You Have Been Watching

Topic

What have you been watching lately?

Replies

Martin Smith wrote:

what I think is meant to be an off-brand Guardian of the Universe from Oa.

Most likely it is grandmaster, collector(he did not always look like Benicio Del Toro) or one of the other elders of the universe.

Steve Sensible wrote:

We just finished watching The Terror last night. It was… fine I guess? I’m not sure why it’s so beloved by critics. The cast were great of course, but it should really have been called The Disgust, since that was the emotion it inspired most of all. (Yes I get that it was named after the boat…)

It seemed to be an exercise in how many times they could get you to look away from the screen as the mens’ physical condition broke down, and they got torn apart by each other or the rather silly-looking polar bear thing.

Also, the ending was ridiculous – the idea that Crozier would have stayed in that terrible place that killed all his men, rather than being compelled to return home by a sense of ego, duty or a desire to warn others off was completely nonsensical.

Either my memory of the Roger Corman classic is completely screwed up, or there’s another movie with the same name?

Rocket wrote:

Martin Smith wrote:

what I think is meant to be an off-brand Guardian of the Universe from Oa.

Most likely it is grandmaster, collector(he did not always look like Benicio Del Toro) or one of the other elders of the universe.

Nah, the Collector didn’t look anything like that and the Grandmaster is blue with a much different costume. Plus, you can’t see it from this angle, but he’s short and wearing a gown with a green symbol in the centre. Hang on, I’ll see if I can get a better shot.

Steve Sensible wrote:

Also, the ending was ridiculous – the idea that Crozier would have stayed in that terrible place that killed all his men, rather than being compelled to return home by a sense of ego, duty or a desire to warn others off was completely nonsensical.

I disagree; it was already established during the show that Crozier had nothing and no one to go home to, as the girl he loved (John Ross’ daughter) would never marry him; and his career and prospects were pretty much stalled. All the people he felt a strong friendship and kinship with died during the expedition. I also think the actions of the Lady Silence to rescue him and nurse him to health after he had killed her tribe’s protector (the Tuunbaq) convinced him that the Inuit were more “civilized” than his own kind, which made his decision to live among them a logical (to his mind, at least) choice.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Will_C, Christian

DavidM wrote:

Either my memory of the Roger Corman classic is completely screwed up, or there’s another movie with the same name?

Steve is talking about the Ridley Scott TV mini-series, based on a novel by Dan Simmons, about a British expedition in the 19th century that went looking for the northwest passage and never came back. That part is a historical truth, as are the names of the ships (the Erebos and the Terror). The miniseries explores what happesn to the crews as they are stuck in the ice and rations are running low, and adds a supernatural terror that is hunting them.

And don’t listen to Steve, it’s brilliantly made and captivating in its exploration of man vs. nature and man vs. man.

2 users thanked author for this post.

njerry, DavidM

Thanks. I honestly hadn’t heard of that, but I don’t know why because it sounds like something I need to see.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Christian, njerry

Just began watching WARRIOR on HBO Max. Three episodes in and really enjoying it.

My only complaint, which is a regular complaint of mine, are the anachronisms that pepper the show. It’s supposed to be set in 1878, yet the characters use 20th century idioms and phrases, the soundtrack is all contemporary music, et cetera. I realize artistic license is allowed, but I generally prefer period dramas to be more accurate in their portrayal of that time period. DEADWOOD, a show set in more-or-less the same time period as WARRIOR, was a more immersive experience because everything felt appropriate to that period.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Christian

njerry wrote:

DEADWOOD, a show set in more-or-less the same time period as WARRIOR, was a more immersive experience because everything felt appropriate to that period.

I remember Warren Ellis talking about it back then and pointing out (or finding out himself, and being somewhat disappointed by it) that Swearingen’s swear-words didn’t really fit the setting and that they’d used modern words like “cunt”, which would’ve been more likely have been something else at the time.

Christian wrote:

I remember Warren Ellis talking about it back then and pointing out (or finding out himself, and being somewhat disappointed by it) that Swearingen’s swear-words didn’t really fit the setting and that they’d used modern words like “cunt”, which would’ve been more likely have been something else at the time.

