Quiara
Grade School
Posts: 775
|
Post by Quiara on Jul 4, 2022 14:15:24 GMT -8
I'm wondering if S4 actually will air later this year, or if they'll push it off to next year to give the show (and the network) a bit more breathing room. It would make more economic sense for S4 to air in 2023, especially since - after such a long break after S2 - FX wouldn't want to just write it off so quickly. Speaking of shows that are at risk of getting written off too quickly*, Season 2 of Hacks just wrapped. Jer, do you have Hacks withdrawal? I watched the first three episodes of Loot (the Maya Rudolph is not not Mackenzie Bezos show) and it's really good if you're looking for a show that's like Hacks if Hacks was worse in every conceivable way, except as a Pinterest board for fun aunts looking for new styles, and as a space for MJ Rodriguez to try and play against type in a comedy (in a role that she seems kind of miscast in tbh but she's still acting circles around everyone else here). One of the episodes had three different "Genius of Love" needle drops, which is three reasons to like the show right there.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Jul 4, 2022 17:22:08 GMT -8
Jer, do you have Hacks withdrawal? I watched the first three episodes of Loot (the Maya Rudolph is not not Mackenzie Bezos show) and it's really good if you're looking for a show that's like Hacks if Hacks was worse in every conceivable way, except as a Pinterest board for fun aunts looking for new styles, and as a space for MJ Rodriguez to try and play against type in a comedy (in a role that she seems kind of miscast in tbh but she's still acting circles around everyone else here). One of the episodes had three different "Genius of Love" needle drops, which is three reasons to like the show right there. So I read this paragraph three times and I still have no idea if you're recommending the show or not. Loot sounds interesting on paper - I like Maya Rudolph's screwball comic talents a lot, and she doesn't get enough starring roles - though the reviews I've seen have been mixed. It's from the same writing team that created Forever (also starring Rudolph), which is a show that I found more interesting as a novelty than an ongoing series. But I may at least check out the pilot to see if Adam Scott does a good Jeff Bezos impression. Speaking of Adam Scott (woohoo, another ace transition!), I recently watched the first season of Severance. Though my interest in puzzle-box shows has waned over the years, I was glad to see the show doesn't leave its questions (apart from a few overarching mysteries) dangling for very long, and in fact is best appreciated on the level of a psychological drama - i.e. exploring what gives a person their identity beyond memory and persona. The cast is really strong, with notable performances from longtime vets like Patricia Arquette, John Turturro, and a surprisingly subdued Christopher Walken. Also, Dichen Lachman's role takes on an extra layer of amusement when placed in context with Dollhouse.
|
|
|
Post by Jay on Jul 5, 2022 20:09:42 GMT -8
It's like the Boardwalk Empire of British tv. It's a B- that should've been an A. Well produced, but ultimately really empty. I think the really great historical shows ( Deadwood, Manhattan, Halt, The Knick, etc.) feel like a lot more than just playing around in an interesting historical setting for the sake of it, which Peaky Blinders definitely does. They use it as a mirror to our own world in some profound ways. And even if you placed Deadwood in a different setting, it would still be a fascinating show about how societies come together. Halt would still be a poignant story about failure and human connection. Whereas with Peaky Blinders and Boardwalk, it feels to me like the setting is all they have. I think that there was some intended commentary on fascism there, but it came in so late that it was hard for me to feel like there was some intent behind it rather than playing to current events as they unfolded. You can't really claim that it's promoting tolerance of minorities either because it's favorable to those who are potentially white-passing in Jews and Gypsies whereas the Chinese, while a persistent element throughout, never are elevated to that level of being to see the nuance.
