(no subject)
Feb. 19th, 2020 07:29 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatMy goal is to make it towards bed by 9pm tonight. Let's see if that happens. I think I'm suffering from a combination of stress, dehydration and sleep deprivation. I ach all over today. Was extremely tired. And having troubles focusing. Also, I'm trying to drink a lot of water.
As an aside - I have a love/hate relationship with the internet. I worry about alienating folks at the same time, I'm thinking, why the frakking heck should I care, why do they care? People offend/alienate/annoy me all the time. It's as if I'm furious at my own anxiety and determined to take it out on the cause?
Anyhow, television reviews...for what it's worth.
1. First, I explained to a Chidi recently that scholars had written journal articles and presentations on Buffy, and taught courses. He stared at me as if I were crazy. Of course he didn't really check it out in the later seasons, which he heard were more interesting.
Anyhow, here is yet another analysis of the Spike/Buffy relationship in S6 - The Disturbing Forgotten Scene in Buffy the Vampire Slayer Season Six - for scholars it might say something new, but not folks who have been in the fandom for twenty years, and watched it live and debated it live in 2002. Also what forgotten scene?
I honestly think there is a huge gap between the people who binge-watched, streamed or watched Buffy on DVDs, and those who watched it as it aired, with often huge gaps between episodes and commercials. It's not the same experience at all.
2. Ragnarok - the Norwegian series by way of Denmark or the Danes, which apparently stirred quite a bit of controversy in Norway. It's intriguing but not very good. The acting is...disappointing. Although, it is interesting that actors in other countries don't look like they stepped off of a model cover shoot the way they do in the US. Does the US just have better makeup artists and production design? Is it a camera editing thing? I don't know why the people aren't as pretty and flawless looking in imports...with the exception of the Korean imports, in which they are actually as pretty if not prettier.
It's an odd series -- has a very strong pro-environment, anti-corporation message. But alas, the plot is a bit sluggish, and it's hard to care that much about the characters. I was the most interested in Magna aka Thor's brother, Lauritas -- who I think might be Loki. But they never really went anywhere with it. He's queer, and unashamed of it. He was the most interesting character in the series, with the exception of Isolde who was killed off in the first episode. You know the television show has a problem when the most interesting female character is killed off in the first episode, and other two teen women are hard to tell apart. I didn't like any of the remaining female characters.
The series also comes across as ever-so-slightly sexist or misogynistic. Which is a problem. From the reviews I read, I wasn't the only one who picked up on it.
In other words? Stick with Marvel.
3. Locke and Key based on the best selling horror comic. This even had cameo's by the authors of the horror comic, much like Stephen King's adapted novels often had a cameo from King. Joe Hill by the way looks a lot like his father, if I didn't know better, I'd have thought it was Stephen King.
The television series is creepy. But not quite out there enough. I think it is hard to replicate the nuttiness of the comics. Although during a second season they might do it?
The biggest weakness was the uneven writing in regards to the demon or bad guy. That often felt a bit contrived in places, and didn't always work.
4. The Chilling Adventures of Sabrina -- I'm still stuck in S2, which is dragging. Have two episodes left. So far I've been a bit disappointed in it. I hear S3 is better. Maybe I'll skip ahead?
5. Did you get tired of the Winter shows already, and feel there's nothing new on TV? Well, never fear...there's even more shows popping up pretty much everywhere soon. Because we can never have enough television? Can we?
Entertainment Weekly is rather amusing about content now - it's as if they've thrown up their hands and admitted they can't cover everything, so why bother?
* March 1 - is Jason Segel's new television series "Dispatches from Elsewhere" starring Segel (from How I Met Your Mother), Sally Field, Richard E Grant...
It's a weird sci-fi/fantasy series on AMC at 10 PM.
* DEVs - miniseries on Hulu, starts March 5 - directed/written/created by Alex Garland. Sci-fi thriller.
- Hillary documentary series also comes on Hulu.
* Council of Dads - cancer striken man requests a group of men act as father figures for his daughters. - NBC March 10.
* The Plot Against America - aka Philip Roth's take on a fascist America. on HBO on March 16.
