Cold snowy day - weekly TV update
Jan. 22nd, 2005 03:56 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatWell, it's white-out conditions outside at the moment. Honestly, I cannot make out most of the buildings out my window - all I see is a cloud of snow. Softly
falling now as opposed to shooting diagonally. The wind? Bitter. Went outside briefly to pick up assorted things and came back with my fingers and toes aching, and I wore layers.
So...to keep myself from baking brownies, because, honestly? I don't need the poundage (not that that will keep me from doing it in an hour), I'm writing up my thoughts on the entertainment pursuits I indulged in this week. (I think I've gained back those 25 pounds I lost while unemployed - due to the fact that my office keeps rolling out birthday cakes. In the past two weeks, I think I've had slices from a total of five birthday cakes. Ugh. Plus winter?
For some reason my body just craves food in the winter.)
Well not much good on this week TV wise. Best show, still seems to be BattleStar Galatica. Second week in a row, it delivered. All the actors are fantastic in their roles, not a weak one in the bunch. The characters are complex. They don't get along - there are inherent conflicts amongst them. And the problems they are faced with are realistic and multi-faceted. The only draw-back to the series may be that it is a serial - not episodic. You really can't miss an episode without getting lost. Personally I like that aspect, but I know a good portion of the audience will have problems with it. This was Farscape's dilemma as well. The reason Star-Gate does so well is it's like
JAG - episodic in nature. You can miss episodes and still follow it. Not true here.
The episode starts with last week's problem, they've lost half their water supply. Boomer did locate a planet with water - but the only usable water is ice and they need to send laborers to get it. People who are strong and able and willing to work under harsh conditions with no pay. Who to send? The other issue is how to figure out who the Cylon infliterator is - because that is clearly who caused them to lose their water supply.
So they decide to use the "prisoners". The President disagrees with this idea at first, stating - "that's slave labor." But Lee Adama (pilot call sign Apollo) offers an alternative - what if we offer them points towards freedom?
Give them something in exchange? Not force them to do it.
Great idea in theory - until they reach the ship and Lee comes face to face with Tom, an ex-terrorist and radical writer. And here's where the story gets interesting. The writers do two things here - first they subtly play with the themes and ideas of the old series. In the old series there was a similar story, except - Richard Hatch (who plays Tom) was playing Apollo and the military head honch played by Lloyd Bridges, thought war, regs, and controls was all that worked. Elections? Pshaw? Laws? We needed to control things.
Here the writers do a wonderful job of making the themes murkier, not so clear-cut. And Tom makes fun of Lee's call signal. "Apollo - that's what your called right? The son of Zeus.." "No," Lee argues, "that's just my call signal - a nickname or pilot code name while in battle. My name is Lee Adama." "But you chose that nickname - the idea of being the son of Zeus, the legendary lords of cobalt" - "Mere legends, nothing more.." "Yet they lorded over us, is that what you want? To lord over..." Or something to that effect, this is all from memory. Yet, at the same time, Tom also wants recognition, he's been out of it too long - he wants the bloodbath, he wants to be marytr - wants to be important. His argument to Lee is a valid one, yes, but his means not so valid.
Lee hunts the compromise - why does it have to be one or the other, he proposes? Why can't you live - work to get your points, and in seven months, we'll have your elections?
The irony of course, is that the President had been told in the mini-series that she had no more than six possibly seven months to live - terminal breast cancer. We know that in 7 months they'll have to have one anyway. And seven months is the end of the old President's term - the term she is completing.
The other level to the series - is the gender politics and how the writers play with male/female roles. Boomer and Starbuck are both female here. Boomer is told to stop having a romance with the Chief, her inferior by Col. Tye.
