Supernatural and other tv shows..
Jul. 29th, 2007 08:48 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatAfter spending two hours this morning doing laundry in a sweaty crowded laundramat,complete with a mosquito who bit me on the leg, retreated homewards, made bed up clean and broke in the new air conditioner by reading, watching the telly, and knitting all day. Good day for it too, since the sky threw a tempertantrum complete with thunder, lightening and pouring rain.
Anywho... I feel I should apologize to the folks on my flist regarding Supernatural. I was wrong. You were right. Yes, I've changed my mind. It happens.
I've now watched about fifteen episodes? Maybe more? In sequence. And I have changed my mind about the series. With a few minor exceptions, such as the Amber Benson vampire episode, it is overall a well-written, well-acted, fairly innovative series that reminds me a great deal of John Carpenter and Howard Hawks buddy Westerns, Cop dramas, and horror films. It also is reminiscent of the old style 1970s shows such as Koljack the Night Stalker and Starsky and Hutch, with a bit of Maverick thrown in. At any rate, I'm really enjoying this series at the moment. The writing is fairly clever in places, and the chemistry between the regular or re-curring characters is spot on.
Also, the horror stories are innovative, not repetitive, not predictable, and based on versions of actual urban horror stories. On top of that - they actually further the main characters emotional arcs and act as metaphors for what is going on with them.
Saw two today that are great examples of that. One about a murderous clown at a carnival and the other about a Trickster Ghost - a tale that I have not seen done in quite this way before. Both creepy, yet with a sense of humor.
What you have to keep in mind about Supernatural is that its a story about two brothers.
The entire series is in the brother's point of view and only veers from their point of view to either set up B-plot or to show what the villians are doing and set up the scare.
Each time it veers from their point of view, it is deliberate and makes perfect sense.
While women are not always shown in the best light, it does make sense - since we are in the brothers' pov and neither brother was raised by their mother or for that matter has had a long term relationship with a woman. Add to that - one saw the mother killed by a demon, the other his girlfriend. Women to the brothers are a liability or something they can't have, forbidden fruit. Plus they were raised by a bitter, vengenful man, played by the brilliant Jeffrey Dean Morgan, who devoted his life and his sons to taking down the demon who killed his wife - not caring who got hurt in the process. John Winchester is not unlike the gun he is named after - and he reminds me a great deal of the Western stars of yesteryear, John Wayne, Gregory Peck, Clint, Glenn Ford, James Arness....I admit it - I am a woman who adores Westerns. Even if they are sexist. Actually I sort of preferred them that way. The politically correct Westerns of the 1980s and 1990s just felt odd. And I felt guilty about that. Still do. So I keep that to myself. Oops. Guess not so much anymore.
The show does have two interesting female characters in it - which I sort of wish they'd decide to make regulars or more recurring - "Jo" and her mother "Ellen" - the wife and daughter of a hunter that John Wincester partnered with.
The mythology of the series is fairly dark and fairly tight. Tighter than Whedon's was.
And based heavily upon urban legends and folktales. Unlike Whedon, the writers aren't creating monsters based on gothic or sci-fi tradition but rather on the urban horror tradition or oral narrative. Which is different, and far scarier. The tales we told around the camp fire or in the dorm or even over drinks in college - in an attempt to scare ourselves silly. Stories that were often based on fact or a kernal of truth. Hence the term legend. They are embellishments of what actually happened and are therefore far scarier than your average vampire, zombie or ghost story. The writers also reference the classics - HP Lovecraft, Stephen King, Clive Barker, Doris Lessing, Shirly Jackson, and others. The grand masters of the horror tradition and instead of blending it with science fiction like Doctor Who or Whedon often did, they blend it with the Western - which was often dirtier than sci-fi, more rugged, less stylish. Less tech heavy.
The soundtrack is kick-ass. Van Morrison. Spinal Tap. Stone Temple Pilots. I really want the CD of this series - when it gets released. Some true classics.
And the art direction? Consistently dark and brooding, yet bad-boy cool. The car the boy's drive reminds me of something out of John Carpenter or Quentin Tarantino film - 1950s or 60s, with Jimmy Dean behind the wheel, and James Woods riding shot-gun. Or maybe Michael Marsden. The look - makes me think of the film The Crow - starring Jason Lee - the original film. Complete with Jane Siberry singing in the background.
Yet it also has humor. Jensen Ackles and Jared Palecki share a banter that makes me laugh out loud. And Ackles may have the best one-liners I've seen since well, Marsters, Spike.
Also, Ackles is hot. But so is Palecki. As they take turns playing bad boys. Showing the edges of gray.
