(no subject)
Apr. 7th, 2018 05:57 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkat1. Just saw Legion S2 premiere...and in case you were wondering if they could get any weirder or more surreal, they just did.
It helps to remember, while watching this series, that we're only in David Haller's perspective. And David Haller is a powerful telephath who has the ability to bend reality to his own will. He's also insane or rather has dissociative identity disorder or DID. The term LEGION has a double-meaning in the series -- it means well the biblical context, and more importantly a legion of personalities inside Haller's head. This means that we've no clue what is real or who is real, because Haller has no clue what is real. Haller is busy trying to figure it out. We have no way of knowing whether Sid exists or is a construct created by Haller.
The episode gives you some interesting clues -- when it jumps outside of Haller's perspective which isn't often.
We do see Sid outside of Haller's perspective, so she's most likely real. But is she also insane?
Or is Haller at this point the only one who is sane?
There's this philosophical bit in the middle that I rather adored, where we get the story of the Chinese Philosopher dreaming about the butterfly, but at one point not certain if he is a Chinese philosopher dreaming about being a butterfly or vice versa. Then we get a story about a man who stumbles and feels as if his leg isn't really his, it's an alien leg, and the idea grows and grows until one day he saws it off in his shower. This is by means of explaining how an errant idea or flawed one or a delusion isn't a bad thing in of itself, but if allowed to take root and destroy all the good ideas -- psychosis takes over. They show this in a rather fascinating visual manner -- that reminded me a great deal of the comics, which were equally weird.
Anyhow that bit is explaining how the Shadow King works -- and that he's a psychosis of sorts that is spreading and trapping everyone inside their own heads. The mutants have team up with Division to stop it. But can we trust Division? Can we trust the mutants? Melanie has escaped into an opium daze and seems a bit lost -- now that her lover, Oliver, is seemingly lost to her.
Watching it reminded me a lot of watching The Prisoner, a 1960s British series, that was equally surreal and had a similar credits sequence. Actually this one could give The Prisoner a run for its money.
2. Molly Ringwald Revisits The Breakfast Club and the John Hughes Films Through the Eyes of the ME#TOO Movement
This quote was interesting in light of shows such as "Roseanne" and "Will and Grace", which are offensive in their own ways. And derogatory about women, race, etc. Will & Grace less so.
Or Outlander, which has a lot of rape - and I do mean a lot of rape. (Every single lead character regardless of gender or age gets raped in that series. So, well, at least it's not discriminatory. Equal opportunity rape. And it's not exploitative or gratitous about it, in that the rapes all further the plot and characters. However, one does wonder a bit about a writer (it's the novelist's idea to include all this not the television writers and it's a female novelist ) who can only further plot or character via sexual violence.
That said, I agree with Molly Ringwald, we need to be careful about shaming ourselves or others for loving art that is...unsettling or controversial in this manner. Because as she points out in her article -- the stories Hughes told helped a lot of people in positive ways. They spoke to people who felt like outsiders in their schools or itchy in their own skin. People can see the same story various ways, and may focus on different angles or bits or things than others. No two people see the same thing the same way.
This used to fascinate me with online fandom discussions. I'd realize halfway through that the person I was discussing the story with -- didn't see the same things I did nor did the interpret the characters or situations the same way. We don't. We can't. And that I've always found to be fascinating -- it also to some extent explains a lot.
I remember having a lengthy discussion in lj once about souls. And one poster got upset that people don't share the same "values" and "moral compass" she did. I remember responding..."well, considering we can't seem to agree on the definition of what a soul actually is, I'd say that that's most likely a given...since it's doubtful they define it the same way."
3. Sigh, not to complain, but really...still more TV shows??? And they are bloody hard to find. I keep forgetting they are on and lose them. I forgot "TRUST" was on and completely lost it.
11 Television Series We Are Watching in April
I still haven't made it through the ones in March. And I'm thinking it is time to delete the following shows from my DVR, without bothering to watch them:
* Scandal S6 - 12 episodes (at least I think we are on Season 6, it's the final season at any rate, and I realized recently that I do not care what happens to anyone on the show. Love the actors, but the writing has lost me.)
* Once Upon a Time - 6 episodes (finale season, I think we are on Season 7 or 8, lost track. I tend to after 5. And I don't care about these guys any longer either. Don't know why I'm still holding on to it.)