*The Terror with Robert Englund on Travel Channel. Apparently Travel Channel feels the need to do horror stories now too? These are re-enactments of scary stories ripped from newspaper headlines.
* Self Made - Inspired by the Life of Madam CJ Walker - on Netflix 3/20.
It also talked about books, but nothing I found remotely interesting. I'm in the reading slump to end all reading slumps.
As an aside - I have a love/hate relationship with the internet. I worry about alienating folks at the same time, I'm thinking, why the frakking heck should I care, why do they care? People offend/alienate/annoy me all the time. It's as if I'm furious at my own anxiety and determined to take it out on the cause?
Anyhow, television reviews...for what it's worth.
1. First, I explained to a Chidi recently that scholars had written journal articles and presentations on Buffy, and taught courses. He stared at me as if I were crazy. Of course he didn't really check it out in the later seasons, which he heard were more interesting.
Anyhow, here is yet another analysis of the Spike/Buffy relationship in S6 - The Disturbing Forgotten Scene in Buffy the Vampire Slayer Season Six - for scholars it might say something new, but not folks who have been in the fandom for twenty years, and watched it live and debated it live in 2002. Also what forgotten scene?
I honestly think there is a huge gap between the people who binge-watched, streamed or watched Buffy on DVDs, and those who watched it as it aired, with often huge gaps between episodes and commercials. It's not the same experience at all.
2. Ragnarok - the Norwegian series by way of Denmark or the Danes, which apparently stirred quite a bit of controversy in Norway. It's intriguing but not very good. The acting is...disappointing. Although, it is interesting that actors in other countries don't look like they stepped off of a model cover shoot the way they do in the US. Does the US just have better makeup artists and production design? Is it a camera editing thing? I don't know why the people aren't as pretty and flawless looking in imports...with the exception of the Korean imports, in which they are actually as pretty if not prettier.
It's an odd series -- has a very strong pro-environment, anti-corporation message. But alas, the plot is a bit sluggish, and it's hard to care that much about the characters. I was the most interested in Magna aka Thor's brother, Lauritas -- who I think might be Loki. But they never really went anywhere with it. He's queer, and unashamed of it. He was the most interesting character in the series, with the exception of Isolde who was killed off in the first episode. You know the television show has a problem when the most interesting female character is killed off in the first episode, and other two teen women are hard to tell apart. I didn't like any of the remaining female characters.
The series also comes across as ever-so-slightly sexist or misogynistic. Which is a problem. From the reviews I read, I wasn't the only one who picked up on it.
In other words? Stick with Marvel.
3. Locke and Key based on the best selling horror comic. This even had cameo's by the authors of the horror comic, much like Stephen King's adapted novels often had a cameo from King. Joe Hill by the way looks a lot like his father, if I didn't know better, I'd have thought it was Stephen King.
The television series is creepy. But not quite out there enough. I think it is hard to replicate the nuttiness of the comics. Although during a second season they might do it?
The biggest weakness was the uneven writing in regards to the demon or bad guy. That often felt a bit contrived in places, and didn't always work.
4. The Chilling Adventures of Sabrina -- I'm still stuck in S2, which is dragging. Have two episodes left. So far I've been a bit disappointed in it. I hear S3 is better. Maybe I'll skip ahead?
5. Did you get tired of the Winter shows already, and feel there's nothing new on TV? Well, never fear...there's even more shows popping up pretty much everywhere soon. Because we can never have enough television? Can we?
Entertainment Weekly is rather amusing about content now - it's as if they've thrown up their hands and admitted they can't cover everything, so why bother?
* March 1 - is Jason Segel's new television series "Dispatches from Elsewhere" starring Segel (from How I Met Your Mother), Sally Field, Richard E Grant...
It's a weird sci-fi/fantasy series on AMC at 10 PM.
* DEVs - miniseries on Hulu, starts March 5 - directed/written/created by Alex Garland. Sci-fi thriller.
- Hillary documentary series also comes on Hulu.
* Council of Dads - cancer striken man requests a group of men act as father figures for his daughters. - NBC March 10.
* The Plot Against America - aka Philip Roth's take on a fascist America. on HBO on March 16.
*The Terror with Robert Englund on Travel Channel. Apparently Travel Channel feels the need to do horror stories now too? These are re-enactments of scary stories ripped from newspaper headlines.
