Both are right. On the one hand the suits making these decisions don&#039;t give a rat&#039;s ass about artistic integrity, quality writing or anything like that and just look at the bottom line. Reality TV viewers help the suits along by providing ratings to cheap vapid fair. Quality TV has been moving to Premium Cable for years now and network TV channels don&#039;t seem to think that time is running out on them, both as a result of crappy programming and the fact that they have had to rethink their business model for years now but haven&#039;t bothered to do so. Truth is the end is near for them, unless some visionary out there is busy coming up with some bright new idea as we speak.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Both are right. On the one hand the suits making these decisions don&#8217;t give a rat&#8217;s ass about artistic integrity, quality writing or anything like that and just look at the bottom line. Reality TV viewers help the suits along by providing ratings to cheap vapid fair. Quality TV has been moving to Premium Cable for years now and network TV channels don&#8217;t seem to think that time is running out on them, both as a result of crappy programming and the fact that they have had to rethink their business model for years now but haven&#8217;t bothered to do so. Truth is the end is near for them, unless some visionary out there is busy coming up with some bright new idea as we speak.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Just Not Funny by guiltyfeat</title>
		<link>http://guiltyfeat.com/2010/09/26/just-not-funny/#comment-195</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[guiltyfeat]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Oct 2010 14:52:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://guiltyfeat.com/?p=618#comment-195</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hey David!

I think there&#039;s something about setting appropriate expectations for viewership as well. &lt;em&gt;Modern Family&lt;/em&gt; would have succeeded anywhere. It&#039;s well-written and mainstream. &lt;em&gt;Chuck&lt;/em&gt; struggles on Network TV because it&#039;s quirky and aimed at a niche audience of geeks. &lt;em&gt;Burn Notice&lt;/em&gt; does well because it&#039;s broadcast on a channel that doesn&#039;t expect the highest ratings. It&#039;s entertaining and it plays to its audience.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey David!</p>
<p>I think there&#8217;s something about setting appropriate expectations for viewership as well. <em>Modern Family</em> would have succeeded anywhere. It&#8217;s well-written and mainstream. <em>Chuck</em> struggles on Network TV because it&#8217;s quirky and aimed at a niche audience of geeks. <em>Burn Notice</em> does well because it&#8217;s broadcast on a channel that doesn&#8217;t expect the highest ratings. It&#8217;s entertaining and it plays to its audience.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