* Unsolved - Tupak and Biggie Murders (eh, I'm compelled by the struggling police investigation actually the dual ones that aren't getting anywhere -- but at the same time frustrated by them. And really wish they'd spend less time showing me the inner lives of the rappers...and the drug/gun trade that seems to be part of that business. There's an eerie scene at the end of the first episode where Tupack and Biggie are firing assault weapon styled water pistols at each other around a sprinkler in the back yard. Basically you have these guys playing with toy machine guns. And I'm thinking, yes, the media is now getting in on the act regarding guns kill people, you idiots. Get rid of them. Take up football instead. You might live longer. See Tupak and Biggie. I'm not surprised it hasn't been solved, although I do think it is rather obvious how they got killed and by whom - so too do the writers of the television series apparently. Which is why I'm not sure I can watch it -- because it appears to be a critique of our bureaucratic justice system and police system, which well yeah I know. Preaching to the choir here.)
I'm holding on to The Expanse (7 episodes) -- mainly because once I find the time to binge it, and am in the right mood -- I think I'll love it to pieces. Right now, not there yet.
On the fence about Rise -- it's not quite as well cast as Friday Night Lights was nor as compelling. I was in love with Kyle Chandler in FNL, Rise stars the guy from How I Met Your Mother and Mercy Street, and for some reason I always just want to smack that dude. I don't why. He irritates me. I was emphasizing with his wife and co-worker a bit too much.
Tried Roseanne -- out of curiosity more than anything else. The promos. Folks. The promos. Didn't make it past the first five to ten minutes. I found it jarring. We have the laugh track. But it is after almost every line. Also, Roseanne, waits, looks at the audience, smiles broadly (as if saying hey look at me!) then says the punch line. Everyone else is acting but her. And as a result she's throwing off their timing. It's not funny. Annoying yes. Funny no. And it should be. The set-up is there, the jokes are there, but I feel like I've seen them already. (Turns out, yes, I have, in the promos. ) It just doesn't work for me. But it didn't back then either. Also, I can't get past my dislike for Roseanne. Her humor doesn't quite work for me. I felt sorry for Darlene. But I've always felt sorry for Darlene. BTW - unless you have Nielsen box, (and I don't), no one will care if you watch this show. If you want to make a difference? Donate money to the Southern Poverty Law Center or the ACLU. (I did.)
So, the new TV shows?
* The Child in Time -- A Benedict Cumberbatch mini-series based on a book by Ian McEwan ( who is a cold analytical writer, interesting but cold, I find him hard to read for that reason). Adaptations of his works tend to be better than his work itself, because the actors imbibe them with the warmth he can't. And I missed the airdate, it was April 1 on PBS. How in the hell am I supposed to keep track of these things???
* Howards End started on Starz, this is the television adaptation of EM Forster's novel, which had last been adapted as a film.
* Killing Eve starts tomorrow night on BBC America.
* Lost in Space reboot starts next week on Netflix.
And here's still more, just in case none of those interested you.
“King in the Wilderness” (HBO, April 2), “Famous in Love” (Freeform, April 4), “National Treasure: Kiri” (Hulu, April 4), “Jersey Shore Family Vacation” (MTV, April 5), “The Boss Baby: Back in Business” (Netflix, April 6), “Paterno” (HBO, April 7), “An American Murder Mystery: The Staircase” (ID, April 8), “Unforgotten” (PBS, April 8), “New Girl” (Fox, April 10), “Rellik” (Cinemax, April 13), “Wyatt Cenac’s Problem Areas” (HBO, April 13), “The Circus” (Showtime, April 15), “Fear the Walking Dead” (AMC, April 15), “Civilizations” (PBS, April 17), “Into the Badlands” (AMC, April 22), “The 100” (The CW, April 24), “Genius” (Nat Geo, April 24), “Archer” (FXX, April 25) and “Dancing With the Stars” (ABC, April 30).
It helps to remember, while watching this series, that we're only in David Haller's perspective. And David Haller is a powerful telephath who has the ability to bend reality to his own will. He's also insane or rather has dissociative identity disorder or DID. The term LEGION has a double-meaning in the series -- it means well the biblical context, and more importantly a legion of personalities inside Haller's head. This means that we've no clue what is real or who is real, because Haller has no clue what is real. Haller is busy trying to figure it out. We have no way of knowing whether Sid exists or is a construct created by Haller.
