Page 1 of 1

New BTV?

Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2015 4:25 am
by jennifertwt
Ever since the Oddcast posted a list of the upcoming OAC eps (yes, I succumbed and joined) I have been intrigued the one with a BTV title. Usually, I do not enjoy speculation, but it would be interesting to hear people's theories. A new "B"? Barrett? Brian? a new character? A previously unreleased ep? Let the brain storming begin!

Re: New BTV?

Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2015 6:46 am
by Wakko
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do believe that it's already been confirmed that another main character will host the show, such as Connie or Whit. I do hope that they at least address Bernard's absence in the episode though.

Re: New BTV?

Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2015 6:56 am
by jennifertwt
I do not follow the usual fan sites so I am usually out of the loop. hm...........then they should change the name of the show. Unless the "B" stood for something other than Bernard.

Re: New BTV?

Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2015 4:15 pm
by Leonard Meltsner
jennifertwt wrote:I do not follow the usual fan sites so I am usually out of the loop. hm...........then they should change the name of the show. Unless the "B" stood for something other than Bernard.
No, the B does indeed stand for Bernard, as stated in the first BTV episode "I Want My BTV".

Re: New BTV?

Posted: Fri Jun 12, 2015 12:43 am
by LIGHTNING
Why not get a new voice for him? He was a really good character!

Re: New BTV?

Posted: Fri Jun 12, 2015 4:34 am
by jennifertwt
I have to listen to I Want my BTV again but in another forum they said the B stood for Bible. I think so many people associate it with "B"ernard that it would not have hurt to remind people of that and would have taken 1-2 seconds.

Re: New BTV?

Posted: Fri Jun 12, 2015 1:41 pm
by JesusFreak777
It really does stand for Bernard, not Bible. And sadly, they don't explain his absence at all. :( It annoyed me a lot, but oh well! The episode itself was good, but a 5 second explanation would have been nice.

Re: New BTV?

Posted: Fri Jun 12, 2015 9:43 pm
by snubs
Phil Lollar said the B in "B-TV" was supposed to have a dual meaning for both 'Bible' and 'Bernard'

also.. I love Bernard just as much as the next person, but I personally don't see what the big deal is. *shrugs*

Re: New BTV?

Posted: Sat Jun 13, 2015 12:06 am
by jennifertwt
Mostly just sentimental and not filling in the "holes" . Also increasing irritation that they will take on such heavy issues as The Ties That bind yet the death of a character /actor goes unmarked. felt the same way about Tom Riley.

Re: New BTV?

Posted: Fri Aug 14, 2015 5:14 pm
by Pound Foolish
We all go through wanting disappeared characters to be acknowledged. But what do we want? A brief explanation of why Bernard can't do BTV anymore? That would be just insulting. It would be like giving a vet a thank-you lollipop. An entire episode at least would be needed for a proper goodbye to Bernard. And listeners who joined post-hiatus won't even know who Bernard is.

It's not canonically inconsistent not to mention him, at least. The show was usually introduced not only by Bernard but with other characters too (and sometimes entirely without Bernard?)

Anyhoo, good episode. It was amazing, it's like they hadn't done an album without BTV. It didn't feel like they were trying to recreate their own work years later. It felt like they turned on the lights in the BTV studio and whipped out a true blue BTV episode. It's a perfect instace of a character's contributions leaving their mark, but the show moves on gracefully.

Re: New BTV?

Posted: Sat Aug 15, 2015 12:06 am
by snubs
Well put, Pound Foolish.

:yes: