Random TV Show Thoughts

[Totenkindly]

I'm always thrilled to see love for Six Feet Under and The Leftovers.

I don't know if I watch enough TV to fill out a chart like that. I don't persist for more than an episode if I don't like it. I tried to watch White Lotus because it won all those awards and had such kudus, and I was bored during the first episode (I didn't find it that funny) and haven't tried to watch more.

 

[chickpea]

I'm always thrilled to see love for Six Feet Under and The Leftovers.

I don't know if I watch enough TV to fill out a chart like that. I don't persist for more than an episode if I don't like it. I tried to watch White Lotus because it won all those awards and had such kudus, and I was bored during the first episode (I didn't find it that funny) and haven't tried to watch more.

omg i didn’t even realize white lotus wasn’t on there… honestly it would be an easy god tier for me. but i had some friends who could not get into it at all.

i agree with not watching stuff i’m not going to like though, that’s why switched the “bad” tier into the maybe i’ll watch it later tier lol. the flop tier has a lot of shows that started out good but i got sick of & quit.

 

[Totenkindly]

Hail Ratma!

The Final Girl Is Armed and Ready to Fight Back in First 'V/H/S/85' Image

The latest V/H/S entry will premiere at Fantastic Fest this September.

collider.com

 

[SensEye]

I'm disappointed that the voice of Korvo on Solar Opposites (and Rick and Morty) had to be replaced due to cancel culture. Some sort of domestic violence issue I understand. Criminal charges dropped due to lack of evidence, but too late for his career it seems.

Not sure about his creative input to those series and if it will be affected by his departure. I worry though. I love both Rick And Morty and Solar Opposites, so at best they can tread water through this change, and at worst they could go downhill noticeably (or be discontinued).

 

[Totenkindly]

I'm not sure what the deal is. It's more than just the domestic violence charges, though.

I empathize about fearing that shows you love will change for the worst. That's kind of the shame of some of this, whether charges are trumped up (like with James Gunn) or whether people actually acted like shitheads while producing a decent quality body of work (like Kevin Spacey).

Inside the Implosion of Justin Roiland’s Animation Empire

To legions of ‘Rick and Morty’ fans, co-creator Roiland was a quirky genius whose career was suddenly derailed by allegations of domestic violence. But to colleagues, his behavior has been troubling for years.

www.hollywoodreporter.com

 

[The Cat]

I'm not sure what the deal is. It's more than just the domestic violence charges, though.

I empathize about fearing that shows you love will change for the worst. That's kind of the shame of some of this, whether charges are trumped up (like with James Gunn) or whether people actually acted like shitheads while producing a decent quality body of work (like Kevin Spacey).

Inside the Implosion of Justin Roiland’s Animation Empire

To legions of ‘Rick and Morty’ fans, co-creator Roiland was a quirky genius whose career was suddenly derailed by allegations of domestic violence. But to colleagues, his behavior has been troubling for years.

www.hollywoodreporter.com

JR has allegedly been creeping coworkers out for a loooong time. To the point that that none of his co-workers had to stretch reality in their minds to make the charges a thing that happened, and even not waiting till the trial to get rid of him. As much of a cash cow Roiland was/is his behavior to work with, was tedious enough that they happily parted ways with him. A part of me wonders if they're trying to get Christopher Lloyd to voice Rick.

 

[Totenkindly]

Watched the first half of Good Omens Season 1 today finally. I expected to like it the first time but it felt kind of laborious (the episodes are an hour long) and I never finished it when it came out in 2019. I must be in a better frame of mind now, because it was just really funny.

And of course pairing Michael Sheen with David Tennant is typically classic, with some other great casts as well. Tennant not only embodies his part character-wise but visually he's garbed in a way that makes him look stringy and gaunt, just like you'd expect for a demon. He just moves so appropriately for the role.

I'll see if I can finish the season over the weekend.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Battlestar Galactica(2003) was prophetic. I'm not talking about with regards to AI, although I'm sure we'll fuck that up if the AI gets good enough.

But I mean the cultural "conversation" around it, such as it was (it seems much more obscure than say, 90's Star Trek, probably because it was on cable). The debate that ranged around this show foreshadows all the endless conversations today about "woke casting". With BSG they changed the gender of one character and the race, gender, and species of another, and there were people who were not happy about that.

Those turned out to be great characters overall*, so for me, it's hard to see what the outcry was. But I can kind of understand the other point of view. The original character meant something to them, and now in the new series, the new character is entirely different, and I can see how someone would be bothered by it.

But anyway, 20 years later, what was once located in a debate around an obscure sci-fi series is now something like 50% of our social politics. I would never have imagined. It's wild.

* Although the resolution of Starbuck's arc is pretty bad, almost Rise of Skywalker level, especially because it reminded me of something satirizing the entertainment industry from a 90's Simpson's episode.

