Television...redux
Dec. 23rd, 2020 09:07 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatDoing Xmas this year by my lonesome - I'd call it solitary confinement, but it isn't really - I've been bing-watching lots of television, writing stories in my head, taking long walks, and chatting on Zoom or the phone, also writing long posts in DW (aren't you lucky). I've also been posting pictures. Basically nothing has changed since March.
I see people. Strangers mostly. And usually at a distance or quickly in passing. On my walks, on my trips to the grocery stores and pharmacies, to the laundry room, recycling, and lobby. Today I walked past two ladies social distancing with their dogs. They had masks on, and stopped to chat briefly with dogs in tow. Plus every time I leave my apartment - I get Christmas music - it's the recycled Christmas Mall Musac variety not the elevated classical music station variety, but hey - festive. Today I got to here the instrumental equivalent of "Oh Christmas Tree" as I left for my morning walk. (I kind of feel sorry for the Muslim and Jewish folks who share the building with me. The Supers are Roman Catholic.) I also see people from church on Zoom, and extended family on Zoom (they are doing New Year's this year apparently.) It could be much worse. Life can always be better and worse, no matter where you happen to be in it.
Anyhow, at the start of this pandemic - some television critic fretted that we'd run out of television content soon. (Somehow I wasn't all that worried. It's a virus. They can figure out a way to do television around a virus. All you have to do is test everyone, then seal them up in a bubble for about two months, crank out the show, then back home again. The Daytime Soaps did one better - they test everyone daily, have everyone wear masks, all food/drink in dressing rooms, and use special effects. It's expensive but doable - also less expensive than going off air - they just cut five characters, voila.)
Turns out I was right. Television critics, I've realized, aren't the brightest bulbs on the planet (how can you be when all you do for a living is watch and critique television? Which, let's face it, we can do. It's not hard. I do it all the time. Sorry, not being kind to television critics.)
1. 58 New Television Shows That Time's Television Critics are anticipating in 2021 - it includes Joss Whedon's The Never's which is premiering on HBO not HBO Max, most likely because it's future remains undetermined? (Whedon left the show after the first season for personal reasons. Or so everyone said. It's hard to know really. Some think it was because of Justice League - except I was reading about the Justice League shoot before the movie was released - long before Fisher's accusations came out. And that was an insane shoot - with so many problems behind the scenes that I seriously doubt they could be laid at Whedon's feet. Also if they could all be laid at his feet, HBO wouldn't have hired him to do the Nevers.
Besides Whedon has been kind of fickle since Buffy ended. He has Brian Fuller syndrom. To date the only series Fuller seems to have finished is Hannibal - it made it to almost four seasons with Fuller at the helm, remarkable accomplishment really. Whedon to date has managed to only stick with Buffy for five seasons, he jumped off it in S6, then jumped back. Everything else - either got cancelled after 13 episodes or he handed off to someone else. I don't think he has the attention span for a long television series. He should stick to producing or shorter fair.]
Other shows on the docket...include some interesting stuff on Netflix, Disney + and I think Amazon.
2. Review of Shonda Rhimes new series Bridgerton
Bridgerton is the eagerly awaited Netflix series adaptation of Julie Quinn's best-selling historical romance novels. (Which I've never read, nor apparently has mother. And between us - we've read over a thousand romance novels. This, I suppose, is proof that the romance genre field is quite large and under-represented on television. I've no clue why she picked the Bridgerton series - apparently its very popular on Good Reads and Smart Bitches. I'd have picked a few others...but okay. Perhaps I should try it first - except the novel I picked up, I've not been able to get into. I don't know - I'd have gone with Joanna Byrne's Spymaster series, or Kerrigyn Byrne's Highwayman series, or maybe Katherine Ashe's Falcon Club. There's more action and a bit more going on than well...society balls and gossip.)