* Self Made - Inspired by the Life of Madam CJ Walker - on Netflix 3/20.
It also talked about books, but nothing I found remotely interesting. I'm in the reading slump to end all reading slumps.
no subject
Date: 2020-02-20 02:49 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-02-20 05:15 am (UTC)In fairness, that may be a reasonable assumption in many cases of younger writers / bloggers / etc. One of the things that made BtVS so unusual in terms of its fan base was the wide gap in ages among that fan base. The show was clearly oriented towards the older teen and young adult audience, yet many far older people were attracted to, and became fascinated, even obsessed with it.
I think it's also inevitable that how a given generation views and analyzes the art of the culture around them will always have an inherent bias that springs from how said generation interacts with that culture.
So one thing that is just now sparking my curiosity after reading this person's commentary on a 20+ year-old creation would be what, if any differences might exist in terms of reading / seeing a scene as either primarily literal, or metaphorical, in older vs. younger generations.
And if so, is this more just a matter of age, or more culture driven?
no subject
Date: 2020-02-20 11:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-02-20 05:56 pm (UTC)I don't think age is relevant here. There were people on the boards back then who were between the ages of 12-25. I think there's a huge difference between watching a show live, with only rumors and spoilers to know what is coming next. People who watched it on DVDs (like my niece, March Watches, etc) respond to it differently. Just as fans respond to television series they can binge in one weekend or two weeks, as opposed to waiting for each episode to premiere.
When Dead Things aired in 2002 - I'd seen rumors and spoilers prior. There was one that stated Spike forced himself on Buffy, before it aired. But I disagreed with the spoiler when I saw the episode. Also, at that time, the spoiler was that Spike was getting his chip removed. We were more focused on it. And there were long stretches of time between episodes. I remember hunting fanfic and essays to read in between the episodes. And I wrote a lot of essays, in part to figure out where they were going next. The series wasn't complete yet, we had no idea where they were going. It's the difference between watching Star Wars in the 1970s, before you knew Luke was Vader's son or Luke and Leia were brother and sister. When Star Wars first aired, we didn't know any of that.
Also, when you watch a television show as it airs on broadcast television, on a weekly basis, with large gaps between episodes -- you tend to obsess over details more. It's more likely that you will rewatch each episode five or six times just to figure out what will happen in the next ones or where the writers are going. People obsessed over each episode as it aired. We discussed it to death -- just to figure out the next one. We didn't know at that time that they would redeem Spike after Seeing Red. We fought over it. We didn't know Spike would get a soul instead of a chip. And at that time, there were lots of interviews and articles from the writers of the show and the actors, that we poured over to see what would happen next.
The essay above is coming from the point of view of someone who binge-watched the series, and knew within the space of maybe a month, if that, what happened. They knew when they started watching that it was only seven seasons, that there was comic series. That Spike went on to do Angel. If they wanted to know what happened next -- it was within easy access. They didn't have to figure it out or wait several months.
So, imagine for a minute watching this show in a couple of weeks, no large gaps between, one episode after another? You'll forget stuff. I do when I binge watch tv shows. I can't remember various scenes from Witcher for example. It blurs together.
no subject
Date: 2020-02-20 06:03 pm (UTC)To add to the above? Television was different in the 1990s and early 00s, We didn't have streaming services. There were only about 20 scripted series, maybe 50 by 2002, not well over a 1000. Also, it wasn't until 2000 or thereabouts, that DVD's were readily available. I taped on VHS. And I remember Dochawk sending me Angel VHS tapes of previous seasons that I'd missed, so I would write about Angel. We traded tapes. And Angel aired opposite The West Wing - there were no DVR's. No cell phones. The technology has changed a great deal since Buffy aired. And that does effect how people view television and content. There's a huge difference between someone watching Buffy -- when it's really the only thing like it on, and they have to choose it over other series, and worry about preemptions (due to sports) and someone watching Buffy now on DVD. Keep in mind Buffy came out before Harry Potter did, before the explosion in YA paranormal television series, movies and books. This was before Twilight, Vampire Diaries, Veronica Mars, etc. The internet, television, etc - were all very different back then.