Main Menu

Current TV Boxset Addiction

Started by radiator, 20 November, 2012, 02:23:29 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

pictsy

I started on Season 3.  I like starting this Season as its opening episode is one of, if not the strongest opening episodes.  It's heavy handed in its moral and metaphor, but it's got the right balance of what makes the show enjoyable and provides a convincing route back to the status quo.

pictsy

Now I have finished the second episode of Season 3 and it is in stark contrast to the first as being one of the worst episodes of the series... I also realise that I seem to repress this episode every time after watching, but it does make me angry.  It wholly undermines the message of it's previous episode and the finale of the previous season turning Willow, Xanda and Joyce into vile people.  It also ends with the message that Buffy was totally wrong [spoiler]to run away[/spoiler] and she owes a big apology to everyone, especially her mother, who behaved and continued to behave like a bitch.  I'm with Buffy all the way in this episode, [spoiler]except her contrition at the end[/spoiler].  Frankly the fact that at the end of the last season [spoiler]Buffy was wanted by the police for murder and theoretically assaulting a police officer, she was a fugitive and on the run in the last episode.  Her returning to Sunnydale is a massive risk and could have wound up with her being incarcerated for a crime she didn't commit.  Her friends know this, her mother (who told her not to return to the house) knew this.  Joyce tells Buffy she made mistakes and Buffy should make allowances, but also that Buffy made mistakes (which I found debatable) and she should live with the consequences.[/spoiler]  There is soooo much wrong with this episode that silly zombies can't even save it.  The only decent thing is Giles, who is just happy Buffy is back and understands she needs time and understanding to settle back in.  This is also the point when [spoiler]Willow starts heading towards the dark side.  This is clearly the beginning of her arc as a Big Bad[/spoiler].

So umm, yeah, this episode pissed me off so much I decided to jump on a forum and vent my frustrations.

von Boom

I'm almost ashamed to admit that I've been watching Two Pints of Lager and a Packet of Crisps again. It's low and crass but it never tries to be anything other than that.

pictsy

Quote from: von Boom on 03 July, 2020, 10:39:50 PM
I'm almost ashamed to admit that I've been watching Two Pints of Lager and a Packet of Crisps again. It's low and crass but it never tries to be anything other than that.

I remember watching that.  It was pretty dumb and particularly funny, but I watched multiple episodes.  I've seen a lot worse.

Jim_Campbell

Watched the first couple of episodes of Netflix's new "Warrior Nun" series. I'm not familiar with the (pretty dodgy-sounding) original comic series, but the show plays kind of like Buffy on steroids... if Faith had been the main character. So far, not bad at all.
Stupidly Busy Letterer: Samples. | Blog
Less-Awesome-Artist: Scribbles.

broodblik

I only watched the first episode but must agree with Jim not bad at all.
When I die, I want to die like my grandfather who died peacefully in his sleep. Not screaming like all the passengers in his car.

Old age is the Lord's way of telling us to step aside for something new. Death's in case we didn't take the hint.

pictsy

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 04 July, 2020, 11:44:40 AM
Watched the first couple of episodes of Netflix's new "Warrior Nun" series. I'm not familiar with the (pretty dodgy-sounding) original comic series, but the show plays kind of like Buffy on steroids... if Faith had been the main character. So far, not bad at all.

Evil Faith or Reformed Faith?

Jim_Campbell

Quote from: pictsy on 04 July, 2020, 01:09:03 PM
Evil Faith or Reformed Faith?

The main character's a bit wild-child-y, that's all.
Stupidly Busy Letterer: Samples. | Blog
Less-Awesome-Artist: Scribbles.

Mardroid

#2558
The Orville

I know it's been out for a while now, but I never saw it until recently. Now I'm near the end of the second series.

I wonder a bit how they got away with this, because it pretty much is Star Trek (particularly TNG onwards) in all but name with a bit more humour and little bit naughtier. And no, it's not because they both involve the crew of an exploratory starship. The uniforms are similar, the theme tune and background stuff is similar, and many of the plots and kinds of story are similar. It's even got quite a few of those TNG type onboard soap operish episodes!

That's not to say I'm not enjoying it. It does make me wonder if I should revaluate TNG as I wasn't keen on that series overall at the time, but I do mostly like this. It is a bit cheesy, sometimes (as was Trek) and some episodes aren't that great, (to be expected) but it's really pretty good.

I'm also watching Castle Rock on Starzplay. I found the first series rather slow going but overall, I enjoyed it. I was a bit worried it would be a mash up of Stephen King stories, but, whilst there are plenty of references, and a suggestion that some stories are part of the history of the town[spoiler]in this case, The Shining, Needful Things, Shawshank Redemption and maybe a bit of The Body[/spoiler] the majority of the characters are new. Essentially it's a way of telling  Stephen King TYPE stories in the Maine town(s) he invented, but it's mostly new.

