![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Opinions on various television shows and books..
1. Saw Boys on the Boat - via $3.99 on Prime, at Mother's recommendation. This is the George Cloony directed/produced film adapted from the non-fiction novel of the same name. It's about the epic quest of nine working class crew members to win Olympic Gold in 1936. Rowing was big back in the 1930s, folks listened to it on the radio. And Hitler was going all out for Germany's 1936 Olympics - with various lavish venues, to demonstrate how great Germany was under his rule. The book jumps between the working class boys training for the Olympics in Seattle, Washington, and Germany preparing for the Olympics. The movie, wisely, just focuses on the boys. Unfortunately it's only an hour and a half movie - so we don't really get much on the "boys". We only get the main point of view - Joe Rantz, who is the one who is telling the story to his grandson, or remembering it. We also get a bit of the lead coach.
It's an uplifting film which my Mother enjoyed more than I did. I felt it was lacking in character development, and didn't quite give us enough of various characters to truly care if they won or lost or how they became a team? This may have worked better as an Apple TV costume drama? Although I agree that it would be difficult to get viewers invested in a series about a bunch of men taking up rowing to compete in the 1936 Olympic Games.
The book is excellent and I highly recommend it. The movie is okay, it's worth $3.99. Not sure it's worth more than that - though.
2. Started watching Outlander again on Netflix. I fast-forwarded over most of the rape sequence in S1. I discovered I can watch this and just fast-forward over some of the sequences. I read the book - so know about it. And I saw enough of it - to have a great deal of appreciation and admiration for the two actors who had to perform those scenes. Both were excellent. Tobias Menzies is rather brilliant. They did a very good job of not romanticizing or making that scene enjoyable, instead it was creepy and painful and got across what grooming, sexual abuse, and male rape is like. This is a difficult topic to do well. But again, I did fast-forward over most of it, and I'd given up on Outlander because of the sexual violence. Both Ron Moore and Diana Galbandano rely way too heavily on it for my sensibilities. However, I can get around it to some extent. (And I've seen worse.)
I started again - because I like the actors, and find the twin time line trajectories interesting. One is 1945-1970, and the other is 1500s through early 1700s, with early Scottish Settlers (which is part of my ancestory actually). Two periods of history that aren't done that often. And - the lead female character is a nurse, who becomes a doctor and surgeon, who works with people in the War. Also, the guy playing the male romantic lead is ...hot. And a good actor. I honestly wish they'd do the Chronicles of Lymond and have him play that role. May be too old now.
Anyhow, I've finished S1, and will start on S2 soon. Mother and brother are rec'ing Shogun, which I may do next. We'll see.
3. I wonder sometimes why other people read books? I've figured out why I do. It's to be in someone else's head. To see the world through another lens or point of view.
It's why I like social media actually - I get to see the world through various points of view. I'm curious. I want to understand why people do what they do, and how they see things?
It took me a while to realize that people did not perceive things the same way I did. Nor did they necessarily understand how I perceived things. And definitely didn't think the same way. Be nice if they did, but they don't. And actually it's probably more interesting that they don't.
Writing, stories, art, music are ways to express how we view the world or think to others, and help us understand each other, and get inside each other's heads? Not perfect, but it helps?
Along these same lines ...I've noticed a recurring theme in various television shows, books, and other things of late - which is, that most people want to save the earth or world they live in, and make it a better place to live, they just disagree on how to go about it. And in some respects vehemently so.
4. Is there any genre you haven't tried?
No.
I've literally tried all of them. I don't understand people who haven't. Aren't you curious? I mean, when I figured out how to read - I devoured whatever I could find. Maybe that's why? It took me forever to figure out how to read - so once it happened, I considered it this marvelous gift? I sometimes wonder if we take the things we do easily for granted? I took drawing for granted, so as a result am not as good as I could have been?
Granted I don't like all the genres. Biography, Memoir, Role-Playing Games or Interactive, True Crime, and Self-Help - I could do without.
Someone on Twitter said they felt that Science Fiction and Fantasy should be allowed to mutually co-exist in the same genre or book. That was okay.
And I did a double-take. Okay, does this person not realize that there is a genre entitled sci-fantasy, and actual books and films that fit in both and are hybrids? Did they skip over the whole Star Wars thing?
5. I am still watching Fallout on Prime. I've made it through about five episodes now? It's very satiric. I'm not a huge fan of satire for satire's sake, and it kind of falls into that category? Also there's the video game aspect (and as you all already know I'm not really much of a gamer, I tried, I don't have the coordination or the mental aptitude for it. It may very well be genetic? Since absolutely no one in my immediate family does either? The most I'll do is play a matching Redecor game. I like the puzzle games, I played those at the video game company that I worked for.) It's okay, just kind of slow and reminds me of a lot of other dystopian satires that I've seen.
Also still plan to watch Gentleman in Moscow - which is dropping slowly on Showtime and I keep forgetting its on. I gave up on Under the Bridge -it's True Crime, and I find True Crime to be icky. And it began to irritate me in that way that True Crime tends to after a bit. (It's why I couldn't become an investigative journalist - after flirting with it in college - that ick factor.)
