I gave up on Walking Dead somewhere near the start of S2 I think. Too much contrived silliness.
Printable View
I gave up on Walking Dead somewhere near the start of S2 I think. Too much contrived silliness.
Season 3 did it for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Timbuk2
I think teevee died!
HBO - no news.
Netflix - no news.
I got Swedish cmore and viaplay (on hold) ... I watch the normal channels, mostly a few minutes of the wakeup/morning show.
...But right now... almost no new series.
Prime! ... I wanted to watch s3 och startup but it's not available to strream when I select it.
Thanks for the warning... :-( so... no news.
*sigh*
I finished S2 of Mindhunter and I was disappointed. It wasn't terrible, but it lost momentum and energy midway, got bogged down, slow and plodding. I thought the guy who played Charlie Manson was fantastic, though.
E1 of Glow S3 almost had me shut it off for good - so bad for a season opener. But E2 started with sex, so I watched that.
Into E4 of Stranger Things - shaping up to be an Invasion of the Body Snatchers plot.
I really need Netflix to release Witcher already.
Is anyone else watching "Our Boys"? It's based on real events. It's the first mini-series I've watched where Hebrew is the main language. I miss a lot of the acting because I'm reading the subtitles, and the plot is still riveting even tho I know how it ends....
Comcast took Turner Classic Movies off their 'expanded basic' package. They bundled it with sports channels I'll never watch. I'm already forced to pay a "sports franchise tax" with no way to opt-out. What a crock. :down:
Cut the cord. I did three years ago and no regrets.Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
Also, Better Call Saul, S4 = excellent!
So ... finished Legion S3 and that's the lot.
Wow! Well worth the outlay.
Surprising, unpredictable, enigmatic, brilliant, haunting, creepy, longing, romantic, melancholic, TV-as-an-art-form.
Loved just about every moment. Highly, highly recommended.
Unbelievable
Netflix series, true story about a serial rapist in the Colorado area. Strong performances from Toni Colette amongst others.
I can usually spot when a series is directed by a woman such as this, as I did here. There is a pause to it, a slowness of pace which gives space and time for a greater thoughtfulness that I have come to appreciate, which is lacking in the more usual male equivalent.
This series didn't tackle the difficult grey area of he said / she said that can afflict the more difficult rape cases as I hoped this one might. But then the facts of this story did not have the scope for that debate.
Insatiable is so silly that it's irresistible.
I thought it was well done, too. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Timbuk2
I watched it with my son, and he noted the title Unbelievable also described the first victim because she was young and from a 'troubled' background. That male police attitude (not believing the victim) was just as powerful as any he said/she said. I didn't know the director was a woman, but thought the 'greater thoughtfulness' was that female detectives approach rape cases very differently than male detectives.
You appear to have missed that it started with a female rape victim undermining her credibility for having the wrong reactions to being raped.
Pray tell, what are the "right reactions" then?
I suspect a point of the movie is there are no "right" reactions.
Watchmen (TV Series).
Not what I was expecting (I'm a fan of the movie), but I like it. I could see it either becoming a real classic or going too much down the being topical route. We'll see what happens with episode 2.
So, you did not see the series. Mind keeping your opinions on it to yourself until you have?Quote:
Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro
I think that was the issue addressed. But it's not a movie. It's a series.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreadnaught
I think the 'wrong' reactions came from the initial male detectives. They didn't recognize she was in shock, or that shock can effect Affect. They didn't encourage her to have someone present during interviews (not just because she was a minor, but for emotional support), and they treated her interviews like interrogations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
The second victim smiled and giggled during her interviews. Because she was in shock. But the female detective believed her, treated her with respect, and continued to hunt for the rapist. She even enlisted help from other police depts and the FBI to extend the search.
None of the cases had much evidence. But the first (male) detectives gave up looking, because it was easier to believe a foster mom's complaints (about a 'troubled' kid) than the victim herself. If you recall, he ended up admitting that cops like him might be part of the problem. :bored:
Nope. But your phrasing was spectacularly bad. Unless you actually hold the option that there are "right reactions" to a rape - in which case not only the phrasing would be bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
It was not spectacularly badly phrased; it was a precise description of what transpired in the series. A young rape victim was suspected of making things up for having the wrong reactions to being raped. And the person who said she behaved odd for a rape victim was a rape victim herself.
Aaaaaaand you phrased it spectacularly badly again. Congratulations on not getting it.
There's no such thing as a "wrong reaction" - and of course she would say such a thing, she knows that there's a certain expectancy on how to behave even when there's no factual basis for it.
But let me enlighten you: "A young rape victim was suspected of making things up for having reactions to being raped that didn't match expectations."
That would be the precise description. When you phrase it as a "wrong reaction" in your summary without qualifiers, you're actually adopting the viewpoint of people who expect victims to behave in a standard way.
But I don't really expect you to realize this.
Can you please shut your claptrap about descriptions of what transpired in a series you didn't even watch?
Peaky Blinders, S5 is excellent.
Trying to get through Good Omens, but I keep falling asleep mid-episode. I guess that's a review in itself....
Agreed - I didn't really get in to Good Omens. Got to about Ep 4 or 5 and moved onto other stuff. Disappointing, was looking forward to it prior to release.
The world seems to have gone a bit mad recently for Peaky Blinders. It's been on the BBC for so long now, but it's only recently suddenly become popular. Strange. Might pick it up some day, not watched any yet.
~
Not really watching much at the moment. Looking forward to S3 of The Crown in a week or so when it's released.
Also S4 of The Expanse when Amazon release it mid-Dec.
Castle Rock on HBO, quite good. :-)
A bit strange... not sure what to make of Season 1.
Finished it. Don't bother.Quote:
Originally Posted by Timbuk2
I've been watching it on Netflix for a few years now. I highly recommend. Make it the next thing you watch.Quote:
The world seems to have gone a bit mad recently for Peaky Blinders. It's been on the BBC for so long now, but it's only recently suddenly become popular. Strange. Might pick it up some day, not watched any yet.
Very much looking forward to this!Quote:
Also S4 of The Expanse when Amazon release it mid-Dec.
I LOVED Peaky Blinders. Even started watching the beginning, again. It's that good. :up:
The problem with Good Omens is the same as the issue with most of Pratchett's work - it's bloody difficult to adapt for television. So much of what makes Good Omens one of the funniest books I've ever read is the language - not just the dialogue, but the narrative, word choice, and pitch-perfect timing. Translating that to television is just incredibly tough. They tried to make it work with a lot of voiceover, but it never really gelled. There were some decent bits, but overall it was quite disappointing.
Honestly I think that the problem with Good Omens started with the casting.