 

[The Cat]

lol what?

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

lol what?

There were people who were fans of the old series and were upset about the casting of Starbuck and Boomer. It mirrors the endless discussion about casting now, when, say, remaking an older movie.

 

[The Cat]

There were people who were fans of the old series and were upset about the casting of Starbuck and Boomer. It mirrors the endless discussion about casting now, when, say, remaking an older movie.

LMAO It was before my online times. Thanks for that trivia nugget. ^_^ I only knew one guy in school who was unhappy about the recasts for BSG, but they were pretty comic book guy from simpsons, so they were easy to just sort of consider the source. I guess some people just like being contrary to having a good time

 

[Totenkindly]

LMAO It was before my online times. Thanks for that trivia nugget. ^_^ I only knew one guy in school who was unhappy about the recasts for BSG, but they were pretty comic book guy from simpsons, so they were easy to just sort of consider the source. I guess some people just like being contrary to having a good time

More there's just a subset of people who take the first iteration as Biblical and then everything else is a deviation.

Note: it's not just for scifi fandom, it is any type of fandom and religion and politics and society and whatever else. They kinda haven't gotten it across that everything creative or that happens is liberated from the iterations of the past and was just a flavor of it, and the one they happen to view as "authentic" is just the first one they experienced rather than necessarily better or worse.

Example: If someone would remake The Rise of Skywalker to be far better, I wouldn't be bitching about how it didn't conform to the shitty original.

 

[The Cat]

There were people who were fans of the old series and were upset about the casting of Starbuck and Boomer. It mirrors the endless discussion about casting now, when, say, remaking an older movie.

LMAO It was before my online times. Thanks for that trivia nugget. ^_^ I only knew one guy in school who was unhappy about the recasts for BSG, but they were pretty comic book guy from simpsons, so they were easy to just sort of consider the source. I guess some people just like being contrary to having a good time

More there's just a subset of people who take the first iteration as Biblical and then everything else is a deviation.

Note: it's not just for scifi fandom, it is any type of fandom and religion and politics and society and whatever else. They kinda haven't gotten it across that everything creative or that happens is liberated from the iterations of the past and was just a flavor of it, and the one they happen to view as "authentic" is just the first one they experienced rather than necessarily better or worse.

Example: If someone would remake The Rise of Skywalker to be far better, I wouldn't be bitching about how it didn't conform to the shitty original.

I think those poor kids deserve a do over on that trilogy

 

[SearchingforPeace]

If Rise of Skywalker were any good (like the BSG remake was), people wouldn't care.

Hollywood always does remakes. The problem is bad actors, scripts, and showrunners, all to further an agenda rather than make good shows.
There are a lot of badly done remakes and always have been, just like bad sequels, just like there always have been bad adaptations.

The problem is that a good movie or show is often pure luck. Just watch any making of documentary and so many, even the ones that we thought finely crafted works of genius, are just crap thrown together that worked, often limited by budget and other factors.

The Netflix series, "The Movies That Made Us", really shows this point very well.

So the odds are against any adaptation, remake, or sequel. We should expect them all to suck and be pleased when they don't.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

More there's just a subset of people who take the first iteration as Biblical and then everything else is a deviation.

My experience with IT helps me understand this a bit. It's been years since I've seen the miniseries. According to a podcast I enjoy, it doesn't hold up, with the exception of Tim Curry. This may be true; the miniseries no longer holds up now that we're all in our 30s and 40s (rather unlike the story, huh?). None of this changes that this is my first exposure to the story, and this probably shapes how I view any other adaptation of the story.

I saw the new IT in theaters when it first came out a few years ago. You know what I did every time Pennywise on screen? I thought to myself, this guy is no Tim Curry, and I can't imagine seeing this as a kid and being freaked out by Pennywise. For me, Tim Curry is Pennywise, and I suppose I can't accept anyone else. Inevitably, I will compare any actor in that role to Tim Curry. For me, that miniseries was my first exposure to IT; I imagine there may be more flexibility for people who read the book first. For these people, maybe IT doesn't need to be Tim Curry.

(I also think the 50s are creepier than the 80s, so the time shifting didn't help, although I get why they did it)

 

[Totenkindly]

My experience with IT helps me understand this a bit. It's been years since I've seen the miniseries. According to a podcast I enjoy, it doesn't hold up, with the exception of Tim Curry. This may be true; the miniseries no longer holds up now that we're all in our 30s and 40s (rather unlike the story, huh?). None of this changes that this is my first exposure to the story, and this probably shapes how I view any other adaptation of the story.

I know a lot of people love it. I read the book before I saw the mini-series and I really didn't like the miniseries at all -- it was a sanitized network TV version, I didn't like much of the casting, the story was chopped to pieces, none of the characters much felt like the characters I experienced when reading the book. Tim Curry of course was the best thing about it, but pretty much everything else rotted for me.... but yeah, for those whom it was the first exposure, it still is spoken of lovingly.