Yet in another scene - with Starbuck, we see an odd intimacy between Tye and Starbuck - wondering what their relationship was. Starbuck tells Tye that she has her own flaws in an attempt to commiserate or make the peace, offering water instead of liquir. Tye remarks, yes, but mine are personal - yours professional. Fascinating scene. His problem with Starbuck is not that she is a woman, but her tough guy behavior traits - the cigars in the ready room, the
gambling, and of course her tough guy devil may care attitude. Normally you'd hear a female boss telling this to a guy - in fact in the old series, Athena delivered the same line to the male Starbuck. I love seeing it flipped. Battlestar flips gender roles a lot here, plays with so many ideas. The cylon chip in Baltar's head - the goregous female who is smarter than he is.
Or Starbuck as the sniper, while Lee is the peacemaker, the flip side of Adama and the President.
Wonderful series so far. Best one on TV this year in my opinion.
< /lj-cut>
Medium is also delivering the goods. Arquett's character continues to interest me. She's not goregous, not overly witty, and moving in her uncertainities. Her husband is actually sexier and wittier and that's a nice contrast.
I'm also enjoying the D.A. who is both skeptical yet accomodating.
The show has potential and each episode gets better as we move forward.
I like how the murders in each episode are metaphors for the main characters own uncertainities and issues. But subtly. This week - we deal with the suprise party her husband is planning juxtaposed with a series of murders in which a wedding photographer kills married couples. He sees it as a social experiment - "do you love you wife enough to die for her?" The main character may be asking herself the same question - does my husband love me enough to put up with this craziness forever? And do I love him enough to lie to him, to let him think he can surprise me for my birthday? The things we do for love or rather the things society expects us to do for love? Funky show. Wish it came on earlier so I didn't have to tape it. But then I'd miss 24, which I haven't completely given up on, yet.
Veronica Mars and Gilmore Girls were reruns - so I didn't watch. Tried to watch American Idol but it made me cranky. It really is a mood show. 24?
It's getting better actually. I like the character development for Erin, Alberta Watson's character, also Barusk (sp?) mother is interesting.
And it is much tighter than the previous seasons - the storylines fall much more neatly together without too many subplots. Of course, I'm odd, I like disjointed sub-plots.
Lost - not as good this week as last. Sort of slow. And I'm not sure I liked the somewhat misogynist theme echoing in it for two weeks straight. Uh, Abrams, you do realize that you only have four female characters in a 13 character show, right? And they are all pretty young model types? Not a good place to play with anti-female themes. Might want to rethink that.
Last week we saw how wicked Shannon was, and manipulative. And that Boone was so much better off with Lock. (Although I'm not completely sure about this - we only got the story from Boone's point of view after all. And Boone may not be the most reliable narrator in the world - rich playboy, henpecked by Mom, and running a wedding franchise does not sound like the ideal background.)
This week we're in Michael's point of view - where he has great plans for his son, but his wife takes off for a career in another country, divorces him, and keeps his son away from him. Forcing him to let her new husband adopt the boy.
Nine years later, she drops dead from some mysterious blood disorder. The new husband tells Michael he wants no part of Walt and Michael flies half way around the world to pick the kid up. Far-fetched? Yep. Also makes the wife seem a little too nasty. Add to that - Walt might have super-powers which only Lock notices - ie. making the polar bear he sees in the burning comic come to life. Or killing a bird. Not sure this story works.
What did work for me? The little moments. Michael sharing his art with his son and his plan to build a raft. The interaction between Kate, Charlie and Sawyer.
(Although I'm getting tired of the storyline where if something is missing, of course Sawyer has it.) The best bit? Charlie wrestling with himself over reading Clair's diary - and finally giving in. Oh that bit was brillaint.
I've decided the best characters in this show are: Locke, Charlie, Sawyer, and Sahid - when the camera is on these guys the show rocks. Really rocks. Also Hurley and maybe Sun. I sort of like KAte - but mostly just her interaction with Sawyer. The other characters don't quite register as well.
After Lost, I sort of watched three shows at the same time. Why? I got bored.
