Messages

Tell a lie: Paranormal is apparently set in the sixties not seventies. (I'm unable to edit the above post.) I was sure I saw a 70s year at the start of the first episode.

In the past I would usually stick to one series, watching it through, then move on to the next.

I've been alternating between these series however. I'm enjoying the experience.

Ratched on Netflix.  This is a TV series about the wicked* controlling head Nurse Mildred Ratched from One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest when she first comes to the sanitarium in 1947. I'm enjoying it a lot. It's disturbingly dark in places but has moments of poignancy, mystery and lots of machination. Ratched is played by Sarah Paulson. (I remember her as Merlin the ghost girl from American Gothic - remember that weird show? Paulson's appeared on a lot since then, including several series of American Horror Story.)

Paulson is great in the role. I thought they might go down the cliched route of portraying her as a good person and showing her moral decline, and while there is an element of that, she shows great ruthlessness from the start.  She's got her reasons though, and she is certainly a complex character, and it's fun to see her machinations. In one episode she [spoiler]organises a horrific murder -which doesn't go to plan, but also shows great sympathy for other characters.[/

The supporting cast are very good too. I don't think we've met any of those characters yet (one plus of setting this so far before One Flew... ) so that gets rid of any worries, of "I know how they end up" that may be an issue for prequels. (It's rarely an issue for me, as it's all about the journey, for me, but I know many are bothered by that sort of thing. There's a doctor character who struck me as a pretty awful man,[spoiler] performing lobotomies willy-hilly (and awful hot cold bath treatment, in this case to cure two lesbians of their 'deviancy'. An awful, ambitious, cowardly little fellow. And seeing some of his back-story was incredibly disturbing.

And then last episode, he made me almost feel like I had something in my eye with his tearful "I think I actually helped someone!",  moment, after apparently successfully treating a MPD patient with great empathy. And it didn't come across out of character. [/spoiler]. That's range for you.

Paranormal on Netflix. Another period piece, this time set in 1970s Cairo. It's a foreign language series mostly performed (if that's the correct term) in Arabic. I'm enjoying this a lot. The filmography is very dismal (in a good way) considering this is set in such a hot country. I like the melancholic cynical lead character a lot, and the supporting cast are good. If I had any criticism, it would be that I find some of the paranormal stuff a bit on the nose. I don't mind some straight supernatural elements, but I wouldn't mind some things being a bit more ambiguous. I appreciate the X Files already did that, though.  Oh there's a creepy little girl in it too, and spooky children always hit the right chill factor with me, and I like that we aren't sure what her motivations are.

Vikings - final series on Amazon Prime:  Enjoyable series so far. Kudos for continuing the quality after [spoiler]killing off Ragnar Lothbrock. (Name is misspelt as it has Norse characters).[/spoiler]

Ripper Street on Amazon Prime: I've only seen one episode of this Victorian police drama, but I enjoyed that a lot. It went to a pretty nasty place some might find disturbing, but it's kinda in the title, isn't it?

The next two I can't really help seeing piecemeal since they're released weekly (although American Gods missed a week for the last episode, apparently due to American Super Bowl and Starz schedule. (It premiers in Starz in the US the day before apparently, then on Amazon Prime the next day.)

WandaVision on Disney+:  I won't say much about this, except I'm enjoying it a lot and, concerning last episodes end: "A-HA HA HA HAAA!" Also don't switch off during the over-long end-credits for this episode as there's a little mid-credits bit. You might want to ffwd though.

American Gods (latest series) on Amazon Prime: Its a little slow with the main series thread, but it's enjoyable enough. Glad they're doing more with Bilquis than Gaiman did.

It occurs to me, all but the latter two are period pieces.

*In the literal sense of the word. I don't use that word to mean 'good'.  Actually that was something that occurred when I was at secondary school, decades back. Do the kids still do this? I think they say 'sick' now instead.

probably true, but after watching Jaws, I don't think I'll ever swim in the ocean.