I am going to watch it. Curiosity more than anything else. Also I like the genre. Rhimes though, can be hit or miss. Since she's not show-running this series and just producing, it may work. Chris Van Dunsen is writing and show-running it - he's her prodigy from Grey's. Interesting that a guy is writing a romance series. But a guy also did Sandition. The genre actually is read by men, by the way. So too are daytime soaps - quite a few men watch them. Straight, gay, bi, men. Just like a lot of women watch football and sports movies, hard science fiction, mystery, action and non-fiction. Entertainment is not as gender specified as people like to believe.
It's gotten mixed reviews. Variety liked it better than the NY Times. But you know, television critics.
3. Great Pottery Throw-Down on HBO Max - I love this show. I like it better than Great British Bake-Off. It kind of has the same set up. They do a showstopper, a technical, and a throw-down. Also, someone is voted off, and someone is top potter. But it's more fun to watch - in part because its easier to understand and predict the judging. (Bake-Off's problem is you can't taste the creations so have no idea why they pick one person over another. Also baking is a bit more subjective than pottery - there are techniques that can be objectively judged.) The other reason I enjoy it more - is I don't crave things I can't eat and can't make. I'm more likely to make a good pot and design it, than back a great cake or pie or bread. (I'm not a baker.)
4. HBO's His Dark Materials - also love. It follows the books pretty closely and has stellar casting and effects. I'm enjoying the characters, who are layered well. One of the best characters is Mrs. Coulter - who Ruth Wilson plays with perfection, and Lee Scoresby, portrayed with warmth and flair by the guy behind Hamilton. Also I love the actress playing Lyra, and Will definitely growing on me. I'm actually enjoying this series more than Game of Thrones - for one thing, it's not as violent, few things are.
Also, whomever is playing Lord Boreal - is a true find. That actor is riveting when he's onscreen. More so than the weirdly popular Andrew Scott from Fleabag. (The appeal of Fleabag continues to be lost on me. Everyone seems to love that series but me. I couldn't get through the first two episodes. I really don't handle embarrassment humor well - which may be the reason. Although it is British embarrassment humor - so you'd think it wouldn't be a problem? I usually handle that fine. But no, I found it cringe-inducing.)
5. Overall review of Streaming Channels to date.
As you can see, I've jumped from streaming Netflix to HBO Max, and possibly Hulu and Disney. Netflix - I ran out of things that interested me at the moment. Just in time for it to get more pricey. HBO Max is actually cheaper.
It doesn't have nearly as much content as Netflix at the moment - but that may be a plus - also short-term. Warner has a lot of movies coming down the pike. At any rate, right now it's easier to find things on HBO Max than it is on Netflix and Amazon.
These streaming channels need to make it easier for folks to find things on them.
Disney so far has the best model - which HBO Max kind of copied. Hulu's isn't bad. Amazon's is atrocious, as is Netflix's which is similar to Amazon. It's very hard to find things on either.
I rather like Disney/Hulu models. HBO Max kind of reminds me of them. All three rely heavily on pre-established content, much like Netflix once did. They also are bringing in new content. HBO Max may give Netflix a run for its money in the movie category. Disney might do it in the lighter kid fare and family far categories - also Disney is cheaper than Netflix and easier to find stuff on. And has an extensive catalogue of content that it doesn't have to pay anyone else for.
They are all very different of course. The most eclectic is Netflix - which seems to range in quality from horrific to excellent, and it's hard to know which is which until you watch it. Amazon is similar, but doesn't quite have the same wealth of content at its offering.
Disney clearly has more franchises than Warner to exploit, and with Fox, it has even more under Hulu umbrella as well. Warner has quite a bit, but does it have as much as Disney, hard to know. Warner has always been known for quality fare, and with AT&T's acquisition there was some, okay more than that, fear that there would be a major dip in quality. If so, I've not seen it, yet. But I'm admittedly just flirting at the moment.
To be tried?
* Flight Attendant - the new thriller staring Penny from Big Bang Theory (not as Penny of course)
* Tell Me About It - the Steven Soderburgh film with Meryl Streep, Dianne Wiest, and Candace Bergen
* Wonder Woman 1984
* The Witches reboot with Anne Hathaway and Octavia Butler
In process?
