No need for any more:
4 Likes
Well, we just finished the second season. After such a stellar first season, the second was a disappointment. Not sure what happened there. They dropped the story arc in big chunks, in favor of a more predictable episodic style.
And that ending? It felt like a slap in the face to all the viewers who’d stayed with it to the end. OK, so they knew Crime Story wasn’t going to be renewed. I can see giving the network the middle-finger salute … but the viewers? Why not give a satisfying finale to what was, overall, such a great series?
4 Likes
We wrapped this one up last night. It had a much more satisfying ending than Crime Story … at least for us. Though I did find it perhaps a bit too pat. I wasn’t expecting everyone to have a happy ending. But I don’t mind that they did.
Question: In Season 3, Episode 5, the mother of a man who is missing at sea is upset that his wife and children are holding a memorial service for him at Brighton Beach. She blurts out, “This is previous. You’re being previous doing this. And if the time ever comes, it should be in a church.” My husband and I think she meant to say that it was premature. In British English, is previous ever used as a synonym for premature? I think of previous as referring to chronology, as in something that happened before something else.
3 Likes
Then again, the British phrase “all a bit previous” comes to mind. Which means acting too hastily. So maybe she was correct in saying this. It just sounded odd to us.
3 Likes
Honestly didn’t know we had another CAPE FEAR remake in the pipeline…
Addendum: moved from films to tv shows since this is a 10 part series on Appletv
2 Likes
Good to hear it turned out so well. I was hesitant to give it a chance. But it’s always great to be surprised.
1 Like
Began watching Under the Banner of Heaven last night with the first episode. Very good so far. Andrew Garfield is very good in the lead. Also really liked Gil Birmingham as his partner, who brings a much needed differing perspective. Had no idea that Sam Worthington was in it until I found myself wondering why one of the members of the Lafferty family looked familiar. And Daisy Edgar-Jones is fantastic, as usual, in this.
Was also not aware that this was based on a John Krakauer book, which got my attention when I saw his name on the credits. His book Into the Wild is the basis for one of my favorite films of all-time, so I’m finding myself even more interested to continue on with this than I already was.
3 Likes
Krakauer’s Into Thin Air is also a fascinating report of, literally, the Mountain Madness that is modern day Everest ‘climbing’. Recommended.
4 Likes
Widow’s Bay on AppleTV
Three and a half episodes in this is surprisingly entertaining for a horror comedy. That particular (sub-)genre often struggles with the right tone but here the plight of (uncontested) outsider mayor Tom Loftis (Matthew Rhys) trying to steer a possibly/probably cursed island community to prosperity amid growing supernatural - or super hysterical - manifestations turns out to be at times hilarious and intriguing.
Plenty of nods to great genre classics from JAWS to THE FOG, THE RING, IT (and doubtless many I don’t even know). But done with gusto and not simply stacking these homages on one another. It’s naturally a bit episodic, positively so. If this keeps the quality up to the final episode - as reviews would promise - it’s a winner.
2 Likes
Leaving these here…
2 Likes
As weird and unprofessional this was handled, it will benefit the show to have a longer hiatus. It was too much, too repetitive and too sprawling in its too dense mythology recently. Quite like the Marvel universe: it became exhausting homework to keep track of everything.
Back to basics, reboot completely, I say. Ignore everything which came before and start over.
Like B…
3 Likes
My thoughts exactly.
From the second article:
The 2005 revival worked because Davies threw away the continuity baggage, only gradually reintroducing old elements.
Give this another year or two, let someone with a fresh perspective reimagine the show from scratch. Perhaps even move it away from the family target audience? It wouldn’t have to be explicit to be interesting. But some of the silliness probably doesn’t help the format nowadays.
2 Likes
While I do understand the decisions, I am disappointed. There were a lot of dangling plot threads which will now never get resolved, and it’s better for the longevity of the series if they don’t. Whoever takes over next doesn’t need that baggage.
Although, can we take a moment to acknowledge how insane the situation with Carole Ann Ford as Susan is? They brought back one of the original actors, more than 60 years after the series first aired (and I think 50 years after her last on-screen appearance), only to delete her scenes, abandon her storyline and relegate her appearance to a pair of bizarre, nonsensical cameos?
4 Likes
This is the problem with the introduction of story threads which are not supposed to resolve quickly: they serve only the function to keep viewers coming back. However, the constant extension of these story bits only lead to an unsatisfying conclusion if there is any.
And viewers are bombarded with so much content (it mostly is just that, content, these days) that there is neither time nor sustained interest in following every show‘s „big“ secrets.
My advice: resolve everything within one episode, with only a slight hint at what’s to come in the next episode.