One episode - can't remember the name of it - is about an Avenging Angel who kills bad people seeing the bad people as demons - the episode is direct reference to Bill Paxton's Fraility, but it examines Paxton's themes from that film from a completely different angle, and still leaves some questions unanswered.
Really enjoying this series. Right now it is amongst my favorites of the summer and I'm definitely going to be DVR'ing it next year, regardless of what is opposite. Have decided to sacrifice 30 Rock and The Office in favor of Ugly Betty/Greys and Smallville, Supernatural. Which manage to meet both sides of my personality - my guy geek side, and my chickflick side. So yes, it is possible to love both. Sitcoms? They live in syndication forever.
I'm also watching Smallville - which was really good last year, again with a few minor exceptions. Welling actually has figured out how to act and keep his own opposite Rosenblum. And Kristen Kuerk is doing more than just looking pretty. Eric Endurance's Lois is a great addition, as are Jimmy Olsen, and Oliver Green - who is clearly taking Bruce Wayne's place in this series - since they can't get the rights to use Batman. Sort of happy about that, since I know less about the Green Arrow. Smallville is doing some interesting things and entertaining the heck out of me.
Tried Mad Men with Wales, we were both bored. Of course it did not help that the actors mumble and are difficult to hear. We had to keep rewinding to figure out what they were saying. Also as Wales put it - it is a bit too blatant about its sexism and racism.
Yes, we know the 50's were a bit like that...but we don't need it repeated in every frame.
We gave up on it twenty minutes in.
Also gave up on Rescue Me finally. Again was just bored. The characters don't appear to be evolving and it is just depressing. I'm tired of watching people scream at each other. I can see that in my real life on a daily basis don't need to watch it on television. Also Denis Leary's character is terribly whiny and starting to get on my nerves.
Saving Grace ? Not sure about this one. A bit too preachy. A bit too obvious. But I like Holly Hunter and the rest of the cast. I'll watch two or three more then decide.
Doctor Who - the jury is still out. It's incredibly campy and silly. And Freema Agyman isn't impressing me. Tennant is almost too twitchy for my taste. And the monsters a tad over-the-top. I should state at this point that I'm not overly fond of camp. The campier episodes of Buffy turned me off as well - never liked Go Fish, Reptile Boy, or a good percentage of the episodes in the first season. I found them silly not funny. It's my sense of humor, which is admittedly on the dark side of the fence. At any rate - I did not like the second episode with Shakspeare and the Witches, nor did I like the episode with the Runaway Bride, but I did like the one with the hospital on the moon. Have not seen the last two - still on DVR. So will wait until I see a few more before deciding one way or the other.
The previews for Torchwood look like a lot of fun and much better than Doctor Who.
(No, James Marsters isn't going to be on it yet. We're getting the FIRST season. The episodes with Marsters won't premiere in the States until Fall 2008 - if that. So, when I say that Torchwood looks interesting, it is not because Marsters is going to be on it.)
Anyone watching The 4400? Is it just me or is this beginning to resemble the X-Files? Or rather the X-Files meets the X-men? It even has it's own version of the lone gunman and the cigarette smoking man. Not sure I like the similarities - X-Files government conspiracy stuff got on my nerves.
PS: Does anyone have any cool Jo or Ellen icons from Supernatural? Really like those two characters.
Anywho... I feel I should apologize to the folks on my flist regarding Supernatural. I was wrong. You were right. Yes, I've changed my mind. It happens.
I've now watched about fifteen episodes? Maybe more? In sequence. And I have changed my mind about the series. With a few minor exceptions, such as the Amber Benson vampire episode, it is overall a well-written, well-acted, fairly innovative series that reminds me a great deal of John Carpenter and Howard Hawks buddy Westerns, Cop dramas, and horror films. It also is reminiscent of the old style 1970s shows such as Koljack the Night Stalker and Starsky and Hutch, with a bit of Maverick thrown in. At any rate, I'm really enjoying this series at the moment. The writing is fairly clever in places, and the chemistry between the regular or re-curring characters is spot on.
Also, the horror stories are innovative, not repetitive, not predictable, and based on versions of actual urban horror stories. On top of that - they actually further the main characters emotional arcs and act as metaphors for what is going on with them.
Saw two today that are great examples of that. One about a murderous clown at a carnival and the other about a Trickster Ghost - a tale that I have not seen done in quite this way before. Both creepy, yet with a sense of humor.
What you have to keep in mind about Supernatural is that its a story about two brothers.
The entire series is in the brother's point of view and only veers from their point of view to either set up B-plot or to show what the villians are doing and set up the scare.
Each time it veers from their point of view, it is deliberate and makes perfect sense.
