Jump to content



Sign up for a free account!

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests to win things like this Logitech Harmony Ultimate Remote and you won't get the popup ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

Rockford versus Cannon


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 of 19 dhammer

dhammer

    Second Unit

  • 300 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 14 2008

Posted April 07 2010 - 11:14 AM

I thought I may change gears from my live chat disappointment.

I am a big fan of both shows and am amused by the contrast between the two characters. Rockford an ex-con and a loser in many ways. I don't mean as a person but he is the quintessential hard luck character. He usually gets stiffed on his fee; he gets beat up and double crossed frequently; hated and persecuted by the police; lives in a shabby trailer.

Cannon was an ex-cop, loved and respected by all law enforcement officers. He gets full cooperation and is solicited for his expertise. He is a very successful private investigator and lives in a posh apartment. He is pleasant, charming and very positive. Contrast this to Rockford's cynicism and general negative outlook on life and people. To be fair, on the Rockford  Files his instincts are usually correct.

While I love the Rockford Files, it is refreshing to watch Cannon. I find it tedious the irrational way police officials are constantly persecuting Jim Rockford no matter how many cases he solves.


#2 of 19 anime-fan

anime-fan

    Auditioning

  • 14 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 06 2010

Posted April 07 2010 - 11:51 AM

Personally? I prefer The Rockford Files over Canon. I think it's refreshing that TRF is more entertaining then Canon is.

#3 of 19 Jeff*H

Jeff*H

    Supporting Actor

  • 688 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 10 2004
  • Real Name:Jeff
  • LocationDenver, CO

Posted April 07 2010 - 02:32 PM

Rockford ultimately had a sense of fun about it, and often had deeper, more complex scripts with great character insights that made you really feel for the character.  The mysteries weren't always cut and dried; they often had lots of little twists and turns.  Not to mention the supporting cast was outstanding.

However, BOTH shows had tremendously appealing leads that had lots of charm and energy.  I love Cannon primarily for William Conrad moreso than the stories, while Rockford I love for James Garner along with 3 or 4 other key reasons.  Both are also somewhat defined by their choice of automobile.  The thing I love about Cannon is that for such an overweight guy, he sure gets into a lot of physical action and isn't afraid to get roughed up.  He also has a great sense of humor about himself.

Another interesting comparison would be Mannix and Rockford.  Both are guys who get stiffed on occasion, have a love-hate relationship with the police, and get beat up and shot at all the time.  Plus, each had good chemistry with their platonic female co-star.
Facebook members, be sure to visit my Hawaii Five-0 Celebration page:  http://www.facebook....113331868678710

#4 of 19 Corey3rd

Corey3rd

    Screenwriter

  • 1,715 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 24 2007

Posted April 07 2010 - 03:03 PM

I like Cannon since he belly bumped an attacker. He put his gut to work

come see the reviews at
http://thedvdlounge.com/

and the Seinfeld Tour Bus

#5 of 19 Guest__*

Guest__*
  • Join Date: --

Posted April 07 2010 - 03:13 PM

Cannon gets my vote


#6 of 19 jamoon2006

jamoon2006

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 138 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 23 2007

Posted April 08 2010 - 12:32 AM

You've got two shows with two great lead characters played by good actors.  However, Rockford gets my vote just because it's a better all-around show.  The writing, particularly the episodes by David Chase, is fantastic; the Cannon episodes are just OK detective stories and don't have much in the way of character development.  Plus, Rockford has the advantage of an ensemble cast of supporting players for James Garner to play off of.  Rockford has a sly sense of humor; William Conrad could have pulled off some more humor in Cannon, but QM Productions didn't seem to tap into that element.

#7 of 19 HenryDuBrow

HenryDuBrow

    Screenwriter

  • 1,198 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 23 2004

Posted April 08 2010 - 04:30 AM

It's no wonder that more fun and lighter shows like Rockford Files or Barnaby Jones were so successful, and Cannon too for that matter. They were a tad more family friendly watching than, say, the grittier Kojak, Streets of San Francisco or Harry O, thus proving they appealed to more people and often ran more seasons. Quantity and higher ratings doesn't always mean better quality of course, I personally prefer the last three mentioned here but also love Cannon and BJ to bits, so thumbs up to CBS for continuing them hopefully. 

