Cybill and Roger Director Commentary

[ilovewilliscirca88]

I really loved the commentary on this one. I keep laughing about Cybill questioning whose baby Maddie Hayes was having...she's like, why would Maddie have a baby if it wasn't David's? Uhhh, yeah, exactly!!! Also I loved when she was reading David's emotions when he was meeting Walter Bishop for the first time...

Good stuff here and good insite into the show.

[bertviola]

Jun 11, 2012 22:24:01 GMT -5 missingmymoonlight said:

I felt sorry for Cybill when I listened to her commentary. I think she must have recorded it after her autobiography came out. I think this because she does not take much responsibility for her own off-putting or unprofessional behavior in the book -- regarding ML or anything else. In "Cybill Disobedience" she relates angry confrontations with GGC and, unlike in the commentary, IMHO, unresolved bitterness. She's older now. Wiser. And I think genuinely dismayed by (haunted by?) the many shenanigans of MANY folks that went into the untimely demise of our:) show. She did say one thing toward the end of the commentary track that bothered me -- maybe in jest to be fair. Paraphrasing, she said that GGC said he couldn't figure out how to resurrect ML and she said to ROGER DIRECTOR something along the lines of "who needs him?". To which Roger nervously laughed. Well, the script would need Glenn for one thing. And for another getting Bruce to do it is almost thoroughly dependent on Glenn's involvement, not to mention his blessing as the two remain very close friends. Geez...such a long post! I am still so hung up on this show 25 years after it left the air!@#!! I wish with all my heart the moonbeams could be revisited on us mere mortals once again. But deep down I doubt it. MOONLIGHTING was lightning in a bottle. It is going to be next to impossible to create that type of magic again.

Well, they gave us a third season of Twin Peaks after all those years:). Maybe we really ought to start a petition. Let's say if we'd get 100,000 people, willing to each pay 100$ for a new Moonlighting, we'd already have 10 million dollars(is that enough for at least 2 or 3 episodes:P?). My major fear is that like most other "remakes" or reboots, it would fail, due to new writers. I feel that every movie or show has a certain spirit, usually closely linked to the time when it was made. In the case of Moonlighting, that's the 80's vibe. So I think a new Moonlighting should either try to be set in the 80's(all those beautiful shots of the city by night and all) or at least re-hire all the old writers. It never works well if you hire writers that grew up as fans of the show or during a different time period(for instance, compare current Simpsons to the late 80's Simpsons). 
In that case, we might have a shot at a decent continuation, although we'd still have to keep an open mind. But I think it's not impossible.