* Great Pottery Throw Down
* Titans
* His Dark Materials
6. What are you watching while stuck at home and unable to visit folks during the COVID pandemic?
I see people. Strangers mostly. And usually at a distance or quickly in passing. On my walks, on my trips to the grocery stores and pharmacies, to the laundry room, recycling, and lobby. Today I walked past two ladies social distancing with their dogs. They had masks on, and stopped to chat briefly with dogs in tow. Plus every time I leave my apartment - I get Christmas music - it's the recycled Christmas Mall Musac variety not the elevated classical music station variety, but hey - festive. Today I got to here the instrumental equivalent of "Oh Christmas Tree" as I left for my morning walk. (I kind of feel sorry for the Muslim and Jewish folks who share the building with me. The Supers are Roman Catholic.) I also see people from church on Zoom, and extended family on Zoom (they are doing New Year's this year apparently.) It could be much worse. Life can always be better and worse, no matter where you happen to be in it.
Anyhow, at the start of this pandemic - some television critic fretted that we'd run out of television content soon. (Somehow I wasn't all that worried. It's a virus. They can figure out a way to do television around a virus. All you have to do is test everyone, then seal them up in a bubble for about two months, crank out the show, then back home again. The Daytime Soaps did one better - they test everyone daily, have everyone wear masks, all food/drink in dressing rooms, and use special effects. It's expensive but doable - also less expensive than going off air - they just cut five characters, voila.)
Turns out I was right. Television critics, I've realized, aren't the brightest bulbs on the planet (how can you be when all you do for a living is watch and critique television? Which, let's face it, we can do. It's not hard. I do it all the time. Sorry, not being kind to television critics.)
1. 58 New Television Shows That Time's Television Critics are anticipating in 2021 - it includes Joss Whedon's The Never's which is premiering on HBO not HBO Max, most likely because it's future remains undetermined? (Whedon left the show after the first season for personal reasons. Or so everyone said. It's hard to know really. Some think it was because of Justice League - except I was reading about the Justice League shoot before the movie was released - long before Fisher's accusations came out. And that was an insane shoot - with so many problems behind the scenes that I seriously doubt they could be laid at Whedon's feet. Also if they could all be laid at his feet, HBO wouldn't have hired him to do the Nevers.
Besides Whedon has been kind of fickle since Buffy ended. He has Brian Fuller syndrom. To date the only series Fuller seems to have finished is Hannibal - it made it to almost four seasons with Fuller at the helm, remarkable accomplishment really. Whedon to date has managed to only stick with Buffy for five seasons, he jumped off it in S6, then jumped back. Everything else - either got cancelled after 13 episodes or he handed off to someone else. I don't think he has the attention span for a long television series. He should stick to producing or shorter fair.]
Other shows on the docket...include some interesting stuff on Netflix, Disney + and I think Amazon.
2. Review of Shonda Rhimes new series Bridgerton
Bridgerton is the eagerly awaited Netflix series adaptation of Julie Quinn's best-selling historical romance novels. (Which I've never read, nor apparently has mother. And between us - we've read over a thousand romance novels. This, I suppose, is proof that the romance genre field is quite large and under-represented on television. I've no clue why she picked the Bridgerton series - apparently its very popular on Good Reads and Smart Bitches. I'd have picked a few others...but okay. Perhaps I should try it first - except the novel I picked up, I've not been able to get into. I don't know - I'd have gone with Joanna Byrne's Spymaster series, or Kerrigyn Byrne's Highwayman series, or maybe Katherine Ashe's Falcon Club. There's more action and a bit more going on than well...society balls and gossip.)
I am going to watch it. Curiosity more than anything else. Also I like the genre. Rhimes though, can be hit or miss. Since she's not show-running this series and just producing, it may work. Chris Van Dunsen is writing and show-running it - he's her prodigy from Grey's. Interesting that a guy is writing a romance series. But a guy also did Sandition. The genre actually is read by men, by the way. So too are daytime soaps - quite a few men watch them. Straight, gay, bi, men. Just like a lot of women watch football and sports movies, hard science fiction, mystery, action and non-fiction. Entertainment is not as gender specified as people like to believe.