So yeah, prime example.

I saw the new IT in theaters when it first came out a few years ago. You know what I did every time Pennywise on screen? I thought to myself, this guy is no Tim Curry, and I can't imagine seeing this as a kid and being freaked out by Pennywise. For me, Tim Curry is Pennywise, and I suppose I can't accept anyone else. Inevitably, I will compare any actor in that role to Tim Curry. For me, that miniseries was my first exposure to IT; I imagine there may be more flexibility for people who read the book first. For these people, maybe IT doesn't need to be Tim Curry.

That is how I feel about it, Tim Curry was an iteration, and I really liked what Bill Skarsgard did with the role as well in his iteration of the character. As someone who read the book first, I think the two IT leads were the best things of both versions. (But I was also a Skarsgard fan going into it, he's a decent actor.)

I had high hopes for the film version, but Muschetti just seems like a flawed writer/director to me... I typically like some of what he does, but then he does things that can be kind of weak too. Like look at this whole "Flash" thing recently, that he directed.... eh -- basically he gets some good performances from the lead cast, but there are story / writing problems in the most important parts of the film that just really kill any impact. My favorite film of his is still Mama, and that is a flawed movie as well but it transcends the flaws I think... Anyway, for the film, the best parts were some of the casting and the opening minutes (like the Georgie sequence). Occasionally he would add something to the story, like the slide projector bit, that was really great, but then it just felt inert in so many other ways.

(I also think the 50s are creepier than the 80s, so the time shifting didn't help, although I get why they did it)

yeah, same.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

yeah, same.

I wonder why that is? Perhaps it's because so much more was hidden and submerged in the 50s. The perfect image people have of it is completely inaccurate; I can determine this just by talking to older relatives. The truth was simply that there was so much people didn't talk about, and that's a terrifying concept. Note that it's the hidden and submerged things that IT chooses to exploit.

 

[The Cat]

I wonder why that is? Perhaps it's because so much more was hidden and submerged in the 50s. The perfect image people have of it is completely inaccurate; I can determine this just by talking to older relatives. The truth was simply that there was so much people didn't talk about, and that's a terrifying concept. Note that it's the hidden and submerged things that IT chooses to exploit.

"The Rules" dominated the 50's
"The Rules" Were and are all lies.​

 

[Totenkindly]

I wonder why that is? Perhaps it's because so much more was hidden and submerged in the 50s. The perfect image people have of it is completely inaccurate; I can determine this just by talking to older relatives. The truth was simply that there was so much people didn't talk about, and that's a terrifying concept. Note that it's the hidden and submerged things that IT chooses to exploit.

That's actually pretty true. I mean, I think it got dumped because King wove in a bunch of things (like the Wolfman) culturally from the 50's that would be kind of dorky in a modern film unless handled extremely well... but they really seem kind of mundane nowadays.

Not that my generation didn't have its issue, and it's kind of annoying today that we've been effectively erased -- we don't even show up in a ton of generation quizzes/surveys because everyone forgets about Gen X and we don't often give a shit. But we definitely were calling bullshit on all the stuff dominating our parents and grandparents' generations, including the silence -- we're the latchkey kids who are actually happy to call our dysfunctional families what they were except now that's become kind of a cliche and I wish people would just shut up sometimes... not in the sense it was in the 50's (denial of problems) but in the sense of "yeah, everyone's got shit from their childhood to deal with, so why don't you shut up, stop using it to promote your YouTube channel, and actually get your shit together and take responsibility because it's your life?"

Sorry for the rant, lol. But you get a different response from kids who didn't grow up in the 50's like King did. I mean, really, he was talking about his own childhood.

Some of the best stuff in the books didn't make into the films. like, they really defanged Patrick Hoffstedder, who was like hugely solipsistic and kind of a fascinating victim case study. But just SO much. And instead in the modern films I remember Beverly's dad just being written as a cliche sexual weirdo father, he could have been in any shitty B film. I don't really remember how the TV version handled the complex childhoo result in Beverly's desire to be fathered and told what to do, despite her stubborn streak -- I just remember a 2-3 hour story that was missing nuance.

Did the earlier version have Bill riding his bike down at the end to wake up Audra? The book was really powerful but if it was in the TV version, it just doesn't stick with me or didn't come across with nearly the same amount of power. That is one of the flaws with King's adaptations -- he's capable of making some really mundane stuff seem magical in his prose, but unless you deal with it differently on-screen, it just ends up looking dorky sometimes.

 

[Totenkindly]

I think I will rewatch the miniseries (which i have not seen for like 20+ years) and the movies again to compare, for laughs and giggles. I am surprised the miniseries is not a free offering on ANY streaming service. you can rent it for $3-4 on Amazon and Apple. The bluray was only $7 with free shipping, so I got that instead.