This should've lasted longer than 2 years
2 years? Really? It should've at least went on for 4, bringing it to 100 episodes.
tRuE sTAR LeGEnd
I agree. I loved this show. Disney cancelled it too soon.
share
MovieChat Forums > Phil of the Future (2004) Discussion > This should've lasted longer than 2 year...
It really should have. Even though I don't care about Raviv anymore, they should have at least wrapped it up even if it was a movie. I'm still sore about the cliffhanger.
love lights more fires than hate extinguishes
I loved this show back then (and still do), but I think two seasons was honestly enough. Season 2 wasn't nearly as good as season 1 IMO. It was just a lot less fun to watch and it focused way too heavily on the Keely/Phil relationship. And frankly, they were a very boring couple.
I ate a pear. I ate three pears. - Lizzie Borden
I became disinterested in this show, and most of Disney and Nick's then-newer output when I was in the 8th grade (the 2004 - 2005 school year). Catching up with this show again tonight, I can see that the show was pretty mediocre and didn't have much going for it. I agree with you that it probably shouldn't have gone on any longer.
My 15 year old Sister loves it though. I woke her up an hour ago at 2 AM on a school night because she wanted to watch Phil of the Future. She got teary-eyed during the intro.
Tongue-tied and twisted, just an earth-bound misfit, I
Yep, I hear you. For me, I didn't have Disney Channel until 2004 (except briefly in the early 90s), when I was fifteen. And I was really enjoying the first season of PotF when it was airing new episodes. And I still do enjoy that season. But the second season, IMO, destroyed the show. It really didn't have any redeeming qualities going for it, and even at the time I knew if there were to be a third season, it definitely would've been even worse.
I ate a pear. I ate three pears. - Lizzie Borden
If i m not mistaken they had a rule were they couldn't pass the 50 range. Might have been too expensive
share