The episode gives you some interesting clues -- when it jumps outside of Haller's perspective which isn't often.
We do see Sid outside of Haller's perspective, so she's most likely real. But is she also insane?
Or is Haller at this point the only one who is sane?
There's this philosophical bit in the middle that I rather adored, where we get the story of the Chinese Philosopher dreaming about the butterfly, but at one point not certain if he is a Chinese philosopher dreaming about being a butterfly or vice versa. Then we get a story about a man who stumbles and feels as if his leg isn't really his, it's an alien leg, and the idea grows and grows until one day he saws it off in his shower. This is by means of explaining how an errant idea or flawed one or a delusion isn't a bad thing in of itself, but if allowed to take root and destroy all the good ideas -- psychosis takes over. They show this in a rather fascinating visual manner -- that reminded me a great deal of the comics, which were equally weird.
Anyhow that bit is explaining how the Shadow King works -- and that he's a psychosis of sorts that is spreading and trapping everyone inside their own heads. The mutants have team up with Division to stop it. But can we trust Division? Can we trust the mutants? Melanie has escaped into an opium daze and seems a bit lost -- now that her lover, Oliver, is seemingly lost to her.
Watching it reminded me a lot of watching The Prisoner, a 1960s British series, that was equally surreal and had a similar credits sequence. Actually this one could give The Prisoner a run for its money.
2. Molly Ringwald Revisits The Breakfast Club and the John Hughes Films Through the Eyes of the ME#TOO Movement
John’s movies convey the anger and fear of isolation that adolescents feel, and seeing that others might feel the same way is a balm for the trauma that teen-agers experience. Whether that’s enough to make up for the impropriety of the films is hard to say—even criticizing them makes me feel like I’m divesting a generation of some of its fondest memories, or being ungrateful since they helped to establish my career. And yet embracing them entirely feels hypocritical. And yet, and yet. . . .
How are we meant to feel about art that we both love and oppose? What if we are in the unusual position of having helped create it? Erasing history is a dangerous road when it comes to art—change is essential, but so, too, is remembering the past, in all of its transgression and barbarism, so that we may properly gauge how far we have come, and also how far we still need to go.
This quote was interesting in light of shows such as "Roseanne" and "Will and Grace", which are offensive in their own ways. And derogatory about women, race, etc. Will & Grace less so.
Or Outlander, which has a lot of rape - and I do mean a lot of rape. (Every single lead character regardless of gender or age gets raped in that series. So, well, at least it's not discriminatory. Equal opportunity rape. And it's not exploitative or gratitous about it, in that the rapes all further the plot and characters. However, one does wonder a bit about a writer (it's the novelist's idea to include all this not the television writers and it's a female novelist ) who can only further plot or character via sexual violence.
That said, I agree with Molly Ringwald, we need to be careful about shaming ourselves or others for loving art that is...unsettling or controversial in this manner. Because as she points out in her article -- the stories Hughes told helped a lot of people in positive ways. They spoke to people who felt like outsiders in their schools or itchy in their own skin. People can see the same story various ways, and may focus on different angles or bits or things than others. No two people see the same thing the same way.
This used to fascinate me with online fandom discussions. I'd realize halfway through that the person I was discussing the story with -- didn't see the same things I did nor did the interpret the characters or situations the same way. We don't. We can't. And that I've always found to be fascinating -- it also to some extent explains a lot.
I remember having a lengthy discussion in lj once about souls. And one poster got upset that people don't share the same "values" and "moral compass" she did. I remember responding..."well, considering we can't seem to agree on the definition of what a soul actually is, I'd say that that's most likely a given...since it's doubtful they define it the same way."
3. Sigh, not to complain, but really...still more TV shows??? And they are bloody hard to find. I keep forgetting they are on and lose them. I forgot "TRUST" was on and completely lost it.
11 Television Series We Are Watching in April
I still haven't made it through the ones in March. And I'm thinking it is time to delete the following shows from my DVR, without bothering to watch them:
* Scandal S6 - 12 episodes (at least I think we are on Season 6, it's the final season at any rate, and I realized recently that I do not care what happens to anyone on the show. Love the actors, but the writing has lost me.)