That was me for years until I finally figured "What a fantastic way to go!" There's nothing mundane about your demise if you are eaten by sharks!

Or by piranhas. Then there won't remain nothing of you. I know, week consolation.

For what it's worth, I don't think piranhas actually do that to people in real life. If you're already dead I think they'd strip your corpse but if you're swimming they'll likely see you as the predator and run. Which makes sense as a I've heard they're good eating.

That being said, one needs to be careful when swimming in South American rivers as there are other little beasties with spines that can swim into ...um... inconvenient places they shouldn't. But I won't elaborate on that, except to say 'ouch!'

Back to movies, I saw a curious British comedy horror film recently called Eat Locals, on the Horror Channel. Small spoilers ahoy:

It starred he of the Daredevil series, Charlie Cox, and a whole bunch of other British actors, including that Welsh lady from Torchwood, the skinny chap from The Office (playing a priest in this) and the lady who played Mrs. Meldrew. I never thought I'd see that lot together. Oh and it also starred one of Tenant Who's lovely companions. And a dark eyed Scottish bloke, who has a familiar face who I've seen around yet I can't quite place what I've actually seen him in. (No criticism of him, he's good enough, although I think he plays similar character types.)

Anyway, it's basically army guys vs vampires involving a house in the middle of nowhere. You're probably thinking it's basically Dog Soldiers with vampires instead of werewolves, but, aside from the premise, it's not really. For one thing it's the vampires who are trapped in the house and the soldiers on the outside. And the soldiers are not the heroes. (I'm not saying the vampires are either. These aren't your modern  emo  'oh we're just misunderstood  victims' types. Neither are they purely one dimensional monsters, but they do drink and kill people. (Aside from Charlie Cox's character. He only feeds on animals, apparently, and does seem to have a conscience, but he isn't exactly forbidding the others either.)

I felt like it wasn't a particularly good film, but it was okay. Kinda cheesy in places, but I think maybe it was supposed to be. It was fun to see all those familiar faces in a film I didn't know even existed. And there were a couple of twists. Extremely low budget I'd say, too, as there's little in the way of horror effects, (not a bad thing in itself) and the occasional creature CGI is a bit dodgy. Like the bit when Mrs. Meldrew sneezes.

Well, she should do wrestler movies then. And yes, I called euphemistically. Because she objectively is. And in (most) movies of today, especially Hollywood, handsome look is required. Being fat does not look well on the screen when you are required to run, jump, roll over etc. This is primary reason why I hate xXx 2.

Do you realize you are using silly arguments? Like, Arnie should only have done body-building movies, by your logic. And The Good, The Bad & The Ugly must be bad because not everyone's handsome? And people you consider overweight shouldn't do anything dynamic on screen? Of all the reasons to dislike XXX^2, you are blaming body shape?

I guess we can all rest easy that you're not in charge of talent scouting for any movie companies.

Totally agree with this.

I don't agree with most of Gina's posted views, although I was very much in the 'don't fire her for having them brigade'... until that last ridiculous statement comparing her experience to Jew in the Holocaust, etc. Yeah, she went way too far there.

But from a physical point of view I welcome the fact they cast someone who isn't the usual slim stereotypical view of female beauty. (That makes it seem like I don't think she is attractive. That's not what I mean, in fact I think she looks quite lovely. Just not sure how else to phrase what I mean there.) And I thought she fit the role of an ex rebel shock trooper well in that regard. And yes, got the impression, like you that much of her size is muscle not fat. I wouldn't even describe her as fat, although she's a whole lot of woman.   

I hope a lot more women (or men for that matter, although there isn't as much bias with them) of all body types and shapes are employed in more mainstream roles in future.

I didn't even mind her acting. It was a bit wooden, but for the role I thought it was okay.

So... I liked the character. Mixed view considering her firing, but it's her own fault. Totally understandable why they did it.

I take it back. Just had to fork out for last 4 episodes.

