Poll Results

Total comments added = 7 Total votes cast =
 
[ Poll Closed | Other Polls ]
Displaying 1 to 7 (of 7 comments)  
Comment made by TOftedal (67.41.245.77 ) on 2012-07-25 23:21:42

I have to disagree with the majority here - I believe the script was very well written - the cast excellent - and the production very well done. A series has great potential as Peter's story (as yet perhaps unresolved) could thread through any number of plot lines and cases. The characters are interesting, the scenes rich, and the possibilities endless. A serious woman detective who is working through a terrible loss, with supportive and insightful professionals along side. An excellent beginning.
Comment made by Sable (173.160.171.77 ) on 2012-07-24 15:19:35

time for me to weigh in on this. As the author. I thank all of you for your comments. the story was produced (and written long before it was produced) roughly 15+ years ago. I like to think my writing has improved since then. :) The Phil Byrnes stories (just noticed that it's spelled wrong above) have been done by other production companies and won't be done again. It occurred to Larry and myself, after viewing some of your comments, that this particular story is best supported by the 7 that came before it, introducing the other characters (there were only four actors in this show). They provided an important background. As I was editing the soundtrack, adding music and sound effects (I happen to prefer a full soundscape and that's what I do with my other work) there were things I was thinking: hmmm, should have changed that. Unfortunately with something that's this old you can't do much by way of changes so you go with what you've got. Funnily enough, one of the Phil Byrnes stories WAS changed into a Harry Nile story when we found ourselves in need of a new script quickly. It was the What's in Mama's Piano episode.
Comment made by CO (24.245.47.133 ) on 2012-07-24 00:26:34

I have been an avid listener since I was little. That having been said I have to say that I really like the idea of a lead detective being a woman, but I also don't want to listen to a poor female copy of Harry Nile. We have Harry. It seems as if the writer was going for more than what could be/should be achieved in a 1 hour radio performance. It was a little too hurried, a little too many characters that didn't actually even have a voice in the drama so you were expected just to remember the names and what others said about them. I will keep my ears out for future programs and will always keep purchasing. Thanks for reading
Comment made by lee and pat (71.172.209.201 ) on 2012-07-21 22:10:10

This new series needs a lot of work. The good news is that there was nothing wrong with it that can't be fixed. So here's what needs to be fixed. 1) Too many characters, too many names to keep straight: in other words, the story was too busy (especially for radio). 2) Too many flashbacks. It's not easy to make flashbacks work on radio. Somehow you have to signal--clearly--that "the following material is a flashback." It's easy to do in print and in a movie. The resourceful radio writer will think of something. But on the plus side--and this is why the series is worth devoting more work to--we found a warmth and depth of feeling among the characters which is definitely not easy to achieve! We like the three main characters--a lot. It's just their surroundings that need to be fixed.
Comment made by Razorboy_99 (76.220.74.4 ) on 2012-07-21 18:36:53

This episode is awful. I'm also a long time listener (15 yrs. +) At the risk of echoing the first two comments, perhaps we can insert those exact sentiments here and say things another way. The entire Imagination Theater experience has lost it's fire. It wasn't long ago that the writing was more intense across the board. The acting used to be done by people that could deliver lines that made you hang on every word. (What is with the acting in Powder River? Yikes.) Just a thought, but maybe the American audiences have been dwindling the last few years due to a quality decrease. Still, I prefer listening to these shows over watching most of the nonsense on television. Jim...You need to get your fire back.
Comment made by Liz (24.17.62.176 ) on 2012-07-21 13:49:23

I was disappointed in this episode. I think the idea for the show is good, but I had a lot of trouble following the story. There was a lot of characters which made it difficult to match up who's voice was who's. The flashbacks and talking dead guy just added to it. In addition, the volume of the voices and sound effects weren't consistent throughout the show (at least online), so I kept turning it up to hear the actors, only to be blasted a minute later by a saxophone or commercial.
Comment made by Jim Meals (69.109.158.203 ) on 2012-07-17 21:14:22

I have been an avid fan of Imagination Theater for over ten years and this is the first time I have given a show the lowest possible rating. I believe that I should explain why. Waiting for Redemption is a cluttered mess of flashbacks and truly awful dialogue ("I'm not a woman. I'm a detective.") The play often borders on being unintentionally funny. One problem: Many of the main characters in the story (including the killer) never actually appear. They are only talked about. As a result, listeners can't get very interested in them. I found my mind frequently wandering during the program and that has never happened before with an Imagination Theater broadcast. Waiting for Redemption is totally lacking in excitement or suspense. At the end of the tale we are told that the killer is currently in Europe. Not to worry, when the culprit returns the cops will arrest the no good. Could there be a more flat and dull ending to a story? Please remember, this note is written by a long time listener. I know that a lot of talent was involved in this production. Unlike Harry Nile, I am a baseball fan. I know that even the best teams have awful days. My suggestion: put Waiting for Redemption in the lost column and forget about it.
Displaying 1 to 7 (of 7 comments)  
This website and all content contained within is copyright of Jim French Productions - © Jim French Productions 2008. All rights reserved.
Reproduction or redistribution of part or all of the contents in any form is prohibited without the expressed written permission of Jim French Productions.
Shirts, Mugs, Apparel and More at CafePress.com