While women are not always shown in the best light, it does make sense - since we are in the brothers' pov and neither brother was raised by their mother or for that matter has had a long term relationship with a woman. Add to that - one saw the mother killed by a demon, the other his girlfriend. Women to the brothers are a liability or something they can't have, forbidden fruit. Plus they were raised by a bitter, vengenful man, played by the brilliant Jeffrey Dean Morgan, who devoted his life and his sons to taking down the demon who killed his wife - not caring who got hurt in the process. John Winchester is not unlike the gun he is named after - and he reminds me a great deal of the Western stars of yesteryear, John Wayne, Gregory Peck, Clint, Glenn Ford, James Arness....I admit it - I am a woman who adores Westerns. Even if they are sexist. Actually I sort of preferred them that way. The politically correct Westerns of the 1980s and 1990s just felt odd. And I felt guilty about that. Still do. So I keep that to myself. Oops. Guess not so much anymore.
The show does have two interesting female characters in it - which I sort of wish they'd decide to make regulars or more recurring - "Jo" and her mother "Ellen" - the wife and daughter of a hunter that John Wincester partnered with.
The mythology of the series is fairly dark and fairly tight. Tighter than Whedon's was.
And based heavily upon urban legends and folktales. Unlike Whedon, the writers aren't creating monsters based on gothic or sci-fi tradition but rather on the urban horror tradition or oral narrative. Which is different, and far scarier. The tales we told around the camp fire or in the dorm or even over drinks in college - in an attempt to scare ourselves silly. Stories that were often based on fact or a kernal of truth. Hence the term legend. They are embellishments of what actually happened and are therefore far scarier than your average vampire, zombie or ghost story. The writers also reference the classics - HP Lovecraft, Stephen King, Clive Barker, Doris Lessing, Shirly Jackson, and others. The grand masters of the horror tradition and instead of blending it with science fiction like Doctor Who or Whedon often did, they blend it with the Western - which was often dirtier than sci-fi, more rugged, less stylish. Less tech heavy.
The soundtrack is kick-ass. Van Morrison. Spinal Tap. Stone Temple Pilots. I really want the CD of this series - when it gets released. Some true classics.
And the art direction? Consistently dark and brooding, yet bad-boy cool. The car the boy's drive reminds me of something out of John Carpenter or Quentin Tarantino film - 1950s or 60s, with Jimmy Dean behind the wheel, and James Woods riding shot-gun. Or maybe Michael Marsden. The look - makes me think of the film The Crow - starring Jason Lee - the original film. Complete with Jane Siberry singing in the background.
Yet it also has humor. Jensen Ackles and Jared Palecki share a banter that makes me laugh out loud. And Ackles may have the best one-liners I've seen since well, Marsters, Spike.
Also, Ackles is hot. But so is Palecki. As they take turns playing bad boys. Showing the edges of gray.
One episode - can't remember the name of it - is about an Avenging Angel who kills bad people seeing the bad people as demons - the episode is direct reference to Bill Paxton's Fraility, but it examines Paxton's themes from that film from a completely different angle, and still leaves some questions unanswered.
Really enjoying this series. Right now it is amongst my favorites of the summer and I'm definitely going to be DVR'ing it next year, regardless of what is opposite. Have decided to sacrifice 30 Rock and The Office in favor of Ugly Betty/Greys and Smallville, Supernatural. Which manage to meet both sides of my personality - my guy geek side, and my chickflick side. So yes, it is possible to love both. Sitcoms? They live in syndication forever.
I'm also watching Smallville - which was really good last year, again with a few minor exceptions. Welling actually has figured out how to act and keep his own opposite Rosenblum. And Kristen Kuerk is doing more than just looking pretty. Eric Endurance's Lois is a great addition, as are Jimmy Olsen, and Oliver Green - who is clearly taking Bruce Wayne's place in this series - since they can't get the rights to use Batman. Sort of happy about that, since I know less about the Green Arrow. Smallville is doing some interesting things and entertaining the heck out of me.
Tried Mad Men with Wales, we were both bored. Of course it did not help that the actors mumble and are difficult to hear. We had to keep rewinding to figure out what they were saying. Also as Wales put it - it is a bit too blatant about its sexism and racism.
Yes, we know the 50's were a bit like that...but we don't need it repeated in every frame.
We gave up on it twenty minutes in.
Also gave up on Rescue Me finally. Again was just bored. The characters don't appear to be evolving and it is just depressing. I'm tired of watching people scream at each other. I can see that in my real life on a daily basis don't need to watch it on television. Also Denis Leary's character is terribly whiny and starting to get on my nerves.