Aside from that larger conversation, although not all that distant honestly, we've started watching The Old Man at my ma's prompting, for her fondness for Jeff Bridges. She made a point of emphasizing that she regards him as a superior actor to his father, though I made pains to emphasize that Lloyd's role in Airplane! was crucial. I'm a bit leery of it overall, having grown up on 24 and been suspicious of it then and all the more now, but through the three episodes I've seen, I'm merely cautious about its potential as a white savior and patriarchal narrative. It's a weird thing to be watching as the empire seems otherwise to be coming down.
|
|
Quiara
Grade School
Posts: 775
|
Post by Quiara on Jul 6, 2022 9:13:01 GMT -8
It's like the Boardwalk Empire of British tv. It's a B- that should've been an A. Well produced, but ultimately really empty. I think the really great historical shows ( Deadwood, Manhattan, Halt, The Knick, etc.) feel like a lot more than just playing around in an interesting historical setting for the sake of it, which Peaky Blinders definitely does. They use it as a mirror to our own world in some profound ways. And even if you placed Deadwood in a different setting, it would still be a fascinating show about how societies come together. Halt would still be a poignant story about failure and human connection. Whereas with Peaky Blinders and Boardwalk, it feels to me like the setting is all they have. I think that there was some intended commentary on fascism there, but it came in so late that it was hard for me to feel like there was some intent behind it rather than playing to current events as they unfolded. You can't really claim that it's promoting tolerance of minorities either because it's favorable to those who are potentially white-passing in Jews and Gypsies whereas the Chinese, while a persistent element throughout, never are elevated to that level of being to see the nuance.
Aside from that larger conversation, although not all that distant honestly, we've started watching The Old Man at my ma's prompting, for her fondness for Jeff Bridges. She made a point of emphasizing that she regards him as a superior actor to his father, though I made pains to emphasize that Lloyd's role in Airplane! was crucial. I'm a bit leery of it overall, having grown up on 24 and been suspicious of it then and all the more now, but through the three episodes I've seen, I'm merely cautious about its potential as a white savior and patriarchal narrative. It's a weird thing to be watching as the empire seems otherwise to be coming down.
I think what irritates me about this show so far is that it's blindingly obvious that Alia Shawkat's character is his daughter, and yet the show decides to play that's a twist? It's very weird. Like you I'm not super enthused by the "he was a white mujahadeen" plot, and honestly I don't think the show is particularly interested in exploring that either given that no one says "mujahadeen" let alone "Taliban" at any point during the show.
Mostly The Old Man just makes me miss The Americans.
|
|
|
Post by Jay on Jul 6, 2022 9:44:02 GMT -8
I think what irritates me about this show so far is that it's blindingly obvious that Alia Shawkat's character is his daughter, and yet the show decides to play that's a twist? It's very weird. Like you I'm not super enthused by the "he was a white mujahadeen" plot, and honestly I don't think the show is particularly interested in exploring that either given that no one says "mujahadeen" let alone "Taliban" at any point during the show.
Mostly The Old Man just makes me miss The Americans.
Right, the whole "oh we're doing Lawrence of Arabia... again" thing is putting me off, although I think that by ep three, it was pretty obvious what Alia Shawkat's character was doing there without them outright saying it. I'm also somewhat pleased that modern TV has gotten over the "build suspense to fit a fixed season length," because I found that more insulting overall. On the other hand, my ma literally yelled at the TV when Zoe was going through all of her trauma on a supposed first date, which is a possible downside of the pacing. As for The Americans.... I mean, I'm glad I ultimately watched it but I can do without seeing a dead lady folded up to fit into a suitcase ever again.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Jul 8, 2022 16:03:03 GMT -8
I think that, when it comes to topical humor, my reaction can be based on where the humor is coming from as much as what the actual joke is. It's true that I don't usually find it funny when progressive comedies poke fun at conservatives, but I also roll my eyes at the cheap liberal-bashing jokes on conservative sitcoms like Last Man Standing. In today's day and age, a lot of partisan humor tends to be pretty shallow - and in some cases misplaced or misinformed - so the comedy tends to fall flat. I've found that it's usually a little more interesting when TV shows goof on their own side (e.g. Search Party) since that sort of comedy usually comes with an extra layer of self-awareness and tongue-in-cheekiness. Re-upping this point now, because the third season of The Boys (which just wrapped) pretty much encapsulates what I'm talking about. The Boys is of course a social satire, largely produced by left-leaning writers, and it's been this way since episode one. But the political commentary has gotten more textual and obvious with each season, which hasn't been to the show's benefit. The third season directly