<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Patrick McGoohan, 1928-2009</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tomlennon.com/2009/01/patrick-mcgoohan-1928-2009/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tomlennon.com/2009/01/patrick-mcgoohan-1928-2009/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Dec 2011 17:22:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Clare</title>
		<link>http://tomlennon.com/2009/01/patrick-mcgoohan-1928-2009/comment-page-1/#comment-203</link>
		<dc:creator>Clare</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:07:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peteashton.com/tom/?p=233#comment-203</guid>
		<description>:( I&#039;ve missed the blogbituaries :(</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> <img src='http://tomlennon.com/wordpress/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':(' class='wp-smiley' />  I&#8217;ve missed the blogbituaries <img src='http://tomlennon.com/wordpress/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':(' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom</title>
		<link>http://tomlennon.com/2009/01/patrick-mcgoohan-1928-2009/comment-page-1/#comment-202</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 23:17:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peteashton.com/tom/?p=233#comment-202</guid>
		<description>Yep, indeed he won&#039;t.  I must admit, I rather liked the idea of casting Sir Ian McGandalf as Number 2, but this soon gave way to an overwhelming sense of dread.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Why remake something that remains perfectly fine in its original state?  I&#039;ve said this before, I&#039;m sure, but surely it makes more sense to remake something that contained some decent ideas but was pretty lame in its execution.  &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;It seemed to work for Battlestar Galactica.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yep, indeed he won&#8217;t.  I must admit, I rather liked the idea of casting Sir Ian McGandalf as Number 2, but this soon gave way to an overwhelming sense of dread.</p>
<p>Why remake something that remains perfectly fine in its original state?  I&#8217;ve said this before, I&#8217;m sure, but surely it makes more sense to remake something that contained some decent ideas but was pretty lame in its execution.  </p>
<p>It seemed to work for Battlestar Galactica.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rol</title>
		<link>http://tomlennon.com/2009/01/patrick-mcgoohan-1928-2009/comment-page-1/#comment-201</link>
		<dc:creator>Rol</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:02:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peteashton.com/tom/?p=233#comment-201</guid>
		<description>Sad news.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Although at least now he won&#039;t have to suffer through that dreadful Prisoner remake they keep threatening us with.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sad news.</p>
<p>Although at least now he won&#8217;t have to suffer through that dreadful Prisoner remake they keep threatening us with.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