I tried watching Point Pleasant, I *really* tried - but got bored half-way through and wanted to see what was happening on West Wing and Alias. So as a result, I saw about 50% of Point Pleasant, 30% of West Wing, and 20% of Alias. Of the three? West Wing had the best dialogue and acting, Alias the most interesting ending, and Point Pleasant? The prettiest people. It looked like the casting director of Point Pleasant was the same one for The Mountain, and North Shore. Or at least sampling the same talent pool. The OC has the same problem actually. We need a few more interesting, less pretty players here - such as the ones on Gilmore Girls, Veronica Mars, or even Joan of Arcadia. Pretty people who can't act are boring to watch on TV - doesn't matter what dialogue you put in their mouths. I know - I've watched plenty of soap operas in my lifetime. I honestly think the main two problems with Point Pleasant right now are:1)the actors are too bland and look too much alike, I'm having troubles telling some of them apart, 2)too much exposition not enough action. We spend far too much time building to a scene, telling the audience what it is about, and less on the characters. BTVS also suffered from this tactic at times. Too much exposition kills the suspense. Audiences have short attention spans. And tv shows only last 43 minutes. If you have to explain everything to the audience, you'll bore them. The Mountain did the same thing - lots of inane dialogue that got us nowhere. In the first episode of Point Pleasant - we spent 15 minutes looking out a window at kids playing around a bonfire. (I know because I kept flipping back and forth and they were still on the damn bonfire).
That said, I know that Ben Edlund did not get involved with this series until late in the game - sometime after episode five or six was filmed. Also it was Marti's third or fourth episode that sold the network, plus one scene from the second one - possibly the Dina Meyer/Grant Show one - that I caught half of, the beginning portion. (I watched two shows at the same time that night - The Apprentice and Point Pleasant, mind-bending to say the least. More happened on The Apprentice.)So, if you are there for the writers? Wait until the fifth or sixth episode.
falling now as opposed to shooting diagonally. The wind? Bitter. Went outside briefly to pick up assorted things and came back with my fingers and toes aching, and I wore layers.
So...to keep myself from baking brownies, because, honestly? I don't need the poundage (not that that will keep me from doing it in an hour), I'm writing up my thoughts on the entertainment pursuits I indulged in this week. (I think I've gained back those 25 pounds I lost while unemployed - due to the fact that my office keeps rolling out birthday cakes. In the past two weeks, I think I've had slices from a total of five birthday cakes. Ugh. Plus winter?
For some reason my body just craves food in the winter.)
Well not much good on this week TV wise. Best show, still seems to be BattleStar Galatica. Second week in a row, it delivered. All the actors are fantastic in their roles, not a weak one in the bunch. The characters are complex. They don't get along - there are inherent conflicts amongst them. And the problems they are faced with are realistic and multi-faceted. The only draw-back to the series may be that it is a serial - not episodic. You really can't miss an episode without getting lost. Personally I like that aspect, but I know a good portion of the audience will have problems with it. This was Farscape's dilemma as well. The reason Star-Gate does so well is it's like
JAG - episodic in nature. You can miss episodes and still follow it. Not true here.
The episode starts with last week's problem, they've lost half their water supply. Boomer did locate a planet with water - but the only usable water is ice and they need to send laborers to get it. People who are strong and able and willing to work under harsh conditions with no pay. Who to send? The other issue is how to figure out who the Cylon infliterator is - because that is clearly who caused them to lose their water supply.
So they decide to use the "prisoners". The President disagrees with this idea at first, stating - "that's slave labor." But Lee Adama (pilot call sign Apollo) offers an alternative - what if we offer them points towards freedom?
Give them something in exchange? Not force them to do it.
Great idea in theory - until they reach the ship and Lee comes face to face with Tom, an ex-terrorist and radical writer. And here's where the story gets interesting. The writers do two things here - first they subtly play with the themes and ideas of the old series. In the old series there was a similar story, except - Richard Hatch (who plays Tom) was playing Apollo and the military head honch played by Lloyd Bridges, thought war, regs, and controls was all that worked. Elections? Pshaw? Laws? We needed to control things.