It's gotten mixed reviews. Variety liked it better than the NY Times. But you know, television critics.
3. Great Pottery Throw-Down on HBO Max - I love this show. I like it better than Great British Bake-Off. It kind of has the same set up. They do a showstopper, a technical, and a throw-down. Also, someone is voted off, and someone is top potter. But it's more fun to watch - in part because its easier to understand and predict the judging. (Bake-Off's problem is you can't taste the creations so have no idea why they pick one person over another. Also baking is a bit more subjective than pottery - there are techniques that can be objectively judged.) The other reason I enjoy it more - is I don't crave things I can't eat and can't make. I'm more likely to make a good pot and design it, than back a great cake or pie or bread. (I'm not a baker.)
4. HBO's His Dark Materials - also love. It follows the books pretty closely and has stellar casting and effects. I'm enjoying the characters, who are layered well. One of the best characters is Mrs. Coulter - who Ruth Wilson plays with perfection, and Lee Scoresby, portrayed with warmth and flair by the guy behind Hamilton. Also I love the actress playing Lyra, and Will definitely growing on me. I'm actually enjoying this series more than Game of Thrones - for one thing, it's not as violent, few things are.
Also, whomever is playing Lord Boreal - is a true find. That actor is riveting when he's onscreen. More so than the weirdly popular Andrew Scott from Fleabag. (The appeal of Fleabag continues to be lost on me. Everyone seems to love that series but me. I couldn't get through the first two episodes. I really don't handle embarrassment humor well - which may be the reason. Although it is British embarrassment humor - so you'd think it wouldn't be a problem? I usually handle that fine. But no, I found it cringe-inducing.)
5. Overall review of Streaming Channels to date.
As you can see, I've jumped from streaming Netflix to HBO Max, and possibly Hulu and Disney. Netflix - I ran out of things that interested me at the moment. Just in time for it to get more pricey. HBO Max is actually cheaper.
It doesn't have nearly as much content as Netflix at the moment - but that may be a plus - also short-term. Warner has a lot of movies coming down the pike. At any rate, right now it's easier to find things on HBO Max than it is on Netflix and Amazon.
These streaming channels need to make it easier for folks to find things on them.
Disney so far has the best model - which HBO Max kind of copied. Hulu's isn't bad. Amazon's is atrocious, as is Netflix's which is similar to Amazon. It's very hard to find things on either.
I rather like Disney/Hulu models. HBO Max kind of reminds me of them. All three rely heavily on pre-established content, much like Netflix once did. They also are bringing in new content. HBO Max may give Netflix a run for its money in the movie category. Disney might do it in the lighter kid fare and family far categories - also Disney is cheaper than Netflix and easier to find stuff on. And has an extensive catalogue of content that it doesn't have to pay anyone else for.
They are all very different of course. The most eclectic is Netflix - which seems to range in quality from horrific to excellent, and it's hard to know which is which until you watch it. Amazon is similar, but doesn't quite have the same wealth of content at its offering.
Disney clearly has more franchises than Warner to exploit, and with Fox, it has even more under Hulu umbrella as well. Warner has quite a bit, but does it have as much as Disney, hard to know. Warner has always been known for quality fare, and with AT&T's acquisition there was some, okay more than that, fear that there would be a major dip in quality. If so, I've not seen it, yet. But I'm admittedly just flirting at the moment.
To be tried?
* Flight Attendant - the new thriller staring Penny from Big Bang Theory (not as Penny of course)
* Tell Me About It - the Steven Soderburgh film with Meryl Streep, Dianne Wiest, and Candace Bergen
* Wonder Woman 1984
* The Witches reboot with Anne Hathaway and Octavia Butler
In process?