I saw them all, and I don't think I was charged, but this was a good while back. A new thing? Very cheeky.

I did recently finish the second to last series of Fear The Walking Dead, only to see that the latest is already available! For a price. I figured if I leave it a few months they'll move that to Prime as well, but if they're now charging for episodes of other shows where they didn't originally, I wonder....

[WandaVision]

Dunno who here is enjoying WandaVision (I suppose it depends on your tolerance for over-engineered corporate smugness masquerading as creativity (my own threshold is alarmingly high)), but this week (Episode 5) they tried the meta-gag to beat all meta-gags.

It'd be entirely appropriate if a retro-sitcom-themed show jumped the shark, but I'm hoping this trick works. It's been an enjoyable weekly event (my daughter in particular loves it) and an interesting way to create an epilogue to Endgame and indeed what I assume is a bridge between the MCU's Phases 3 and 4.

Loving WandaVision, and just saw the latest episode.

If you haven't seen the episode, don't check my spoiler (unless you don't mind, obviously):[spoiler]Considering what happened at the end of the episode, will Wanda be the catalyst for bridging a couple of Marvel cinematic universes? I thought that character might turn up but not *that* version! Brilliant![/spoiler]

Not a sports film (although there are plenty of scenes of young ladies jumping about and kicking stuff) but the most recent film I watched was Sucker Punch.

I think I largely like it. The premise and setting was interesting, as was the concept of layers of fantasy... but I  wish they had done something more clever with it. Instead we got [spoiler]Baby Doll is going to dance as a distraction, while the others complete their current mission. Cue elaborate action fantasy sequences of young ladies kicking strange bottom wearing uniforms which I suspect are not regulation. (Baby Doll saves the day in these scenarios, although in the real world it's the other ladies who are undertaking the dangerous missions, while she prances about -which you never actually see her do -... but it is her fantasy.) They even do that silly dropping from a great height and landing on one knee thing of action films.

I felt sorry for the two dragons. [/spoiler]


The fantasy action scenes were spectacular, and they were a mad ride... yet I found myself feeling a bit bored after a while.

The overall story was quite slight. That's not necessarily a bad thing... but I think more could have been done with this film. [spoiler]The layers of fantasy did get a little more confusing at the end - again not a bad thing as it gave me something to think about. Mainly there was a suggestion that the scenes that seemed 'reality' were likely just another layer on what was really happening. It is signposted at the start but you spend so much time in that intermediate reality you can miss it until later. [/spoiler]

Overall, okay film. Not quite as clever as it thinks it is, maybe. Interesting but a bit disappointing.  I've seen it dismissed as 'tittilating' and 'style over substance.' I can understand why, although I don't entirely agree. The ladies wear quite skimpy outfits and kick a lot of bottom, although I didn't find it particularly
titillating, although a teenaged boy might. A couple of men at the asylum/bordello do act in a predatory way, but it isn't shown as anything but unpleasant. [spoiler]And they get their comeuppance.[/spoiler]

They certainly aren't vacuous women although it would have been nice to show more of their personalities, in a couple of cases. These women are victims, but the story is about them rising above that, albeit partly through fantasy. Maybe more could have been done with that.

There is some substance but it is buried somewhat in the action montage stuff. (The 'style' if you like.)

Is it odd that I find the film both a bit shallow and thought provoking at the same time? A sign it had something but should have done more with that something, maybe.

I did like the end concerning [spoiler]Baby Doll and Sweet Pea.[/spoiler]

By the way, if you don't switch off during the Bjork number in the end credits, there's am extravagant camp duet performance between the main villain and the Madame character singing 'Love is the drug...'.. with the other actresses as backing dancers. Well I found it amusing.

Gwendoline Christie as Lucifer is a bit of an odd one. (I don't care about the gender swap, but she looks very different from any incarnation of the character on the page or in my head.)

