Why was series 2 so poor in comparison to series 1?
2007-03-06 23:57:23 · 5 answers · asked by wild_eep 6 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Television
It happens so often when a series popular because it's new/innovative/original etc. When it comes to series 2 or 3 they try too hard to recreate the same feeling instead of continuing to do the cutting edge stuff which made it good in the first place. This is why Ricky Gervais and Stephen Merchant chose not to make any more of The Office and go out on a high.
2007-03-07 00:49:39 · answer #1 · answered by bumpity-bump 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree together with his handle international warming yet have self assurance his stance on biotechnology and recombinant biotechnology is thoroughly unfounded. the reality that he's being advised by using Jeremy Rifkin is a crimson flag in and of itself. The bST occasion interior the editorial is telling simply by fact because it reported interior the item bST is remoted certainly from cows however the cow gene has been remoted/ cloned and (comparable) recombinant bST could be produced in larger portions (and plenty greater affordably) interior the lab. The gene is from cows the protein is comparable, what could desire to probably be the undertaking with that? different purposes of recombinant biotechnology could be problematic. each and each case merits guy or woman interest, assessment earlier use. obtainable issues incorporate freeing affliction/ drought / pest resistant lines that could start to outcompete wild flora without the engineered gene.
2016-10-17 11:34:42 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
.. the same can be said about this last series of Shameless.
2007-03-07 00:05:19 · answer #3 · answered by gemheinz 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Am i the only person who didnt laugh at any of it.
2007-03-07 00:03:53 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It was cack.
2007-03-07 00:03:17 · answer #5 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