@Gumarx: Pretty good analogy!

@Fireflash: Reminds me of an old comedy routine by Eddy Murphy as I remember. He said there " . . . aint no bank in curing a disease."

@Batmanuel: That's a very good point. I have an autoimmune thyroid disorder already, which is under control. Allergies are also reportedly a hyperactive immune response, got those too. If I jack up my immune response to combat a cold, will I then have more problems from my chronic disorders?

@WizarDru: I was also unaware that Adams had participated in it's production. That's probably why it did stay consistent with the book. I'll also agree you have to consider the time it was made and it's budget (or lack thereof). Not many TV shows in the early 198o's had very good effects . . .

@palaeoclimatemonkey: That's something else in it's favor.

@cjschmidt: That's a good point too. For it's time and budget, one has to consider that it did as well as it could. It was, as I said above, pretty true to the book. I appreciate that in a show.

@razerangel: Sorry wasn't aware that was always the case. I only knew that's what they call that format here in the US. I stand corrected.

@durdentyler: Well, to some extent I agree. If you pay for cable, you can use a DVR to save a copy of the show for viewing later, or to keep for yourself. AMC is usually included in cable packages.

@catsmasher: To be fair, I guess there are extremist everywhere. Maybe Canada has some too? You just never hear about Candians who are that angry, which is probably a good thing.

@ElRobear: They are available from iTunes, $2.99 for HD (which also includes an SD version), $1.99 for SD only.

@AlphaJarmel: If A Game of Thrones turns out to be good, which it likely will. However, it is an HBO production, which will limit it's audience a great deal as well.

@Insomnia Bob: I think they have already committed to a second season, from what I've read.

@Tvini: The movie was very disappointing. It shouldn't have suffered from the limited budget constraints of the BBC mini-series, and presumably had the means to afford good writing and direction. However, I have to agree with you on it being worse in the end.

@keviemetal: I have to agree. At the time it was pretty amazing that network TV put it out there. I had read the book, and knew it wasn't really a strict adaptation, but the book is a loosely structured collection of stories itself, so I was willing to suspend my criticism of that aspect. After all, they did try to…

@Witherbucket: I've never watched the Dune miniseries. So the first one is decent? I may have to give it a try if it is at least true to the source material. The movie was awful in my opinion (but not in Frank Herbert's), because it tried to shoehorn far too much content into a single movie. The darned thing began…

@trotskysghost: The special effects were horrible at best, and the production budget couldn't afford a shoestring. However, I do remember it at least being somewhat true to the source material. That's about all I can say in favor of it.

@kitsuneconundrum: Civilization and technology are recent additions to the human condition. Agriculture is slightly older. Hunter-gathering is the default. If civilization crumbles, we would revert to a previous lower state. Not having read the books (yet), I can't say if Ms. Sargent makes any value judgements about…

@TheFirstBardo: OK, you have a point except for the fact that this leads to two words that are inconceivable together: Canadian Terrorist .

@brickbear95: That's a very cool Dalek-O-Lantern! Quite a creative piece of pumpkin carving.

@laylaholic: Don't forget those of us who keep looking worriedly at the mannequins as we walk by the window displays of retail stores.