invokes a lot of modern real-world commentary (everything from "all lives matter" to "fake news" to barely-veiled Covid commentary), plus name-dropping everyone from Sean Hannity to Lindsey Graham (on top of a recurring character who is an obvious Tucker Carlson proxy). I fear the show is slowly turning into an R-rated version of Supergirl - whereas the satire in prior seasons mined humor by maintaining a measured distance from reality, the writers have now dropped a lot of the pretense. And the result is that a lot of the satire targeting right-wingers feels really lazy and uninspired. Did you know that Fox... er, I mean Vought News... is a propaganda outlet? And hey, do those guys marching with torches and yelling that the won't be replaced remind you of anything? Are you not yet aware that Homelander is supposed to be a Trump stand-in? And so it goes. The result is that the only satirical commentary that feels kind of clever is the kind that goes after the left - or more specifically, the world of woke capitalism. Vought may have a conservative media arm, but it's also in several ways a Disney stand-in, and the series has fun pointing out the hypocrisy of a corporation that pledges to be on the side of social justice, even though its progressive platitudes are as broad and vanilla as possible. (Much hay is made over whether the super-team they've curated and test-marketed is just the right level of diverse.) The comedy works well enough because the show doesn't hammer it home, at least not to the extent of the rest of its commentary. (Nobody wears Mortimer Mouse ears or sings "It's a Vought World," for example.) Anyway, beyond the satirical elements, the season itself was okay (though somehow even more graphic than its predecessors). The series is taking some of its characters in increasingly extreme directions, and there's only so much longer it can go before it starts to feel forced or self-parodic. Guess we'll see how the fourth season (already greenlit) stacks up.
|
|
|
Post by Incandescence 112 on Jul 9, 2022 11:22:54 GMT -8
The Boys doesn't really have much to it beyond 'superheroes but bad'. I don't regret dropping it much like I don't regret dropping most superhero tv these days. I enjoy Peacemaker much more, even if I was perhaps hyperbolic in my praise of that show a few months ago.
|
|
|
Post by Incandescence 112 on Jul 9, 2022 12:54:29 GMT -8
It's like the Boardwalk Empire of British tv. It's a B- that should've been an A. Well produced, but ultimately really empty. I think the really great historical shows ( Deadwood, Manhattan, Halt, The Knick, etc.) feel like a lot more than just playing around in an interesting historical setting for the sake of it, which Peaky Blinders definitely does. They use it as a mirror to our own world in some profound ways. And even if you placed Deadwood in a different setting, it would still be a fascinating show about how societies come together. Halt would still be a poignant story about failure and human connection. Whereas with Peaky Blinders and Boardwalk, it feels to me like the setting is all they have. I think that there was some intended commentary on fascism there, but it came in so late that it was hard for me to feel like there was some intent behind it rather than playing to current events as they unfolded. You can't really claim that it's promoting tolerance of minorities either because it's favorable to those who are potentially white-passing in Jews and Gypsies whereas the Chinese, while a persistent element throughout, never are elevated to that level of being to see the nuance.
Yeah, that's a fairly common theme of British tv, even as early as 1964 with the creation of the Daleks. But the problem is the characters are so bland and empty--so who will really take that commentary to heart? It's interesting to me that some people prefer that style of show--that seemingly exists to showcase a particular historical era in detail and not much else--as opposed to shows that use the settings as a scaffolding for drama (of course, Boardwalk did have some great episodes, so I'm being a bit unfair, but still).
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Jul 9, 2022 13:53:16 GMT -8
Heh. Well, after having The Boys recommended to me by numerous people at the gym and at work (in a very enthusiastic manner), I've finally gotten the free month of Amazon Prime, and I'll be watching all three seasons of The Boys, and the second season of Undone, in the next few weeks. Don't see much else on Amazon Prime that interests me (that I haven't already seen), beyond giving a quick look to see how some BtVS eps look in HD (I've heard it's compromised some of the day-for-night scenes, and the standard-def visual-effects, and did they zoom the image to make it widescreen, or just use image data off to the side of the original 4:3 composition? The 16mm-shot first season looks much sharper than I would've expected.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Jul 9, 2022 19:02:24 GMT -8
I think there's more to The Boys beyond "superheroes but bad" - the cultural commentary (prior to this season) is quite cutting and funny, and it's generally quite good at taking risks and making good on payoffs. But it's also a show that has become more notably self-conscious with time, given its unexpected level of political/cultural cache (nominated for several major Emmys, and cited by Obama as one of his favorite shows), which may explain why its messaging has grown more obvious.