* Once Upon a Time - 6 episodes (finale season, I think we are on Season 7 or 8, lost track. I tend to after 5. And I don't care about these guys any longer either. Don't know why I'm still holding on to it.)
* Unsolved - Tupak and Biggie Murders (eh, I'm compelled by the struggling police investigation actually the dual ones that aren't getting anywhere -- but at the same time frustrated by them. And really wish they'd spend less time showing me the inner lives of the rappers...and the drug/gun trade that seems to be part of that business. There's an eerie scene at the end of the first episode where Tupack and Biggie are firing assault weapon styled water pistols at each other around a sprinkler in the back yard. Basically you have these guys playing with toy machine guns. And I'm thinking, yes, the media is now getting in on the act regarding guns kill people, you idiots. Get rid of them. Take up football instead. You might live longer. See Tupak and Biggie. I'm not surprised it hasn't been solved, although I do think it is rather obvious how they got killed and by whom - so too do the writers of the television series apparently. Which is why I'm not sure I can watch it -- because it appears to be a critique of our bureaucratic justice system and police system, which well yeah I know. Preaching to the choir here.)
I'm holding on to The Expanse (7 episodes) -- mainly because once I find the time to binge it, and am in the right mood -- I think I'll love it to pieces. Right now, not there yet.
On the fence about Rise -- it's not quite as well cast as Friday Night Lights was nor as compelling. I was in love with Kyle Chandler in FNL, Rise stars the guy from How I Met Your Mother and Mercy Street, and for some reason I always just want to smack that dude. I don't why. He irritates me. I was emphasizing with his wife and co-worker a bit too much.
Tried Roseanne -- out of curiosity more than anything else. The promos. Folks. The promos. Didn't make it past the first five to ten minutes. I found it jarring. We have the laugh track. But it is after almost every line. Also, Roseanne, waits, looks at the audience, smiles broadly (as if saying hey look at me!) then says the punch line. Everyone else is acting but her. And as a result she's throwing off their timing. It's not funny. Annoying yes. Funny no. And it should be. The set-up is there, the jokes are there, but I feel like I've seen them already. (Turns out, yes, I have, in the promos. ) It just doesn't work for me. But it didn't back then either. Also, I can't get past my dislike for Roseanne. Her humor doesn't quite work for me. I felt sorry for Darlene. But I've always felt sorry for Darlene. BTW - unless you have Nielsen box, (and I don't), no one will care if you watch this show. If you want to make a difference? Donate money to the Southern Poverty Law Center or the ACLU. (I did.)
So, the new TV shows?
* The Child in Time -- A Benedict Cumberbatch mini-series based on a book by Ian McEwan ( who is a cold analytical writer, interesting but cold, I find him hard to read for that reason). Adaptations of his works tend to be better than his work itself, because the actors imbibe them with the warmth he can't. And I missed the airdate, it was April 1 on PBS. How in the hell am I supposed to keep track of these things???
* Howards End started on Starz, this is the television adaptation of EM Forster's novel, which had last been adapted as a film.
* Killing Eve starts tomorrow night on BBC America.
* Lost in Space reboot starts next week on Netflix.
And here's still more, just in case none of those interested you.
“King in the Wilderness” (HBO, April 2), “Famous in Love” (Freeform, April 4), “National Treasure: Kiri” (Hulu, April 4), “Jersey Shore Family Vacation” (MTV, April 5), “The Boss Baby: Back in Business” (Netflix, April 6), “Paterno” (HBO, April 7), “An American Murder Mystery: The Staircase” (ID, April 8), “Unforgotten” (PBS, April 8), “New Girl” (Fox, April 10), “Rellik” (Cinemax, April 13), “Wyatt Cenac’s Problem Areas” (HBO, April 13), “The Circus” (Showtime, April 15), “Fear the Walking Dead” (AMC, April 15), “Civilizations” (PBS, April 17), “Into the Badlands” (AMC, April 22), “The 100” (The CW, April 24), “Genius” (Nat Geo, April 24), “Archer” (FXX, April 25) and “Dancing With the Stars” (ABC, April 30).