#8 of 19 anime-fan

anime-fan

    Auditioning

  • 14 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 06 2010

Posted April 08 2010 - 09:41 AM

Not only that but Rockford has something that Cannon doesn't: Magnum P.I. With a great cast like Noah Beery, Joe Santos and Stuart Margolin, that's just something that Cannon doesn't have. 

#9 of 19 HenryDuBrow

HenryDuBrow

    Screenwriter

  • 1,198 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 23 2004

Posted April 09 2010 - 02:30 AM

Yes, Cannon's a P.I. working on his own same is a guy like Mannix too, so the lone detective idea can exist quite well. Or rather it could, as these days everything is teams on a case taking much of the drama out of it in my opinion, substituting it with technical lingo. Lack of imagination in stories I think is a big problem now. 

#10 of 19 dhammer

dhammer

    Second Unit

  • 300 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 14 2008

Posted April 09 2010 - 04:27 AM



Quote:
Originally Posted by HenryDuBrow 
Quote:
It's no wonder that more fun and lighter shows like Rockford Files or Barnaby Jones were so successful, and Cannon too for that matter. They were a tad more family friendly watching than, say, the grittier Kojak, Streets of San Francisco or Harry O, thus proving they appealed to more people and often ran more seasons. Quantity and higher ratings doesn't always mean better quality of course, I personally prefer the last three mentioned here but also love Cannon and BJ to bits, so thumbs up to CBS for continuing them hopefully. 
This point about ratings and how it relates to quality is siutable for its own discussion. If you offer hungry people only oatmeal, and they eat it, do you assume they love oatmeal?

Take any current run of movies in the theaters. A certain number of people will watch them. Most people who go to the movies will go regardless of what's showing. They want to go to the movies on a date or outing. They will choose from what is available according to their preferences. It is illogical to assume they really cared for the movie just because they went to it, when their choices are so limited. TV is similar to this. Don't assume people like tv content just because they watch it.



#11 of 19 HenryDuBrow

HenryDuBrow

    Screenwriter

  • 1,198 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 23 2004

Posted April 09 2010 - 09:42 AM

TV isn't quite similar actually, at the theater you pay for it which you don't do at home with a much more free palet of choice. Just because a lot of people watch something doesn't mean it's good, which is (also) my point in the post there, quantity is not the same as quailty.

#12 of 19 dhammer

dhammer

    Second Unit

  • 300 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 14 2008

Posted April 09 2010 - 10:47 AM

With cable tv you have so many choices but do you really? When you look behind the scenes you find that a few media giants control it all like Disney or Warner, to name two of them.


#13 of 19 HenryDuBrow

HenryDuBrow

    Screenwriter

  • 1,198 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 23 2004

Posted April 10 2010 - 04:05 AM

Material at offer is still different, isn't it. 

#14 of 19 dhammer

dhammer

    Second Unit

  • 300 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 14 2008

Posted April 10 2010 - 04:22 AM

I noticed years ago while watching cable tv that there was all this cross advertising. One minute your young child is watching Sponge Bob and the next minute their watching some highly sexual or violent commercial for some adult show- on another channel. That really makes me angry as a parent. This happens all day long on modern tv. But the point is, that you start to see that all these channels are run by a few companies.

Material at offer is different? I don't know what you mean. Please elaborate?


#15 of 19 Regulus

Regulus

    Screenwriter

  • 2,185 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 07 2006

Posted April 10 2010 - 06:35 AM



Quote:
Originally Posted by dhammer 

I noticed years ago while watching cable tv that there was all this cross advertising. One minute your young child is watching Sponge Bob and the next minute their watching some highly sexual or violent commercial for some adult show- on another channel. That really makes me angry as a parent. This happens all day long on modern tv. But the point is, that you start to see that all these channels are run by a few companies.

Material at offer is different? I don't know what you mean. Please elaborate?
 