I think the first season is one of the best seasons of any superhero drama I can think of, and Season Two (despite its flaws) isn't far behind. But very few serialized hourlong dramas these days are able to sustain their quality for three seasons or more.
As for other Amazon Prime shows, their output remains something of a mixed bag, but Invincible is showing promise as another strong adult superhero series. Marvelous Mrs. Maisel is growing stale at this point; there's only so much 21st-century spin you can do on '50s screwball romantic comedy before it loses its edge.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Jul 10, 2022 1:44:35 GMT -8
I wasn't blown away by Season 1 of The Boys, which I completed tonight. but I liked it well enough. The premise w/r/t cultural branding and propaganda is fairly well worked-out right from the outset, and most of the main characters have a decent amount of dimension, and are well-acted. I'd say the gore is probably as self-consciously over-the-top as the profanity in Peacemaker, but this show feels a bit more adult in nature (not making a value judgment on the two shows based on that, only noting that Peacemaker gets cutesier at times, especially with Eagley).
I don't see any other Amazon-produced TV shows that I'd be interested in following (I'll pass on Maisel), but I watched that weird body-horror art film Titane (a mixed bag, which actually got more conventional in its second half) tonight, and will finally watch the Borat sequel, Being The Ricardos (which I know is probably not very good, but I'd like to see the performances from Kidman and Bardem), and the remake of Suspiria.
Anyways, on regular cable, I'm looking forward to the final stretch of Better Call Saul (which begins on Monday) and the fourth season of WWDiTS.
|
|
|
Post by Jay on Jul 10, 2022 11:30:44 GMT -8
I think that there was some intended commentary on fascism there, but it came in so late that it was hard for me to feel like there was some intent behind it rather than playing to current events as they unfolded. You can't really claim that it's promoting tolerance of minorities either because it's favorable to those who are potentially white-passing in Jews and Gypsies whereas the Chinese, while a persistent element throughout, never are elevated to that level of being to see the nuance.
Yeah, that's a fairly common theme of British tv, even as early as 1964 with the creation of the Daleks. But the problem is the characters are so bland and empty--so who will really take that commentary to heart? It's interesting to me that some people prefer that style of show--that seemingly exists to showcase a particular historical era in detail and not much else--as opposed to shows that use the settings as a scaffolding for drama (of course, Boardwalk did have some great episodes, so I'm being a bit unfair, but still). Right, it's funny that you mentioned Halt earlier because I was having some of the same responses as I was watching Peaky Blinders, knowing that Sir Oswald Mosley and Lady Diana Mitford were so historically established that there wasn't much that could be done with them... Even then, it's hard to account for Tommy Shelby's stoicism in his response, nor how the series ended, which in retrospect seems solipsistic. I didn't watch Boardwalk (though I was intrigued), but I think that my overall sense of Peaky Blinders comes down similarly in that it was style over substance. I enjoyed the music throughout, but the writing was not especially deep aside from fun characterizations (Tom Hardy was always a delight) and all the squad walks and violence and Arthur swearing might be dismissed as fanservice beyond a point. Regarding its inability, or unwillingness to say anything too political, I think that one telling illustration was that, in addition to Freddy Thorne NOT lasting, once Tommy made it to Parliament, the speeches were rarely heard, instead being silent, smoky set pieces in a larger montage. On the rare instances we did hear him, there wasn't a whole lot of passion behind the words. It makes me think that the series ultimately endorsed a sort of quietism about British class hierarchy and how even if you manage to move up, you'll never fit or change anything.