Saving Grace ? Not sure about this one. A bit too preachy. A bit too obvious. But I like Holly Hunter and the rest of the cast. I'll watch two or three more then decide.
Doctor Who - the jury is still out. It's incredibly campy and silly. And Freema Agyman isn't impressing me. Tennant is almost too twitchy for my taste. And the monsters a tad over-the-top. I should state at this point that I'm not overly fond of camp. The campier episodes of Buffy turned me off as well - never liked Go Fish, Reptile Boy, or a good percentage of the episodes in the first season. I found them silly not funny. It's my sense of humor, which is admittedly on the dark side of the fence. At any rate - I did not like the second episode with Shakspeare and the Witches, nor did I like the episode with the Runaway Bride, but I did like the one with the hospital on the moon. Have not seen the last two - still on DVR. So will wait until I see a few more before deciding one way or the other.
The previews for Torchwood look like a lot of fun and much better than Doctor Who.
(No, James Marsters isn't going to be on it yet. We're getting the FIRST season. The episodes with Marsters won't premiere in the States until Fall 2008 - if that. So, when I say that Torchwood looks interesting, it is not because Marsters is going to be on it.)
Anyone watching The 4400? Is it just me or is this beginning to resemble the X-Files? Or rather the X-Files meets the X-men? It even has it's own version of the lone gunman and the cigarette smoking man. Not sure I like the similarities - X-Files government conspiracy stuff got on my nerves.
PS: Does anyone have any cool Jo or Ellen icons from Supernatural? Really like those two characters.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-07-30 09:29 pm (UTC)The last one I watched was Bugs, so I'm fairly early on in the season still, but everything you said about the series is right on the mark.
I'm often surprised by how dark, gory and strong the violence is at times (for a network show at least.) As cliched as its become to say for tv nowadays, Supernatural DOES look like a movie.
Plus the banter between the brothers is my favourite part.
Smallville season 6 has only just started over here, but I loved the first episode. Can't wait to see the others.
Doctor Who is normally very hit and miss, but I just saw Blink today and have to say it is not only the best Dr Who episode (IMHO), but one of the most original stories I've seen in any series on tv.
no subject
Date: 2007-07-31 12:48 pm (UTC)Thinking Blink must be one of the two on my DVR that I haven't looked at yet? May try them tonight. Thanks for the heads up.
Supernatural is very well produced. Better than usual. And scarey.
I skipped a lot of the first season, which seemed to be more episodic and focused on the monsters. The second season seems to focus more on the characters and less on the monsters - or uses the monsters more as metaphors for what the characters are going through. It's an interesting trend in some of these tv series (saw it with Buffy, Smallville and Angel as well)- the one's that last that is - they start out as very episodic - mystery/monster of the week - then as the seasons move forward become more and more serialized.
Season 6 of Smallville is far more entertaining than I expected. A welcome surprise. Much better than the previous season.
no subject
Date: 2007-07-31 01:30 pm (UTC)I enjoyed those first few episodes but I think the next one for you to watch (Gridlock) is the first really good one. There's a bit of a lull in the middle, but it gets better after
no subject
Date: 2007-07-31 06:04 am (UTC)From the cringe worthy necking next to the dead deer to the homeless guy (where did he get a gun now? He didn't have any $!) shooting about the only nice character in the whole show. The whole thing makes my skin crawl.
I wish James Marsters would get some better roles!
no subject
Date: 2007-07-31 01:11 pm (UTC)There are a lot of problems with this series. And I agree with the critics, it is frustrating to watch. Because the story bits that are interesting get lost amongst the inane bits with the Angel.
Saving Grace can't seem to make up its mind on what it should be. Touched by an Angel, or NYPD Blue with a female Sipowitz?
I've given up on it. The pilot had the same problems. I got frustrated mid-way through. It's a shame, the series would be interesting if they got rid of the Angel bits, just let it be a gritty cop show. The Angel bits just do not work.
Agree - wish Marsters could get better roles. But that's the lot of 75% of the actors out there. I'm starting to give up. He's having the same problems ASH is in getting good roles. Shame. Maybe the Torchwood role will be better?
no subject
Date: 2007-07-31 02:33 pm (UTC)I think JM's role in Torchwood will be fun, usually the writing is good and the acting is wonderful.... I did love ASH's headmaster role in Doctor Who's second season, which was just one episode but he was a riot (evil child eating bat-alien-strict-Headmaster guy. LOL).
no subject
Date: 2007-07-31 03:57 pm (UTC)What makes one person laugh, may make another cringe or get annoyed.
It's really odd.
