What TV Shows Are You Watching ?

[shadowkat]

Because I'm curious...please advise which of the tv shows below you are watching. Note I did not list all of them nor ones I've yet to see, or ones that just premiered and haven't shown more than one episode yet.

[Poll #1938215]

Comments

[local-max.livejournal.com]

I think that the Buffy comics were better pre-Twilight arc than AoS is now, and AoS is better than the comics became after you quit :). Which -- there are enough things I liked about season eight that the goodwill lasted through to the end of the season, but season nine has mostly killed it for me so I'm back with the majority.

I agree that AoS seems more clearly Marvel's baby than Whedon's. I think that Whedon has hit on an interesting idea -- "what is it like to live in a world with superheroes, i.e. in which huge powerful events happen over which you have no control" -- and has articulated it well in interviews. Jeff Bell did well showrunning Angel and so I have some hope that it might be able to pull together. But it might be that they're just trying to find some reason to justify the show other than as truckloads of cash. I have not been impressed by Clark Gregg as the series lead, but I thought he was very good as Leonato in Whedon's "Much Ado About Nothing" and so have real hope for him.

I really liked Deadwood, for the record. I was a little bit burned by aspects of BSG (which I overall liked) and so am a little reluctant to check out Carnivale. Ron Moore is a very interesting writer, but he has certain excesses when it comes to more fantasy-oriented things that I want to steer clear of.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

I think that the Buffy comics were better pre-Twilight arc than AoS is now,

Oh I'd agree. I actually enjoyed the comics pre-Twilight arc. But there were better writers involved and Whedon was more heavily involved and less distracted by other venues. You can sort of tell when Whedon stopped caring about the comics and began to phone it in so to speak or hand it over to others. Writer burn-out, not a pretty thing. This is why most tv shows shouldn't last more than 5 seasons and why there's a lot of turn-over in writers for on-going print serials.

I don't necessarily dislike AoS, it just doesn't interest or compel me at all. But part of this is due to what interests me in stories - which is quite different than what you describe above. A college friend used to call me "character girl", she was always interested in the plots or thematic structure, while I cared about the characters and how they handled things and their struggle. This is why Buffy worked for me but Dollhouse and Firefly not as much, because I didn't care that much about the characters and felt those shows were more thematic than character oriented. It's also why I've lost interest in Whedon, he seems to be more interested in "meta-narrative" and exploring specific ideas, than he is in creating and building complex characters. Which is okay, nothing wrong with that - it just doesn't interest me. It's also why I have a love/hate relationship with the novelist Neil Gaiman - because he's more interested in the world and themes, then he is in character - as a result his characters often feel flat or cyphers, I'm noticing this with Whedon as well.

It's why I enjoyed BSG more than you did and LOST, the themes I could care less about - I was interested in the characters journeys and how they handled difficult problems. The difficulty I have with The Wire is that it often is more interested in message/idea/theme than character as well - and to me that feels preachy. It's a personal thing.

The other issue I have Agents of Shield - is I was an X-men fan. And in the X-men, Shield and the Avengers are portrayed as fascist/mainstream superhero groups, while the X-men are the outcasts and disenfranchized minority. Shield's casting choices, and use of Clark Gregg as a lead sort of reinforces that feeling.

And...I admittedly do not see the appeal of Clark Gregg's Coulson. I don't dislike him, he just...doesn't register as interesting? I forgot about him after the movies. Which is a big problem for me as a viewer - in order to watch or read a story - I have to find at least one character "engaging or interesting" - they don't have to be likable, they can be a nasty piece of work like Walter White, but as long as they intrigue me and I care what happens to them next or am curious - I'll watch. AoS - five minutes in? I was surfing the net, and half watching. Not a good sign.

[local-max.livejournal.com]

Right, I see what you mean. I think that I am both character-intrigued and theme-intrigued, and ideally somewhere at the intersection...I think Buffy works on both levels for the most part (obviously there are exceptions). BSG -- my main problem, character-wise, was that I lost contact with Adama by the end, and didn't like Starbuck's journey in s4. But I was still very invested in much of the cast; for example, the final scene between Gaeta and Baltar gave me chills. LOST, similarly, I liked some characters a great deal -- Ben, for example, Hurley when he didn't just let Jack boss him around -- but it wasn't until late in the game where I like Jack, and that was a big gap. And I think, too, that with both, I feel disconnected from characters because of how the plot/themes work. I never quite bought the way Lost set up the "man of science/man of faith" thing with Jack and Locke -- and so I gradually felt like I couldn't really get where either was coming from. And generally speaking, I love the Firefly and Dollhouse characters, too -- though I get why others don't.

But yeah, AoS is weak on a character front. I like Clark Gregg's version of Leonato in Whedon's Much Ado -- and that is part of the reason I think that Coulson could work out. I even like Coulson as author insert fanboy. But he is a very questionable series lead. The scene at the end of episode two, where Fury chews Coulson out, is a good example of what is not working about the show -- because it positions Coulson as the renegade cop being chewed out by his superior officer, which is a cliche to begin with, and totally does not fit the way we've seen Coulson behave. And that is the big thing that will probably ultimately turn me off AoS, is that they are trying to present them as outsiders.

That said, I still like Skye -- and think that there is a possibility that there is an interesting story in where her loyalties are, what that says about her. Because, and I may just be projecting, I think I see myself in the way she is presented -- idealistic, sort of, but in a somewhat uninformed, shallow way, and a little easily swayed by alternate belief systems. Well, that's a harsh read of myself, so I don't want to say I believe that totally, but I think I can see Skye falling into her anarchist beliefs almost by accident, and falling out of it just as easily. I *think* that the show is maybe setting up for her to develop real conviction and I want to see that happen -- it's just that I hope it isn't conviction that hyper government control is great.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Okay that makes sense.

From all the reviews I've read? I think whether you like Agents of Shield has a great deal to do with whether you can relate or find one or both of these two actors engaging, interesting, relateable or likeable:


Skye

Coulson

If you find neither likable or engaging? The show won't work for you.
Which to be fair, is actually true of all tv series. If none of the characters appeal to you personally, you'll give up on the show regardless of how interesting the plot or set-up is or how well or badly written. At the end of the day it comes down to - I find so and so interesting and relateable or I really really don't.

Sigh. Television watching and criticism is definitely a subjective sport. ;-)

[local-max.livejournal.com]

Yep. I think that's definitely true. So for me -- I'm on the fence about both characters, but I am leaning toward being happy with Skye, and leaning toward being unhappy with Coulson. Hence my being interested in the show, but also really skeptical -- but not entirely bored.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

See that's my problem...Skye doesn't really engage me. I don't know why. She should...maybe it's the actress? Don't know. (shrugs).

I was hoping to get into Ming Na-Wen's character - Belinda May, the world-weary ace pilot who despises field action (ie. if Starbuck had lived and made it to 50). But she's barely in it and doesn't have enough to do to hold my interest.

I really wish they'd kill off Wade and find a new and more interesting actor/character. I think he's supposed to be the male lead.

[local-max.livejournal.com]

I agree that Ming Na-Wen's character could/should be interesting -- but they are not using her at all. I love the "if Starbuck had lived to fifty" way of looking at her.