Baby Reindeer (very popular on social media outlets) - I can't watch for multiple reasons - I tried and didn't get past the first ten minutes of it. I can't watch "You" either, which is a similar idea, albeit as fictionalized satire - I tried. The trailer alone turned me off of it. It's cringe and I can't do cringe. I don't care if its comedy or horror - cringe and me are unmixy things.
6. I've started reading "The Benevolent Society of Ill-Mannered Ladies" based on an old college friend's recommendation. She said it made her think of me and she loved it. It's actually pretty good, the lead character, Augusta ("Gus") is tall and unmarried. She's just not found anyone who fit with her. And can't understand really why anyone would want to marry or the whole deep romantic love thing. She's dated, but never been overtaken by passion apparently. She's very logical and rationale. Her sister, who is recently widowed, has breast cancer, and her brother is a bit of a pest. Anyhow, in an attempt to distract her sister from her ills - they've launched on an ill-advised campaign with their manservant to save a mutual acquaintance from her abusive husband. En route, highwaymen try to rob them - Gus accidentally shoots one of them, and takes the injured highwayman (who they recognize as a former disgraced Marquis) to the bad guy's residence - stating they require medical attention for their brother, and gain entry as a result.
That's as far as I've gotten.
While I can see the resemblance between myself and Gus, I also see the differences. I have more imagination than Gus does. I would not have done any of that. I also can imagine and do understand wild passionate love, and why someone who devote their life to a man or woman they loved as the case may be. I'm a writer and storyteller. Just because you haven't experienced something first hand doesn't mean you can't visualize it or understand it or imagine it. I talk to people. I've played various roles in plays. I can feel empathy for someone who is nothing like me.
Not everyone lacks imagination. It took me a while to figure out that a lot of people do lack imagination and honestly cannot imagine, visualize or understand something they have not experienced first hand. There's also a lot of folks who lack empathy or have never learned it? They don't get that child birth can be both painful and wonderful because they've not experienced it and lack empathy for those that have or vice versa. And they honestly don't understand how someone else who hasn't experienced what they have first hand can possibly get it.
Although it's unlikely anyone will ever understand or experience it the same way. It may be the most wonderful experience in the world for one person, and the worst experience for another. Doesn't say anything negative or positive about either. Five people see an accident, no one sees it the same way. Same with everything else. Five people will read this post - none of them will read it the same way, none will see the same things, or react to it in the same way. I've noticed that with posts on the internet - I get a wild variety of comments. One is pissed off, one is applauding it, one is fact checking, one is questioning something, one relates to it completely, another thinks I'm projecting my opinions on to them.
The trick is ignoring the people who get pissed off (which I suck at, but honestly there's not much I can do about that outside of never post or be ridiculously careful, and that's kind of silly?), figuring out what needs to be corrected, and being grateful that someone connected with it positively. Posting on the internet is ridiculously easy but not always emotional and mentally healthy.
It's an uplifting film which my Mother enjoyed more than I did. I felt it was lacking in character development, and didn't quite give us enough of various characters to truly care if they won or lost or how they became a team? This may have worked better as an Apple TV costume drama? Although I agree that it would be difficult to get viewers invested in a series about a bunch of men taking up rowing to compete in the 1936 Olympic Games.
The book is excellent and I highly recommend it. The movie is okay, it's worth $3.99. Not sure it's worth more than that - though.
2. Started watching Outlander again on Netflix. I fast-forwarded over most of the rape sequence in S1. I discovered I can watch this and just fast-forward over some of the sequences. I read the book - so know about it. And I saw enough of it - to have a great deal of appreciation and admiration for the two actors who had to perform those scenes. Both were excellent. Tobias Menzies is rather brilliant. They did a very good job of not romanticizing or making that scene enjoyable, instead it was creepy and painful and got across what grooming, sexual abuse, and male rape is like. This is a difficult topic to do well. But again, I did fast-forward over most of it, and I'd given up on Outlander because of the sexual violence. Both Ron Moore and Diana Galbandano rely way too heavily on it for my sensibilities. However, I can get around it to some extent. (And I've seen worse.)
I started again - because I like the actors, and find the twin time line trajectories interesting. One is 1945-1970, and the other is 1500s through early 1700s, with early Scottish Settlers (which is part of my ancestory actually). Two periods of history that aren't done that often. And - the lead female character is a nurse, who becomes a doctor and surgeon, who works with people in the War. Also, the guy playing the male romantic lead is ...hot. And a good actor. I honestly wish they'd do the Chronicles of Lymond and have him play that role. May be too old now.
Anyhow, I've finished S1, and will start on S2 soon. Mother and brother are rec'ing Shogun, which I may do next. We'll see.
3. I wonder sometimes why other people read books? I've figured out why I do. It's to be in someone else's head. To see the world through another lens or point of view.
It's why I like social media actually - I get to see the world through various points of view. I'm curious. I want to understand why people do what they do, and how they see things?