Man Child did make me laugh at times though. My favorite ASH role post-Buffy though was probably MI5. I like it when he plays the darker roles more complicated roles. Which makes sense - I fell for him in two of those roles initially - the American in Chess and the ambiguous mentor/friend in VR5.
The only think I've seen Marsters do outside of Buffy that I found remotely interesting was a bit in Millenium. Everything else has been sort of bland writing wise. And it really is about the writing, isn't it?
There's only so much the actor can do.
no subject
Date: 2007-07-31 04:33 pm (UTC)I agree, it is very hard for an actor to over-come bad writing, and I think that that is the problem with 'Saving Grace'; Holly Hunter is really brilliant, but with such an unlikeable role, in such a contrived, cringe inducing story, there just isn't much she can do to draw me in when everything on the screen is pushing me away.
I hope that JM gets some better opportunities soon. He was going to do a play here in San Francisco, and I was very disappointed when that feel through because I would love to see him on stage in a good play.
no subject
Date: 2007-07-31 05:33 pm (UTC)I know JM is doing something at the moment, besides Torchwood and PS I Love You, but I'm not sure what. It was given as the reason he couldn't make Comic Con or Dragon Con - to promote Shadow Puppets (the film not the comics) and his gig on Torchwood. The problem with acting, like any of the other arts - is you can be REALLY busy but no one knows it unless it gets distributed or marketed. I've known quite a few professional actors in my life-time who are busy, but no one knows them. They jump from gig to gig.
And their big breaks? Often fall through. I also have a tendency to follow actors who are struggling like Nathan Fillion, Head, Pierce Bronsan (who FINALLY hit the big time), Marsters, Denisof, Michael Zaslow (a soap actor who died a few years back)...and every time that get close, something falls through.
Even the names struggle - why else is Holly Hunter and Glenn Close doing television series? It's better than the roles they are being offered for films. Hunter's role at least has some meat to it - more than most of the stuff being offered to women her age for films.
My difficulties with Saving Grace are slightly different. I don't mind the characters that much. I'm just having troubles caring about it or getting interested. It bores me. Just uninterested. Can't decide if it's the writing or the characters or a bit of both?
no subject
Date: 2007-07-31 05:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-07-31 05:59 pm (UTC)Yeah, there are so many talented people out there who don't get breakthrough roles because the networks and studios want big names... and of course they do, people go to the movies to see (for the most part) movies with the stars they like in them, most people wait for DVD for the smaller films with unknown actors.
At the BSG panel (which was great, all the strong women) someone asked Mary McDonnell (Pres Laura Rosslyn) why a movie star like her was doing a TV show, and she said it was a fallacy to think of TV as '2nd rate', that she hasn't seen any roles in any movies which would give her the range of characterization and great writing (that was the sense of it, I didn't write down what exactly she said). She loves this role just as much or more as anything she has ever done. Except the costumes, she doesn't like the clothes. LOL
no subject
Date: 2007-07-31 07:34 pm (UTC)Makes sense. Think of the films that have come out this year and then consider the competition.
Acting is a tough field. It's 40% talent and 60% luck. People who believe differently have their heads in the sand and are niave. It's also a lot of hard work - auditioning, getting your head handed to you on a plate - being told you suck, you are fat, too short, ugly, the wrong type, etc.
And say you FINALLY get that role. FINALLY get a pilot to make tv.
The network can always cancel you after five episodes, if you are lucky you get five. Nathan Fillion has been trying for years to break out.
He thought Firefly was his chance. Nope. Too cult. Then he tried Drive - nope didn't grab an audience. He started on Soaps. Look at Sarah Michelle Gellar - she did a film with Alec Baldwin - that premiered at Tribeca Film Festival, but because of Alec Baldwin's personal issues which had the ill luck of becoming public the same time it premiered - her film didn't get grabbed by a distributor and is now sitting on the shelf and may get a limited release. Southland Tales? Had the ill luck of being resoundly booed at Cannes. As an actor - you can't tell what will be grabbed and what won't be.
And want to know the job all actors crave - or at least the one's I've talked to? Sitcoms. Why? 9-5 job. Steady pay. Great salary. And usually a live audience. Also you work closely with the writers. Drama's are hellacious hours - 12-13 a day if it has location shooting. People who work dramas - don't sleep.
They can make a heck of a lot of money in that field but like all high-paying fields, some of that is hazard pay. ;-)
Its frustruating to me at times though. I wish the actors I found interesting would get roles as opposed to the ones that bore me. Of all the actors on Buffy/Angel that I wanted to see again? The actors playing Cordelia, Willow, and Angel were at the bottom of my list. But hey, I'm not a Hollywood casting agent. ;-)