Curiously my reaction was kind of the opposite. I thought, "Really? They're casting a woman as Lucifer? Heavy handed attempt at diversity, etc, etc." Not that I'm a sexist prick, at least I hope not. I just think diversity should be dealt with correctly.

Then I saw her face (I didn't recognise the name you see. Remembering names isn't my strength, if I have any, but I recognise her now), and I thought "No, actually, that could work." 

No insult intended to the actress, but her face has that slightly androgynous* look which I think works with such a character, albeit not quite the same as how he looks in the comics.

I just found out yesterday that the Star Trek animated series Below Decks is available now in the UK. It on Amazon Prime.

The tone is rather different from the various series (which can be different from each other) in that this is a comedy series. It's not just played mostly straight with the main characters providing the comedy, either. You get the impression that the whole crew are a bit silly. It's basically like Futurama in a Star Trek setting, but not QUITE as crazy as that... well, so far. It makes me wonder how canon to consider this, for that reason, but it's probably not worth worrying about that. It's quite a fun ride.

I haven't watched it all yet, but so far I've enjoyed it. There's quite a bit of homage and parody of the other series and it might go a bit overboard with the references but I haven't found that irritating yet. I did get a bit irritated by the repetitive '[spoiler]boy who is a stickler for procedure is rubbish while the cooky rebel girl turns out to be really accomplished and bails him out' stuff, but the guy does get his moment later.[/spoiler]

Sorry everyone! I got this thread mixed up with the general TV series thread, hence my post above waffling on about the new Star Trek cartoon. I think it was the Star Trek comparisons in previous episodes that did it. How embarrassing. I can't delete it unfortunately, but admin, feel free,if you like.

Anyway, enjoying the Expanse as well, but I seem to prefer it bit by bit. I.e. I enjoy each episode but don't feel the urge to watch the next quickly, like I do most shows.

This isn't a bad thing however. I get through shows way too quickly

Interesting! I think Jason X starts off great, and has some cool ideas (like the holodeck bit) but the middle of it is just... eh. In fairness I've not seen it for almost 20 years but I remember being super let down by it.

I also like the Friday films a lot more than the Halloween or Elm Street series - Freddy just gets up my nose, he's too over the top. Have you seen Behind the Mask?

Jason X was quite entertaining. I got a kick out of the fact the two actresses from Andromeda played main characters, with  human/robot roles  that appeared to be swapped from their Andromeda series. I.e. Lexa Doig played an Android character (and computer) in Andromeda  while Lisa Ryder played a human character. In  Jason X Doig is the human and Ryder an android.

I enjoyed this latest series. I liked the others too, but I think this felt very Star Trek in spirit.

[spoiler]I felt a bit irritated by the ending when  the Admiral apologised for punishing Michael for doing her own thing earlier in the series then promoted her to captain. While her actions were understandable, they were wrong from the standpoint of a number one officer and I think he was right to demote her. A real eye roll moment for me. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Michael hater, but that went too far. If she's wrong she's wrong and that's okay because it's all part of her character development.[/spoiler]

I just found out yesterday that the Star Trek animated series Below Decks is available now in the UK. It on Amazon Prime.

The tone is rather different from the various series (which can be different from each other) in that this is a comedy series. It's not just played mostly straight with the main characters providing the comedy, either. You get the impression that the whole crew are a bit silly. It's basically like Futurama in a Star Trek setting, but not QUITE as crazy as that... well, so far. It makes me wonder how canon to consider this, for that reason, but it's probably not worth worrying about that. It's quite a fun ride.

I haven't watched it all yet, but so far I've enjoyed it. There's quite a bit of homage and parody of the other series and it might go a bit overboard with the references but I haven't found that irritating yet. I did get a bit irritated by the repetitive '[spoiler]boy who is a stickler for procedure is rubbish while the cooky rebel girl turns out to be really accomplished and bails him out' stuff, but the guy does get his moment later.[/spoiler]

The [spoiler]Ahsoka[/spoiler] episode, while possibly 'riffing on EU geegaws', featuring, you know, [spoiler]Ahsoka[/spoiler], was very heavily influenced by Samurai movies. In fact it pretty much was a short samurai film, except with a [spoiler]glowy sword[/spoiler].