It is an interesting point. In TRUE GRIT, it sounds authentic when the characters rarely, if ever, use contractions, but that too was not really true to the period. It’s really an artistic choice – DEADWOOD chose to use modern language and idioms so that people would relate to the characters from a present day point of view while TRUE GRIT chose unusual speech patterns to place a distance between the audience and the characters to give the impression they were watching people in a different time and place.

Realism or accuracy to the reality of a story’s setting does not create connection or immersion for the audience, and really it is more likely to alienate the audience (intentionally or unintentionally).

3 users thanked author for this post.

Andrew, Dave, Christian

It’s an interesting issue, and one that is extrapolated even more when you think about modern visuals accompanying classic texts. Does a Shakespeare adaptation like Luhrman’s “Romeo and Juliet” or Fiennes’ “Coriolanus” feel more accessible or more alienating than Zefirelli’s “Hamlet” or Polanski’s “Macbeth”? And of course, sometimes the “old” language is part of what is attractive about a work (like the dialogue in Jane Austen adaptations, which nobody ever tries to modernise for good reason).

In the end, if an approach works, it works. I get what Jerry is saying about Warrior’s anachronisms, but I don’t mind them – especially not in a show which I assume is removed from the reality of the San Francisco of that time in a great number of ways, not just the idioms and the use of music. If it was more serious and less trashy in the way it treats history generally, this might be a different matter.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Rocket, Dave

SPARTACUS and ROME are good examples as well. Both took very different and inaccurate approaches to the history – especially in the characterization, but both were inaccurate in different ways to deliver the story to an audience that mostly was unfamiliar with the real history. A lot of this is because what the vast majority of people know about history is cobbled together from the fiction (movies, novels and television series) set in those periods. So, today the fiction is based more on other fiction than on fact.

Interesting bit of trivia on the DEADWOOD development. Originally, they pitched it to HBO as a series about the origination of the cohortes urbanae, the police force instituted in Ancient Rome under Augustus and it would follow two Roman cohorts – veterans of the Roman civil wars – as they got involved in all sorts of historic intrigue as Rome transformed from Republic to Empire. HBO liked it, but said they already had a series set in Rome about two Roman legionnaires going into production. So, they took the basic idea and moved it to the Old West.

I wonder if two ancient Roman cops going around calling everyone c&nts, co&%$uckers and motherf&#kers would have felt less out of place since technically they would have been speaking Latin anyway so historical accuracy would not have been expected.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Christian

Christian wrote:

It’s an interesting issue, and one that is extrapolated even more when you think about modern visuals accompanying classic texts. Does a Shakespeare adaptation like Luhrman’s “Romeo and Juliet” or Fiennes’ “Coriolanus” feel more accessible or more alienating than Zefirelli’s “Hamlet” or Polanski’s “Macbeth”?

I remember Luhrmann addressing this in a slightly different context when Moulin Rouge! came out and some people scoffed at the anachronistic music for the setting.

Even notwithstanding the device of that movie (where the poet’s brilliance is conveyed by him coming out with all these well-known pop songs a century early) Luhrmann made the point that this has always been how things worked in opera – with contemporary music being used as the soundtrack for a story that would often have been set far in the past for the audiences of the time – and people don’t complain about that.

As with the language aspect it’s about making it accessible and removing barriers for the audience rather than striving for 100% historical accuracy.

5 users thanked author for this post.

Christian, DavidM, Andrew, garjones

It is interesting to look at stories set in the future or on alien planets where they talk like we do today as well. In ALIEN, the crew of the Nostromo all talk like truckers and mechanics today which was a little jarring compared to science fiction movies of the sixties or even shows like Star Trek where everyone is much more unrealistically professional. However, during the space race, that’s how you heard pilots and astronauts at NASA speaking in public. The movies were, in a sense, imitating the presentation in real life.

If you had people in a show like The Expanse or Babylon 5 speaking in that kind of faux-archaic speech patterns of TRUE GRIT, it would be jarring, but there really is no reason not to do that if you want to give a sense that this is a very different time and place.

Some of it is really hard to know too with speech patterns. Before recordings we rely on written language but that can be prone to being formalised, to interpretation and censorship (internal and external). For example I know my father’s generation in say the 1950 swore all the time but that language barely exists in any media of the time, books or film. We’re probably into the 1960s before anyone is genuinely recording the kind of unfiltered conversations you’d hear in a bar at closing time.