Here the writers do a wonderful job of making the themes murkier, not so clear-cut. And Tom makes fun of Lee's call signal. "Apollo - that's what your called right? The son of Zeus.." "No," Lee argues, "that's just my call signal - a nickname or pilot code name while in battle. My name is Lee Adama." "But you chose that nickname - the idea of being the son of Zeus, the legendary lords of cobalt" - "Mere legends, nothing more.." "Yet they lorded over us, is that what you want? To lord over..." Or something to that effect, this is all from memory. Yet, at the same time, Tom also wants recognition, he's been out of it too long - he wants the bloodbath, he wants to be marytr - wants to be important. His argument to Lee is a valid one, yes, but his means not so valid.
Lee hunts the compromise - why does it have to be one or the other, he proposes? Why can't you live - work to get your points, and in seven months, we'll have your elections?
The irony of course, is that the President had been told in the mini-series that she had no more than six possibly seven months to live - terminal breast cancer. We know that in 7 months they'll have to have one anyway. And seven months is the end of the old President's term - the term she is completing.
The other level to the series - is the gender politics and how the writers play with male/female roles. Boomer and Starbuck are both female here. Boomer is told to stop having a romance with the Chief, her inferior by Col. Tye.
Yet in another scene - with Starbuck, we see an odd intimacy between Tye and Starbuck - wondering what their relationship was. Starbuck tells Tye that she has her own flaws in an attempt to commiserate or make the peace, offering water instead of liquir. Tye remarks, yes, but mine are personal - yours professional. Fascinating scene. His problem with Starbuck is not that she is a woman, but her tough guy behavior traits - the cigars in the ready room, the
gambling, and of course her tough guy devil may care attitude. Normally you'd hear a female boss telling this to a guy - in fact in the old series, Athena delivered the same line to the male Starbuck. I love seeing it flipped. Battlestar flips gender roles a lot here, plays with so many ideas. The cylon chip in Baltar's head - the goregous female who is smarter than he is.
Or Starbuck as the sniper, while Lee is the peacemaker, the flip side of Adama and the President.
Wonderful series so far. Best one on TV this year in my opinion.
< /lj-cut>
Medium is also delivering the goods. Arquett's character continues to interest me. She's not goregous, not overly witty, and moving in her uncertainities. Her husband is actually sexier and wittier and that's a nice contrast.
I'm also enjoying the D.A. who is both skeptical yet accomodating.
The show has potential and each episode gets better as we move forward.
I like how the murders in each episode are metaphors for the main characters own uncertainities and issues. But subtly. This week - we deal with the suprise party her husband is planning juxtaposed with a series of murders in which a wedding photographer kills married couples. He sees it as a social experiment - "do you love you wife enough to die for her?" The main character may be asking herself the same question - does my husband love me enough to put up with this craziness forever? And do I love him enough to lie to him, to let him think he can surprise me for my birthday? The things we do for love or rather the things society expects us to do for love? Funky show. Wish it came on earlier so I didn't have to tape it. But then I'd miss 24, which I haven't completely given up on, yet.
Veronica Mars and Gilmore Girls were reruns - so I didn't watch. Tried to watch American Idol but it made me cranky. It really is a mood show. 24?
It's getting better actually. I like the character development for Erin, Alberta Watson's character, also Barusk (sp?) mother is interesting.
And it is much tighter than the previous seasons - the storylines fall much more neatly together without too many subplots. Of course, I'm odd, I like disjointed sub-plots.
Lost - not as good this week as last. Sort of slow. And I'm not sure I liked the somewhat misogynist theme echoing in it for two weeks straight. Uh, Abrams, you do realize that you only have four female characters in a 13 character show, right? And they are all pretty young model types? Not a good place to play with anti-female themes. Might want to rethink that.
Last week we saw how wicked Shannon was, and manipulative. And that Boone was so much better off with Lock. (Although I'm not completely sure about this - we only got the story from Boone's point of view after all. And Boone may not be the most reliable narrator in the world - rich playboy, henpecked by Mom, and running a wedding franchise does not sound like the ideal background.)
This week we're in Michael's point of view - where he has great plans for his son, but his wife takes off for a career in another country, divorces him, and keeps his son away from him. Forcing him to let her new husband adopt the boy.