* Great Pottery Throw Down
* Titans
* His Dark Materials
6. What are you watching while stuck at home and unable to visit folks during the COVID pandemic?
no subject
Date: 2020-12-24 03:41 am (UTC)Currently watching various SF stuff with my partner (just finished Altered Carbon, into Mandalorian S2 now), and binging various Arrowverse shows on my own. The Arrowverse is not precisely good but it is at about the brain level I can bring to things.
no subject
Date: 2020-12-24 08:02 pm (UTC)I've flirted with Altered Carbon. And plan on viewing Mandalorian S2 soon. (Although I have been fore-warned to skip over the second episode - due to the spiders. I am an arachnophobe.)
[As an aside - one my cousins works on Disney +, and she hates the Mandalorian - because of Baby Yoda. Apparently she's one of the people tasked with digitizing the Baby Yoda, and they spend hours on Zoom discussing it. I find the idea of spending 12 hours a day discussing how to digitize Baby Yoda and various movements of Baby Yoda - hilarious.]
no subject
Date: 2020-12-24 03:43 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-12-24 08:11 pm (UTC)Amazon has a few good things on it, as does Netflix.
no subject
Date: 2020-12-24 10:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-12-24 07:53 pm (UTC)Although I would be curious to see your analysis - and I'm guessing so would the person who emailed you. Also curious to see how accurate the explicit sex scenes, dirty talk, and sexual talk is - from a historical perspective. It apparently gets rather bawdy (because it's on Netflix and not ABC - and the writers went a little nuts when they realized there were no restrictions any longer.)
I don't know why they picked the Bridgerton series. I'd have picked Cat Sebastians or Courtney Milan or Sherry Thomas or Meredith Duran first. I've not read any Julie Quinn.
no subject
Date: 2020-12-24 08:01 pm (UTC)If they want racially diverse why not KJ Charles -- possibly the world is not quite ready for that amount of m/m?
no subject
Date: 2020-12-24 08:10 pm (UTC)But apparently they only used her books as a kind of map or structure to adapt it from.
I did make the point that what they were asking about sounded to me more like the kind of fix romance writers go in for for plot reasons - though I wouldn't say it was entirely historically implausible.
That would be my guess. From the review - it seems that the sex is plot and character motivated which is in keeping with the romance genre. In romance - sex is usually the action or used in the same way that a fight scene is used in an action novel or thriller, or a murder in a murder mystery. It's often the main thrust of the plot. Not always but often. Romance novels are mainly relationship dramas.
People don't seem to understand that for some reason.
no subject
Date: 2020-12-24 08:10 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-12-24 08:16 pm (UTC)Although there were a few things that seemed to make it through the cracks, not many though. Austen is very...prudish, as are the Bronte's. Everything is "implied".
no subject
Date: 2020-12-24 09:04 pm (UTC)I don't think one can blame Cromwell and the Puritans - 1640s-1660s: The Restoration, 1666, was notorious for libertinage and general unbuttonedness. This more or less lasted for swathes of the eighteenth century although there was the rise of a moralistic backlash from the mid-century.
People at the time were very shocked by the Brontes because they depicted women as having passions, even if they were not sexually explicit.
no subject
Date: 2020-12-25 01:37 am (UTC)Also in Berlin in 1981 - (West Berlin) - there were billboards with naked women. And saunas at hotels where men would come out nude. My mother kept trying to shield us with little success. East Berlin - of course had none of that. Paris? We also saw more open sexual expression. Britain, however, was like the US.
Why? I see it in the novels and literature as well. Les Liasons Dangereux, Les Misrables, Candide, etc were actually a little on the bawdy side. While Clarissa, Dickens, etc weren't.
Is it the water? The cold air? Being stuck on an island? I've noticed both the US, Canada, and even Australia are also plagued with this to varying degrees. But I don't know why. It's always puzzled me.
no subject
Date: 2020-12-25 11:32 am (UTC)Changes over time (C18th Britlit was pretty bawdy, cf Tom Jones)/relating to class/by region (cities vs smaller urban vs rural) even within countries.
Plus, GENDER: some of those more 'liberated' cultures were really more 'libertine', i.e. sexist and privileging men, e.g. in France, men could have mistresses, but could murder adulterous wives with impunity (crime passionnel), and women did not get the vote until 1945, can't remember when they finally were able to have their own bank accounts, and birth control was even made illegal in 1920. Some 'prudery' is (has been) actually women objecting to men being gross, as recent twitter spats about guy flashing during work Zoom meeting has revealed.
