Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

New Series-- Mob City on TNT tonight


Dpantherman

Recommended Posts

Written, directed and produced by Frank Darabont, apparently still smarting over his ouster from The Walking Dead, Mob City (* * out of four, TNT, Wednesday, 9 p.m. ET/PT)quickly divides its denizens among the good, the bad, and the uncommitted. On the hero side of this fact-based story, you have Police Chief Bill "The Boy Scout" Parker (Neal McDonough). On the Mob side, you have famous gangsters Bugsy Siegel (Ed Burns) and Mickey Cohen (Jeremy Luke), with Milo Ventimiglia and Robert Knepper playing supporting henchmen. And in the middle, you have The Walking Dead'sJon Bernthal as a conflicted cop, and Alexa Davalos as the requisite moll on the make.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/tv/2013/12/03/mob-city-review/3858743/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watched the first installment last night. I thought it was pretty good and worth watching. Obviously the language and graphics are mild as it's on network television but it was there and more than you'd expect. It has a very good storyline and there wasn't a bunch of filler with teaser scenes like a lot of shows (Walking Dead). The story picks up very quick and moves nicely. Well put together for a short series. Nice little plot twist at the very end, too.

However, a good 30 minutes of the 2 hour time slot is commercials. It seemed like every 5-10 minutes there was a break. I was busy when it aired so I had DVR'd it and watched it late last night, which turned out to be a blessing in disguise. Won't be watching #2 or #3 live, I couldn't deal with all those commercials.

So yeah, worth the watch but DVR it so you can zip through the commercials.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think TNT is really cable though, and not network. Last I heard abc/cbs/nbc/cw/fox are really the network tv while tnt/amc/fx are cable.

"You are watching the network premiere of Mob City on TNT, stay tuned for more after these messages."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"You are watching the network premiere of Mob City on TNT, stay tuned for more after these messages."

 

Cable stations say that too, and it technically may be a network, but when it comes to ratings and things like that, it's cable I believe. Network stations are the ones you can get with rabbit ears usually.

 

Doesn't really matter because if TNT wanted it to be gritty like AMC shows it could, there really isn't a rule against it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cable stations say that too, and it technically may be a network, but when it comes to ratings and things like that, it's cable I believe. Network stations are the ones you can get with rabbit ears usually.

Doesn't really matter because if TNT wanted it to be gritty like AMC shows it could, there really isn't a rule against it.

Cable is 100% digital now almost everywhere. It'd be hard to pick up anything with rabbit ears anymore. At least anything you could watch without getting seizures from looking at a fuzzy screen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cable is 100% digital now almost everywhere. It'd be hard to pick up anything with rabbit ears anymore. At least anything you could watch without getting seizures from looking at a fuzzy screen.

 

 

When I say rabbit ears, I mean HD antenna etc.  I get all those channels in HD quality, and over the air is even better quality than cable since it's not compressed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I say rabbit ears, I mean HD antenna etc. I get all those channels in HD quality, and over the air is even better quality than cable since it's not compressed.

Incorrect. Cable companies do not recompress local channels, they are sent straight through. Additionally, the transfer rate of a compressed digital signal is much higher than that of a OTA signal.

The effect bit per second data rate supported by 6MHz channel depends on the modulation used. With 8vsb, used for over-the-air transmission, it is 19Mbps. With QAM, used for cable transmission, it is 38Mbps.

Also keep in mind that compared to a cable digital modulation technique, an over-the-air digital modulation technique uses additional error correction bits to recover from ways in which over-the-air signals degrade.

So, yeah, OTA is not a better quality signal than digital cable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Incorrect. Cable companies do not recompress local channels, they are sent straight through. Additionally, the transfer rate of a compressed digital signal is much higher than that of a OTA signal.

The effect bit per second data rate supported by 6MHz channel depends on the modulation used. With 8vsb, used for over-the-air transmission, it is 19Mbps. With QAM, used for cable transmission, it is 38Mbps.

Also keep in mind that compared to a cable digital modulation technique, an over-the-air digital modulation technique uses additional error correction bits to recover from ways in which over-the-air signals degrade.

So, yeah, OTA is not a better quality signal than digital cable.

 

From everything I read, they still do some compression even on local stations and do some other things like shaping so technically, OTA is better but may not be noticeable for most people.  Not an expert, but I'm assuming a good deal of the people passing this info along are.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • lol, that second part is quite literally one of the dumbest things ever. Having or not having guaranteed contracts has absolutely nothing to do with how much these billionaires have to pay.  Because there is a hard cap and a minimum cap spend requirement, and teams either use their cap or roll it over to use it all the next year, so the owners have to pay the same amount of money in the end no matter what. Having fully guaranteed contracts in the NFL would only hurt salary cap management, and thus would end up screwing over the team and its fan base when teams kiss on signings as they take up cap room that is needed to improve the roster. Look at the Browns with Watson, they gave him the fully guaranteed deal and all it’s doing is sucking up massive cap space now.  If they hadn’t done that, the owner would still be paying the same amount of money each year as that cap space would still be used elsewhere. If you want to argue for fully guaranteed contracts because the players deserve it, that’s an entirely different argument and a fair one to discuss.  But anyone against fully guaranteed deals isn’t doing it to argue for the billionaire owners.
    • Start posting in threads in the other forums instead of just creating threads. No one comes over here so you aren't starting conversations.  Get your ass up to 100 posts. It's not that hard. Don't create 100 posts. Contribute to conversations. 
    • Ryabkin could be the steal of the draft, he was a Top 10 pick heading into last season and had a rough year.  Lots of GMs passed on him because of that and his workouts. Pick has really high upside and Svech should be able to translate Rod tearing his arse a new one for making dumb plays since Svech has had several years of it.  🤣😂
×
×
  • Create New...