Carefully told stories need an ending. Not thin promises that at some point answers will be given, maybe. (see „Lost“)
2 Likes
Ah, the mystery box…
Fun in theory, but don’t start a story you can’t guarantee you can finish or leave answers so long that the audience is going to be disappointed because it’s not the one they’ve had time to write in their head.
3 Likes
As for the already known hiatus, this procedure is now the most fun thing in the industry:
„The BBC announced that it will embark on a competitive tender for Season 16, in which producers will pitch in a bake-off-style process to regenerate the sci-fi series.
The idea of farming out one of your iconic brands to a third-party producer may seem anathema to some, but under the terms of the BBC’s operating agreement, known as its royal charter, the corporation has a duty to put in-house shows out to the market.“
This „bake-off style“-pitching is supposed to be fair to all but in reality only works for the employer: get tons of ideas for FREE since every pitch will not be paid. You will only get the answer „be grateful to get the opportunity“.
source: 'Doctor Who' Set To Be Off Air For Years Amid Creative Regeneration
3 Likes
Much as I love Steven Moffat’s writing, I did feel that the complexity of his story arcs led to a conundrum for Doctor Who: How do you top this? Chris Chibnall tried … with largely disastrous results. His best episodes were the stand-alones that didn’t seem hell-bent on one-upping the story arcs of his predecessor.
I’d hoped that with RTD’s return, we’d see a return to a more compact, disciplined style of storytelling. I’ve only seen Ncuti Gatwa’s first season (I have a library hold on the second season). But, while there were some stellar episodes, the centre doesn’t hold. From what I have read, the same is true for his second season.
So, following as it does news of the break with Disney, this news is not surprising. But it is disappointing.
3 Likes
Often mentioned are superior competitor franchises Star Wars and Star Trek. And while that isn’t quite fair, at least the Trek example may give a handy comparison what exactly is the difference. Trek started out - the original series and the first few films - as a 60s phenomenon that held itself until the 90s. Then The Next Generation took over and you didn’t have to have the first idea about Trek to come aboard that series. And while Deep Space Nine and Voyager nominally occupied the same era as TNG they were separate shows with their own characters and environment. They were very friendly to newcomers and no doubt a significant portion of their respective fanbases even started out their journey across Trek with one of these ‘new’ shows. Even the prequel Enterprise eked out its own niche in Trek lore.
Whatever one may think of the most recent volley of Trek, the Abrams films and subsequent Kurtzman shows, they too tried to largely be their own thing - which is not always easy when their setting is too close to TOS. Strange New Worlds proves the show is best when it entirely ignores or downright contradicts TOS. Characters like Spock and Pike win new facets and tired old Trek history gets a new lease on life. Trek historians may or may not enjoy this - but you can be blissfully ignorant of the contrast and still enjoy the show.
For large parts of Doctor Who one didn’t need any background knowledge, the basic concept was self explanatory and continuity existed somewhere out there where the skies are burning. It wasn’t absent, but neither was it imperative. The many many original Who paperbacks and fanfic with all incarnations of the Doctor and all companions is proof how beloved these are with the fans - but also how they all fit into the basic concept, almost to the point of being interchangeable.
Taking that concept and using it for storylines that affected not just the current version but also all other versions (and possibly at least some versions of the companion?) was always going to be a bald move. For a time it looked as if the concept could hold that water - but that was always based on the goodwill of the hardcore fans who were willing to follow every aspect and consequence of the show, not the casual fans who skipped a few episodes or even a Doctor or two.
Now one might argue - probably rightfully - Doctor Who has no casual fans, the entire fanbase is a sworn brother/sisterhood of guardians willing to defend the show with tooth and claw. Might be. But for a show with a supposed broad appeal spanning generations and embracing a family viewership that is a problem.
4 Likes
They ran the show into the ground and I could see it happening a mile away. It didn’t need to come to this. I think they became obsessed with having these big revelations and just lost the plot, damaging the fabric too much for my liking, tripling down on bad ideas. I used to be a fan but I haven’t called myself that for a long time.
5 Likes
I believe stretching the concept of Doctor and Companion into Doctor and a group of companions already was the first mistake.
The Tennant era definitely succeeded because with Rose there was a clear focus on a particular dynamic, and yes, the romantic angle worked so well that it brought in many more female fans.
Of course, one cannot keep on duplicating this, but the principle should not be abandoned: an unaware Earthling meets an inexplicable alien, and both work together to solve dangerous problems.
To shove in too many other characters will only dilute this.
Also, invent new enemies. The umpteenth Dalek episode or the likes just won‘t raise tension.
Nor does the last minute solution explained in a hectic monologue delivered by the Doctor. You cannot build a story to a satisfying conclusion if you just allow it to be finished by a deus ex machina.
4 Likes