The C-word has been in the OED since the 13th century with the same meaning it has now although it has varied in how offensive it is considered – it was used in English placenames in the middle of the last millennium. Whether it would be used in the same manner as it was in South Dakota in the late 19th century is hard to tell conclusively. So there’s always an element of what we perceive as authentic without too much evidence to back it up. If we take Shakespearean dialogue it’s usually presented very performatively, you probably wouldn’t have the energy to speak like that if you are doing something as mundane as asking Terry next door if you can borrow his garden fork.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Dave

My attitude toward historical accuracy in fiction is not always consistent; I think it bothers me more if I have a particular interest in the historical time/place being portrayed, and if the historical context is critical to the story being told. In the case of adaptations of some of Shakespeare’s work such as Hamlet or Romeo and Juliet, the setting and time period aren’t really an important factor in the story being told, whereas I would expect an adaptation of Julius Caesar or Henry V to be historically proper.

That said, I’m not a fanatic about it. I enjoyed Guy Ritchie’s SHERLOCK HOLMES films in spite of the modern-day sensibilities, and I am enjoying WARRIOR. I just think I would enjoy it more if, for example, the music was more appropriate to that time; but I accept that the show’s creators want to tell their story a certain way, and that’s fine.

It kinda bothered me at first too, but the music in the show is reaaally good… so I got over it pretty quickly. Costumes are also quite modern, but again, they’re very good… hell, even the figths are quite unreal, but insanely good… so it’s just a matter of accepting this is a fantasy story in a real historical setting.

1 user thanked author for this post.

njerry

Having finished the 90s X-Men cartoon, I’ve moved onto the first season of the 90s Fantastic Four. And, well, it’s far from great. In fact it’s pretty bad. Two main reasons. First is the writing. The show focuses on adaptations of the early Lee/Kirby era, which is fair enough, but they’re mainly written by Ron Friedman who doesn’t do anything to enhance them and makes them worse really. For instance, there’s a running sub-plot (to be generous) of the FF having to deal with the Baxter Building’s landlady (voiced by Stan Lee’s wife Joan) which isn’t something the FF ever really needed. Doom’s origin story is altered to make his father a persecuted scientific genius with a ring that can fire a tiny mechanical spider (“a golden goose whose feathers could be plucked” 😐), which again, doesn’t really add anything of benefit.

The second problem is the animation. It’s not that it’s bad – well, ok, it is genuinely bad in places – it’s that it’s completely unsuited to the series. It’s provided by Wang Films, a Chinese subsidiary of Hanna-Barbera at the time, and if it was a funny animal cartoon, like the many they worked on in the same period, it’d be fine. But for a super hero action cartoon, it’s tonally off (as is the very cheesy title theme).

There is a germ of a decent series here though (as I remember the second season being). Mainly it’s in the voice cast, many of whom are still the definitive voice of the characters in my mind: Beau Weaver as Reed, Chuck McCann as the Thing, Lori Alan as Sue (a very under-rated take on the character), Tony Jay as Galactus. Neil Ross gets a hell of a lot of guest turns too.

Weirdest thing about the series is that one of the episodes is missing from Disney+. The fourth, Incursion of the Skrulls. I asked Disney+ and they confirmed it’d been actively removed but couldn’t/wouldn’t say why, though encouraged me to contact customer services’ suggestion page and ask for it to be restored, a process which will provide me no response or explanation for why they’ll decline to do so. 🤷‍♂️

1 user thanked author for this post.

Todd

Martin Smith wrote:

Weirdest thing about the series is that one of the episodes is missing from Disney+. The fourth, Incursion of the Skrulls. I asked Disney+ and they confirmed it’d been actively removed but couldn’t/wouldn’t say why, though encouraged me to contact customer services’ suggestion page and ask for it to be restored, a process which will provide me no response or explanation for why they’ll decline to do so. 🤷‍♂️

https://marvelanimated.fandom.com/wiki/Episode:Incursion_of_the_Skrulls

It’s a tragic coincidence that the video game Twin Towers in the episode are destroyed very similarly to the destruction of the real Towers during the September 11 attacks. (See also World Trade Center Bombing and “Duel of the Hunters”.)