It took me a while to realize that people did not perceive things the same way I did. Nor did they necessarily understand how I perceived things. And definitely didn't think the same way. Be nice if they did, but they don't. And actually it's probably more interesting that they don't.
Writing, stories, art, music are ways to express how we view the world or think to others, and help us understand each other, and get inside each other's heads? Not perfect, but it helps?
Along these same lines ...I've noticed a recurring theme in various television shows, books, and other things of late - which is, that most people want to save the earth or world they live in, and make it a better place to live, they just disagree on how to go about it. And in some respects vehemently so.
4. Is there any genre you haven't tried?
No.
I've literally tried all of them. I don't understand people who haven't. Aren't you curious? I mean, when I figured out how to read - I devoured whatever I could find. Maybe that's why? It took me forever to figure out how to read - so once it happened, I considered it this marvelous gift? I sometimes wonder if we take the things we do easily for granted? I took drawing for granted, so as a result am not as good as I could have been?
Granted I don't like all the genres. Biography, Memoir, Role-Playing Games or Interactive, True Crime, and Self-Help - I could do without.
Someone on Twitter said they felt that Science Fiction and Fantasy should be allowed to mutually co-exist in the same genre or book. That was okay.
And I did a double-take. Okay, does this person not realize that there is a genre entitled sci-fantasy, and actual books and films that fit in both and are hybrids? Did they skip over the whole Star Wars thing?
5. I am still watching Fallout on Prime. I've made it through about five episodes now? It's very satiric. I'm not a huge fan of satire for satire's sake, and it kind of falls into that category? Also there's the video game aspect (and as you all already know I'm not really much of a gamer, I tried, I don't have the coordination or the mental aptitude for it. It may very well be genetic? Since absolutely no one in my immediate family does either? The most I'll do is play a matching Redecor game. I like the puzzle games, I played those at the video game company that I worked for.) It's okay, just kind of slow and reminds me of a lot of other dystopian satires that I've seen.
Also still plan to watch Gentleman in Moscow - which is dropping slowly on Showtime and I keep forgetting its on. I gave up on Under the Bridge -it's True Crime, and I find True Crime to be icky. And it began to irritate me in that way that True Crime tends to after a bit. (It's why I couldn't become an investigative journalist - after flirting with it in college - that ick factor.)
Baby Reindeer (very popular on social media outlets) - I can't watch for multiple reasons - I tried and didn't get past the first ten minutes of it. I can't watch "You" either, which is a similar idea, albeit as fictionalized satire - I tried. The trailer alone turned me off of it. It's cringe and I can't do cringe. I don't care if its comedy or horror - cringe and me are unmixy things.
6. I've started reading "The Benevolent Society of Ill-Mannered Ladies" based on an old college friend's recommendation. She said it made her think of me and she loved it. It's actually pretty good, the lead character, Augusta ("Gus") is tall and unmarried. She's just not found anyone who fit with her. And can't understand really why anyone would want to marry or the whole deep romantic love thing. She's dated, but never been overtaken by passion apparently. She's very logical and rationale. Her sister, who is recently widowed, has breast cancer, and her brother is a bit of a pest. Anyhow, in an attempt to distract her sister from her ills - they've launched on an ill-advised campaign with their manservant to save a mutual acquaintance from her abusive husband. En route, highwaymen try to rob them - Gus accidentally shoots one of them, and takes the injured highwayman (who they recognize as a former disgraced Marquis) to the bad guy's residence - stating they require medical attention for their brother, and gain entry as a result.
That's as far as I've gotten.
While I can see the resemblance between myself and Gus, I also see the differences. I have more imagination than Gus does. I would not have done any of that. I also can imagine and do understand wild passionate love, and why someone who devote their life to a man or woman they loved as the case may be. I'm a writer and storyteller. Just because you haven't experienced something first hand doesn't mean you can't visualize it or understand it or imagine it. I talk to people. I've played various roles in plays. I can feel empathy for someone who is nothing like me.
Not everyone lacks imagination. It took me a while to figure out that a lot of people do lack imagination and honestly cannot imagine, visualize or understand something they have not experienced first hand. There's also a lot of folks who lack empathy or have never learned it? They don't get that child birth can be both painful and wonderful because they've not experienced it and lack empathy for those that have or vice versa. And they honestly don't understand how someone else who hasn't experienced what they have first hand can possibly get it.
Although it's unlikely anyone will ever understand or experience it the same way. It may be the most wonderful experience in the world for one person, and the worst experience for another. Doesn't say anything negative or positive about either. Five people see an accident, no one sees it the same way. Same with everything else. Five people will read this post - none of them will read it the same way, none will see the same things, or react to it in the same way. I've noticed that with posts on the internet - I get a wild variety of comments. One is pissed off, one is applauding it, one is fact checking, one is questioning something, one relates to it completely, another thinks I'm projecting my opinions on to them.
The trick is ignoring the people who get pissed off (which I suck at, but honestly there's not much I can do about that outside of never post or be ridiculously careful, and that's kind of silly?), figuring out what needs to be corrected, and being grateful that someone connected with it positively. Posting on the internet is ridiculously easy but not always emotional and mentally healthy.