A little over three and a half years ago I was attending a Social Function. The Host had a room set aside so the kids could watch TV, which was set to a Children's Channel. The Host made some Lemonade, and asked me to take it to the kid's room. The Show they were watching went to a Commercial Break. Suddenly an ad came on for of all things an "ED Pill". Remind you THIS WAS A CHILDREN'S SHOW!/img/vbsmilies/htf/furious.gif I yelled for the Host and he came in time to see the end of the ad. He Disconnected the Cable from the set, then got in his car and beelined to a nearby Targhee to get a Movie for the kids to watch. We both Complained to the Network and the Cable Company, and were both told "We have no control over what is advertised on any of our shows". This was "The Last Straw" for me. I had seen the quality of TV decline with every passing year, with "Reality" shows spreading across the scene like some monsterous Cancer, along with a heavy Increase in the amount of Advertising during a Show. Now I decided it was no longer worth paying for the "privelege" of watching their garbage. I cancelled my Subscription to Cable and have since used my Subscription money to purchase DVDs of my Favorate Shows, along with a few I missed when they ran on TV. I don't miss Cable at all, I have an antenna attached to my TV so if something major occurs I can tune in to a local station to receive information. Otherwise I have TONs of DVDs to watch (Look at my signature to see how well I have done these past through years.)/img/vbsmilies/htf/biggrin.gif The're are NO Schedules to adhere to, NOBODY butts in to hawk a product I have no interest in buying, and best of all, after I'm done I GET TO KEEP IT!/img/vbsmilies/htf/laugh.gif


DVD Collection Inventory: TV Episodes - 33,619( 727 Series ) :biggrin: Movies - 2,363   :B)  Serial Chapters - 1,102 :B)


#16 of 19 HenryDuBrow

HenryDuBrow

    Screenwriter

  • 1,198 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 23 2004

Posted April 10 2010 - 10:41 AM



Quote:
Originally Posted by dhammer 

I noticed years ago while watching cable tv that there was all this cross advertising. One minute your young child is watching Sponge Bob and the next minute their watching some highly sexual or violent commercial for some adult show- on another channel. That really makes me angry as a parent. This happens all day long on modern tv. But the point is, that you start to see that all these channels are run by a few companies.

Material at offer is different? I don't know what you mean. Please elaborate?
 
You don't know what I mean? I thought I made it clear enough, that surely the stuff on TV is quite varied material, crime, comedy, drama, etc. That most of it sucks is obvious to me though, that's why we want stuff on DVD. 

#17 of 19 dhammer

dhammer

    Second Unit

  • 300 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 14 2008

Posted April 11 2010 - 12:23 AM



Quote:
Originally Posted by HenryDuBrow 




You don't know what I mean? I thought I made it clear enough, that surely the stuff on TV is quite varied material, crime, comedy, drama, etc. That most of it sucks is obvious to me though, that's why we want stuff on DVD. 
Easy. I didn't know what you mean but now I do. I also agree with you. People at this forum get bent out of shape when you criticise TV. No matter how bad you think something is someone with militantly defend it. In addition, anything that smells like you are talking about morality in the media will get you in trouble from the mods.

My wife watches Lifetime and Hallmark movies, Hoarders, soap operas, and American Idol exclusively. Can you imaging how I suffer?





#18 of 19 bmasters9

bmasters9

    Second Unit

  • 327 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 08 2008

Posted April 11 2010 - 01:59 AM



Quote:
Originally Posted by dhammer View Post




Easy. I didn't know what you mean but now I do. I also agree with you. People at this forum get bent out of shape when you criticise TV. No matter how bad you think something is someone with militantly defend it. In addition, anything that smells like you are talking about morality in the media will get you in trouble from the mods.

My wife watches Lifetime and Hallmark movies, Hoarders, soap operas, and American Idol exclusively. Can you imaging how I suffer?


 
My mother and sister like "Hoarders" too. I cannot understand it, and neither can my father.
"CBS Sports presents...The Prudential College Football Report, sponsored by The Prudential, offering a full range of insurance and financial services. The Prudential: the Rock...it's strong, it's on the move, it's bigger than life."

(Don Robertson's original opening from The Prudential College Football Report in the 1985 season, Jim Nantz's debut)

#19 of 19 dhammer

dhammer

    Second Unit

  • 300 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 14 2008

Posted April 12 2010 - 09:35 AM



Quote:
Originally Posted by bmasters9 




My mother and sister like "Hoarders" too. I cannot understand it, and neither can my father.

Hoarders in one of the worst "so called reality" shows. The people in this show are so completely and irreversibly mentally ill. Every show is the same. There is an army of therapists and cleaners/movers who gingerly try and convince some psychotic person to let go  of their trash. They have one anxiety attack after another while trying to part with valuable items like an old cereal box or a twenty year old drinking straw.

Thousands of dollars of salaries are wasted while a large cleaning crew idly sits by or is verbally assaulted by these freaks.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users