In UK however there was an active birth control movement (first in world) from mid C19th. Also they were well ahead of the curve in having a modern clinic system for dealing with STIs when France was still - even after WW1 - using the 'regulated brothel' method. Plus, there was a period, in the early 70s, when London was the abortion capital of the world because it had been legalised and thus centre of 'abortion tourism'.
Different national cultures draw the lines in different places, so they're going to look 'freer'/'more constrained' in different ways depending on where you're coming from.
no subject
Date: 2020-12-25 07:54 pm (UTC)So we probably should separate "artistic expression" from "feminist laws/sexual regulations". Although it is worth noting that as late as the 1990s, women were considered property under Missouri Law. So, feminist advancements don't necessarily go hand in hand with artistic repression. I'm not even sure the two are necessarily connected.
Britain still had property ownership through the male line? I may be wrong about that. I hope so. I've never be certain. The US did up until mid-20th Century, I think.
Women admittedly are treated horrifically around the world - some countries worse than others. In some respects the West is a bit more advanced in its treatment than Eastern Countries, in others less so. So complicated, is right.
I mean I've had conversations with Muslim women who believe they are less objectified and better protected than Christian, the ha-bib protects them from the "male" gaze.
And garners them the respect they are do. So it all may be a matter of perspective?
That's the difficulty with culture wars, I think - we (everyone) all think our culture is the best, the most righteous, etc or we all think it's the worst, etc. It reminds me of what a creative writing professor once warned me about writing books in the first person - there's a tendency to either create a character who is "too good to be true"/"amazing" or the exact opposite "horrible". And there's a tendency to demonize others cultures to bolster our own. [By "our" and "we" - I mean everyone on the planet or society at large no one specifically.]
At any rate - it sounds like what one person might view as "prudish" to another is "modesty and being protected from a lecherous male gaze" while what one person might view as "libertine or pornography" to another may be viewed as artistic and a celebration of sex, freely. [See the Mapplethorpe case]. I remember noticing this distinction in views in the book about the fight over Joyce's Ulyssess, and whether it was "too" obscene for publication.
no subject
Date: 2020-12-25 10:00 pm (UTC)I believe (it may vary from country to country) Islamic law has allowed women to own property and run businesses even if married at periods when this was very limited indeed in The West.
Who is considered obscene and for what is often very historically/culturally specific: as I recall, Margaret Sanger lit out for Europe just in time to escape imprisonment for writing about contraception and opening a clinic in New York, around 1914.
no subject
Date: 2020-12-26 04:47 pm (UTC)Yes. On pretty much everything, which is why to practice law in the States, you have to pass that specific state's bar exam. (Unless, of course the state in question honors the passing of the exam in another state. Some do, and usually only those that border them and/or have similar regulations.)
New York is by far the most socialist, and human rights prone of the States, next to possibly California - and as a result has the hardest bar exam to pass. Not helped by the fact that the laws are often contradictory.
Property law across the US varies per State. As does family and marital law. For example? In California, which is a common law state - if you are living together for a specific period of time, you are considered legally married by the property laws of the state, and share common property. But in New York, which is not a common law state, you can live together for 100 years or more, and unless you are officially married, with a license by someone recognized by the State of New York to perform it, you aren't married and do not share property. So if your partner dies, under the laws of New York State, you don't automatically inherit, unless you are married. And you do not have death benefits. Same with children - unless you are married, the father has no rights to the child.
But in say Missouri - that is not the case.
Obscenity laws are similar in the US - often state by state. As are alcohol and drug laws.
no subject
Date: 2020-12-24 02:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-12-24 07:46 pm (UTC)Once there - up comes the Essentials, then scroll down, the movies, series, just added, and if you keep scrolling down - reality shows.
You have to click on the show to see actors, ratings, etc.
no subject
Date: 2020-12-24 08:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-12-24 10:17 pm (UTC)