That’ll do it.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Martin Smith, Todd

Martin Smith wrote:

(as is the very cheesy title theme)

The “Call the Four! Fantastic Four!” one? I always liked that one – the FF are kind of cheesy to me.

Rewatched Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon the other day. Perfect movie. I had such huge crushes on Zhang Ziyi & Michelle Yeoh back in middle school lol

3 users thanked author for this post.

Christian, DavidM, Dave

Andrew wrote:

Martin Smith wrote:

(as is the very cheesy title theme)

The “Call the Four! Fantastic Four!” one? I always liked that one – the FF are kind of cheesy to me.

Don’t think so. It’s this one:

Which, despite dismissing as terrible, I’ve had stuck in my head all night (mainly the “don’t need no more” bit), so I guess it’s not entirely unsuccessful.

[Chris-S]

We watched Sound of Metal tonight. Not sure if it’s Oscar nominee worthy, but looking at that list, what is.

Ahmed is outstanding though and it’s a good movie that would maybe have worked a wee bit better as a 3 part tv drama.

The first hour really sucked me in on full blown empathy mode, the second half not quite as much but i thought overall they did a really good job.

• This reply was modified 3 years, 8 months ago by Chris-S.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Will_C

Up to episode 6 or so of the last Walking Dead season. Honestly, this show is still very good!

The end of season 2 of For All Mankind was great. Such an amazing show.

Watched a bit of PULP FICTION again recently. The dialog between Vince and Jules is interesting. In the movie, Travolta was 40 and Jackson was 46, but the dialogue and behavior really fits characters in their late 20’s or early 30’s.

The intriguing enigma of the movie is Jules’ girlfriend. Jules mentions to Brad in the beginning that his girlfriend is a vegetarian, which, he says, pretty much means he’s a vegetarian.

And that’s it. She doesn’t appear in the movie. He never mentions her again even in the diner at the end when he and Vince have the discussion about eating bacon. Jules appears to be eating a muffin or scone in that scene, by the way and he’s barely eating it, honestly.

At the end of it, I was thinking it doesn’t really feel like Jules actually has a girlfriend. She doesn’t come up in the discussion about what he’s gonna do after he quits the game and maybe “walks the earth like Caine from Kung Fu.”

I always read it that all of the stuff they say after they “get into character” is bullshit. Just like Jules says about his bible verse later on.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Uncle Retrospective

The Irregulars

Four eps in and this is some gonzo TV.

“gonzo” is one word for it… couldn’t get past episode 4 or so… what a godawful mess…

Martin Smith wrote:

Don’t think so. It’s this one:

Yeah, that’s the one. The chorus is “Call the four! Fantastic Four!”.

Andrew wrote:

Martin Smith wrote:

Don’t think so. It’s this one:

Yeah, that’s the one. The chorus is “Call the four! Fantastic Four!”.

Yeah, I realised after I posted. I’d been mishearing the “call the four” line.

The Irregulars

Well, that is quite the nuts take on the world of Holmes.

Dave wrote:

I always read it that all of the stuff they say after they “get into character” is bullshit. Just like Jules says about his bible verse later on.

Good point. I just can’t fit a girlfriend into the character we come to know throughout the movie. At least not one that he cares enough about that he avoids eating meat for her.

And that verse is actually not in the Bible, too, so it does call into question his act.

Speaking of Sam Jackson, rewatched GLASS recently and, again, it is interesting. I think UNBREAKABLE is by far the best of the pseudo-trilogy of movies, while SPLIT is a very entertaining thriller, and GLASS, while ultimately disappointing, is an interesting conclusion to the story.

While I think the marketing for UNBREAKABLE was misguided, GLASS does harken back to an idea that came up in the ARG marketing push leading up to the movie. Quintin Tarantino really liked Unbreakable and he said that the problem with the movie was that it can be summed up really simply: “What if Superman existed in our world, but he didn’t know he was Superman?” Great premise, but the problem is that they didn’t use that to sell the movie. Instead, they kept the movie mysterious so people didn’t really know what to expect from the movie.