In series 2, one of Kings main characters does become the chief protagonist, but she is dealt with in a different way to the novel [spoiler]Misery. Anne Wilkes talks in the same twee speech patterns as the novel original, and she is clearly treading a thin line of insanity, but here she is a young single mother fighting to protect her daughter, rather than the psychotic older woman of the original novel and film. That being said, I can see how this series version could become the other, despite this not really being a prequel.[/spoiler]

I like how the town of [spoiler] Jerusalem's Lot [/spoiler] is a major setting for series 2. In fact this series borrows more from the novel [spoiler]Salem's Lot and the related short stories[/spoiler] than it does [spoiler]Misery[/spoiler]. I also see a couple of ideas that could be borrowed from [spoiler]Desperation and/or The Regulators and The Tommyknockers.[/spoiler]

Like the first series, the majority of characters are new (and the one who isn't is a new spin). I've still a few episodes to go, but so far I'm really liking it.

Bolt-01

Ooh, I'd forgotten all about Castle Rock. Looks like I'll be adding that to my list for once of the current shows ends. Cheers.

wedgeski

We've exhausted our Netflix backlog, so we've switched over to Prime, and started with Jack Ryan, having completed season 1 over the weekend. Light spoilers below, but nothing you won't get from the first episode.

Can't deny it, we really enjoyed this. It's a reboot, of course, of the CIA's most notorious boy scout, but it's hitting all the right notes, with undeniable influence from the likes of Zero Dark Thirty. They've adjusted the backstory (I think; my knowledge of this character is pulled entirely from the film sequence) so that he was actually deployed before getting injured, which goes some way to explain why he gets flown by private jet to CIA black sites instead of the people who should actually be doing that.

Of course the terrorists are ISIS (or at least some offshoot), and the attempt to humanise the resident sheikh couldn't even be called half-hearted, but his wife and children, and their struggles, bring a dimension I've never seen to a trope which is as tired these days as villainous Russkies were in 80's action flicks.

The cast is great, it looks fantastic, it's often sphinter-clenchingly tense, and the action is spectacular. We expected little, and got more than we bargained for. We've already skated straight into season 2. Recommended.

Tjm86

Quote from: wedgeski on 06 July, 2020, 11:14:44 AM
They've adjusted the backstory (I think; my knowledge of this character is pulled entirely from the film sequence) so that he was actually deployed before getting injured, ...

Having read Clancy since HFRO came out in the 80's I've always found adaptations a bit of a mixed bag.  ultimately Clancy's work is definitely 'brain candy' and over the years became more jingoistic  [or "how American Military Technology Keeps The World Safe From Tyranny".  Ironically he included an airline attack on the American Political establishment long before 9/11, something that I think was flagged to him at the time.

The core elements of Ryan as a character are there: finance experience, military experience and injury, medical 'wife'.  In line with the ageism that seems to be a key feature of modern television and film production he is now not that long out of college and on the fast track rather than long in the tooth and grafting his way along.

Jim Greer is also radically changed as a character.  Rather than an Admiral in the twilight of his career he is now the archetypal maverick operative.  Oh, and his religion is now a significant factor.

Some of the changes make sense.  Others seem to be focused on ticking boxes.  Overall personally I found that it worked about as well as the books: disengage brain, sit back, enjoy the ride ...

wedgeski

#2562
Quote from: Tjm86 on 06 July, 2020, 11:40:50 AM
Some of the changes make sense.  Others seem to be focused on ticking boxes.  Overall personally I found that it worked about as well as the books: disengage brain, sit back, enjoy the ride ...
The Hunt for Red October is the only book of his I've read, and I did that purely because I love the film so much. Alec Baldwin is still has the best depiction of Ryan, IMO: hard-edged, uncompromising, having total belief in his own rightness. I assume it's true to the character as he evolved in the books, and I see some of that in the TV series as well.

wedgeski


Mardroid

#2564
Mr Mercedes on Starzplay.

I was a bit reluctant to watch this as I've read the novel and sequels, because I mostly know what happens and I tend to worry how these adaptations will measure up.

I needn't have worried where season 1 is concerned. While there are small changes (to be expected) it's pretty faithful to the novel. The characters while a little different to now I imagined are close enough to work. And being spoiled for certain plot points didn't ruin the journey. I liked it a lot.

I'm curious what route they'll take in season 2 as the second novel in this series [spoiler]mostly focuses on different characters in a different place before joining Hodges and Holly later in the novel. I suspect this one will be more of a departure, but we'll see.[/spoiler]

I also wonder if they'll incorporate the [spoiler]supernatural elements from the third book*[/spoiler], or just keep it a straight detective story.

*[spoiler]Actually the supernatural stuff is introduced in the second book, but that's mainly a tease of things to come in the third book. The events of book 2 are not supernatural at all. [/spoiler]