Unrelated, but I am looking forward to the return of our idiot vampires in WWDITS and the use of Boney M.'s "Rasputin" to promote it is so perfect it's hard to imagine that they hadn't used it earlier.
|
|
|
Post by Incandescence 112 on Jul 15, 2022 18:53:21 GMT -8
Yeah, that's a fairly common theme of British tv, even as early as 1964 with the creation of the Daleks. But the problem is the characters are so bland and empty--so who will really take that commentary to heart? It's interesting to me that some people prefer that style of show--that seemingly exists to showcase a particular historical era in detail and not much else--as opposed to shows that use the settings as a scaffolding for drama (of course, Boardwalk did have some great episodes, so I'm being a bit unfair, but still). Right, it's funny that you mentioned Halt earlier because I was having some of the same responses as I was watching Peaky Blinders, knowing that Sir Oswald Mosley and Lady Diana Mitford were so historically established that there wasn't much that could be done with them... Even then, it's hard to account for Tommy Shelby's stoicism in his response, nor how the series ended, which in retrospect seems solipsistic. I didn't watch Boardwalk (though I was intrigued), but I think that my overall sense of Peaky Blinders comes down similarly in that it was style over substance. I enjoyed the music throughout, but the writing was not especially deep aside from fun characterizations (Tom Hardy was always a delight) and all the squad walks and violence and Arthur swearing might be dismissed as fanservice beyond a point. Regarding its inability, or unwillingness to say anything too political, I think that one telling illustration was that, in addition to Freddy Thorne NOT lasting, once Tommy made it to Parliament, the speeches were rarely heard, instead being silent, smoky set pieces in a larger montage. On the rare instances we did hear him, there wasn't a whole lot of passion behind the words. It makes me think that the series ultimately endorsed a sort of quietism about British class hierarchy and how even if you manage to move up, you'll never fit or change anything.
Unrelated, but I am looking forward to the return of our idiot vampires in WWDITS and the use of Boney M.'s "Rasputin" to promote it is so perfect it's hard to imagine that they hadn't used it earlier.
Interestingly, I think that's what made AMC execs greenlit the pitch for Halt in the first place. They weren't historically established, which allowed for more freedom. I think Peaky Blinders could have done more even within its historical setting.
I don't think Boardwalk is a bad show by any means. The show contains some very strong elements, and Seasons 2 and 3 are pretty darn strong. But I also think it was uneven, often sloppily written, shallow, and poorly paced. I think it's the most difficult to rate of all of the good prestige shows.
Nandor's Wisconsin accent was quite something, and baby Colin Robinson hasn't gotten any less disturbing. It's nice to have the show back.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Jul 16, 2022 3:04:39 GMT -8
I imagine when the set decorator arrived for the pre-production of Season 4 of WWDITS, they asked the show's creators if they'd like to do this, this, this, or this with the vampires' mansion, and the creators' response was "Yes." Man, they're leaning into big visual gags even more than before -- that stuff with the wraiths and construction workers was nuts -- and you won't hear me complaining. As is often the case with these types of shows, the second episode was better, partly because the first one had to do a fair amount of table-setting. And I've got to single out Kristen Schaal, who's been doing terrific work ever since she joined the cast (when Laszlo, while psychoanalyzing her character, stated that she had "the hysteria", I was rolling), and I say that as someone who wasn't much of a fan of her on other programs (such as 30 Rock or The Last Man On Earth).
|
|
|
Post by Incandescence 112 on Jul 16, 2022 13:47:04 GMT -8
I imagine when the set decorator arrived for the pre-production of Season 4 of WWDITS, they asked the show's creators if they'd like to do this, this, this, or this with the vampires' mansion, and the creators' response was "Yes." Man, they're leaning into big visual gags even more than before -- that stuff with the wraiths and construction workers was nuts -- and you won't hear me complaining. As is often the case with these types of shows, the second episode was better, partly because the first one had to do a fair amount of table-setting. And I've got to single out Kristen Schaal, who's been doing terrific work ever since she joined the cast (when Laszlo, while psychoanalyzing her character, stated that she had "the hysteria", I was rolling), and I say that as someone who wasn't much of a fan of her on other programs (such as 30 Rock or The Last Man On Earth). The first episode had to get the gang back together, so to speak. I thought there was a lot more comedic potential in the characters' year apart, but they probably can't do world-hopping adventures for budgetary reasons.
|
|