So, not mutually exclusive things. But I think I get what you mean.

I largely enjoyed series 2 and was happy enough with including things from the EU, (if you include the Clone Wars animation as EU, since it is canon. EU in the sense of 'not of the movies' I guess.)  because it made sense and didn't feel too crowbarred in. I.e. most of the cross-over stuff involved [spoiler]Mandalorian type characters.... [/spoiler]which a Mandalorian is most likely to encounter at some point. As for [spoiler]Ahsoka and Luke,[/spoiler] well that made total sense from the child thread standpoint. [spoiler]There aren't exactly many Jedi about any more, so who else would they meet?[/spoiler]

But I wouldn't want everything to be based on that stuff, and I appreciate this series was EU heavy

My personal small issue with this series was the sheer amount of time they spent on action scenes based completely on other characters. The characters and the scenes themselves were good, but the main character got sidelined for long periods of time, spending part of that literally flying off elsewhere or unconscious. The last two episodes rectified that somewhat.

I suspect those long Mando-light action scenes were intended to showcase characters involved in the spin-off stories, (Rangers and Boba Fett) however.

[American Horror Story]

American Horror Story. Something of a rediscovery for me. I remember watching the first season and being mildly intrigued to discover that the second season would use the same actors in different roles. Then I forgot all about it until a friend gave me several seasons of the thing for Christmas.

I've just started season four (Freak Show), and I'm enjoying it a lot. I'm finding that a large part of my enjoyment is coming from the same actors in different roles schtick - stand out so far are Lily Rabe stepping expertly from sex-crazed Sister Mary Eunice McKee to flower-child swamp witch Misty Day, Frances Conroy finding different ways to be dotty, Angela Basset apparently ageing backwards, and all the rest. And, bloody Hell, isn't Jessica Lange just snecking awesome?

Anyway, I have to stop typing now because Michael Chicklis just turned up with... Good heavens...

One interesting thing I found about American Horror Story is that, not only do the same actors play different characters each season but in later seasons [spoiler]there is a bit of cross-over where characters from previous seasons turn up. Meaning you end up with two characters played by the same actor in the same season. Although not usually in the same scenes. Confused? Heh.[/spoiler]

Good wasn't it? And good of them for [spoiler]keeping that character's appearance under wraps. I'll admit I wondered if he would be the one to turn up, but there were a couple of other candidates they could have used. I'm also sure that those who didn't consider him bad-ass enough in the sequel trilogy* will get a kick out of this. And lovely to see that weapon in action again.

I did find the CGI face a little... uncanny, but I don't think that could be helped. It did the job well enough and overall looked great. Curiously the dark troopers all looked real and solid to me, although I think they must have used at least some CGI. Digital realism has certainly come a long way, but you can still just about see the difference with human faces, most of the time. An observation, not a complaint.[/spoiler]

As for that [spoiler]Boba Fett[/spoiler] end credits scene, [spoiler]before I saw this episode, I'd read online that there was a Boba Fett spin-off teaser. I confess I've felt rather ambivalent concerning a Boba Fett series. While I like the character, and I welcome seeing more of him, maybe a film, or as a guest character again in future series, we've got a cracking mandaloian series already.  If they'd done a Boba Fett series in the first place instead, fair enough, but they didn't. In hindsight, I'm glad they didn't as Din Djarin as a more pure Mandalorian type character is different and the show is interesting in its own right.

After watching that teaser though... wow. That set a decidedly different tone to he Mandalorian. Looks like they'll do things a bit different with this. Bring it on.[/spoiler]

*[spoiler]Wrongly I think. He did right in the end, and was never more powerful, just in a different way.[/spoiler]