Nine years later, she drops dead from some mysterious blood disorder. The new husband tells Michael he wants no part of Walt and Michael flies half way around the world to pick the kid up. Far-fetched? Yep. Also makes the wife seem a little too nasty. Add to that - Walt might have super-powers which only Lock notices - ie. making the polar bear he sees in the burning comic come to life. Or killing a bird. Not sure this story works.
What did work for me? The little moments. Michael sharing his art with his son and his plan to build a raft. The interaction between Kate, Charlie and Sawyer.
(Although I'm getting tired of the storyline where if something is missing, of course Sawyer has it.) The best bit? Charlie wrestling with himself over reading Clair's diary - and finally giving in. Oh that bit was brillaint.
I've decided the best characters in this show are: Locke, Charlie, Sawyer, and Sahid - when the camera is on these guys the show rocks. Really rocks. Also Hurley and maybe Sun. I sort of like KAte - but mostly just her interaction with Sawyer. The other characters don't quite register as well.
After Lost, I sort of watched three shows at the same time. Why? I got bored.
I tried watching Point Pleasant, I *really* tried - but got bored half-way through and wanted to see what was happening on West Wing and Alias. So as a result, I saw about 50% of Point Pleasant, 30% of West Wing, and 20% of Alias. Of the three? West Wing had the best dialogue and acting, Alias the most interesting ending, and Point Pleasant? The prettiest people. It looked like the casting director of Point Pleasant was the same one for The Mountain, and North Shore. Or at least sampling the same talent pool. The OC has the same problem actually. We need a few more interesting, less pretty players here - such as the ones on Gilmore Girls, Veronica Mars, or even Joan of Arcadia. Pretty people who can't act are boring to watch on TV - doesn't matter what dialogue you put in their mouths. I know - I've watched plenty of soap operas in my lifetime. I honestly think the main two problems with Point Pleasant right now are:1)the actors are too bland and look too much alike, I'm having troubles telling some of them apart, 2)too much exposition not enough action. We spend far too much time building to a scene, telling the audience what it is about, and less on the characters. BTVS also suffered from this tactic at times. Too much exposition kills the suspense. Audiences have short attention spans. And tv shows only last 43 minutes. If you have to explain everything to the audience, you'll bore them. The Mountain did the same thing - lots of inane dialogue that got us nowhere. In the first episode of Point Pleasant - we spent 15 minutes looking out a window at kids playing around a bonfire. (I know because I kept flipping back and forth and they were still on the damn bonfire).
That said, I know that Ben Edlund did not get involved with this series until late in the game - sometime after episode five or six was filmed. Also it was Marti's third or fourth episode that sold the network, plus one scene from the second one - possibly the Dina Meyer/Grant Show one - that I caught half of, the beginning portion. (I watched two shows at the same time that night - The Apprentice and Point Pleasant, mind-bending to say the least. More happened on The Apprentice.)So, if you are there for the writers? Wait until the fifth or sixth episode.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-01-22 03:30 pm (UTC)That's what I've heard. I'm patiently waiting to see if it really does improve by that point. I've heard it becomes more about a quirky small town as a character than just the epic, sturm und drang cliche-ish horror/teen soap it is now, so I still have hopes that it'll be good.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-22 07:05 pm (UTC)I hope it will make it until the sixth episode, but being Fox and on Thursdays opposite the two hits: The Apprentice and CSI, not sure it's going to make it. Plus - from what I've seen on Whedonesque, it has the same problem Wonderfalls, Firefly, and
Tru Calling had - it did not hook and enamour the cult audience. That's key. If the cult audience is snarky about it at the get-go, you'll have troubles.
My gut tells me we'll be lucky if Point Pleasant lasts until May. It all depends on what else Fox has.
In Point Pleasant's favor is the fact dramas, specifically soaps like Desperate Housewives are doing very well right now. So if they can make it more like Desperate and less like the Mountain, it might survive.
no subject
Date: 2005-01-24 06:48 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-01-23 09:27 am (UTC)And the backstory this time was interesting but not much happened on the island.