Disney Told Shyamalan Not to Market Unbreakable as a Superhero Movie | IndieWire

From the trailers, it looked a lot like this Jeff Bridges movie FEARLESS about a guy who survives a plane crash and loses all his fear of dying thus creating chaos in his up to then very cautious and successful life.

It’s a good movie, but UNBREAKABLE is not that movie.

However, I can remember before the movie came out, the marketing company had seeded a fake video of a stewardess falling out of a passenger jet on take-off and surviving a 1,000-ft fall with no injuries. Also, there were other fake stories about people saving others from sharks or surviving housefires giving the idea that there are these extraordinary people out there. This was early in the Internet marketing days, so you could fool people for a while with a good marketing campaign. I can’t find any of those stories or videos anymore though.

So, the idea revealed in Glass that there is an organization dedicated to neutralizing or hiding these people definitely fits with the initial lead in to UNBREAKABLE, but in the end, the movie, again, sorta buries the lead waiting until the final scenes practically to reveal that. It kinda feels like that could be a whole movie in itself.

I watched Mortal Kombat this weekend. If I had any expectations, I probably would have been disappointed. but I didn’t so it was ok. I had no idea who the main character was. I stopped playing a long time ago so no idea if he is part of the game now. It was a bit superhero-y with the marks giving the combatants special powers. Jimmy Olsen from Supergirl was wasted as Jax. I did not even recognize him until the credits rolled.

1 user thanked author for this post.

[njerry]

Finished up Season 1 of WARRIOR last night. Can’t wait to get started on Season 2.

One thing I love about the show is that there are no truly good or bad guys; instead there are characters who do good things and bad things depending on the situation (and on your POV). Makes for a more nuanced and enjoyable show

• This reply was modified 3 years, 8 months ago by njerry.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Christian

Yeah, I kinda like them all really. And Li Yong for example is not only a totally awesome badass, but is actually more likeable than Ah Sam in many ways. And the cops are great characters, too, and Leary gets explored more in season 2, and he’s also great.

And the best thing is that now you can watch it knowing it will continue

Rocket wrote:

I watched Mortal Kombat this weekend. If I had any expectations, I probably would have been disappointed. but I didn’t so it was ok. I had no idea who the main character was. I stopped playing a long time ago so no idea if he is part of the game now. It was a bit superhero-y with the marks giving the combatants special powers. Jimmy Olsen from Supergirl was wasted as Jax. I did not even recognize him until the credits rolled.

Ugh, no, they had the incredibly stupid idea of creating a lame-ass boring new  main character to serve as the audience stand-in, which was a bad idea, since 1) Johnny Cage exists and he’s usually the guy for that role, and 2) in this movie Kano ended up being the audience stand-in anyways, and the new one ended up being a waste of time and space.

I legit liked the cast, I thought they all did the best the could given the horrible script they were working with, which makes it more of a waste. And the first 5 to 10 minutes (the flashback sequence) is actually good, but other than that and a couple of moments here and there, the movie is a godawful mess, and I too was not expecting anything in particular, I’m not even a fan of MK.

It’s the kind of movie where it seems they kept making all the wrong decisions at every turn… like, they end up killing 2 of the best characters in the fuckin movie, and I was like, wow really… but worst of it, this is a MK movie, a movie supposedly about a MK tournament right? They even explain that whole thing with some lazy text at the begining… yet there IS NO FUCKIN tournament… what… the… fuck…

Shame though, they had some elements to make a good movie, like a great cast, hell they even did some actually good CGI, but you can see that’s where all their budget went in, because other than the CGI and the begining of the movie, it looks cheeeeaaaap as fuck. Even most of the fights aren’t that good despite having some really talented people to work with.

1 user thanked author for this post.

njerry

Just finished watching Resident Alien, which was solid, if unspectacular, but good fun overall. Tudyk was great.

Watched the first couple of episodes of The Nevers, and it’s quite enjoyable. It’s just Victorian X-Men, but it’s well done. Why does it have swearing and tits though? It’s not exactly an “adult” show, so those things seem really anachronistic. Is it just because it’s an HBO thing?

And finally, we’ve started watching Starstruck, Rose Matafeo’s new sitcom, which is a bit like Gameface but nowhere near as good.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Rocket

Steve Sensible wrote:

Just finished watching Resident Alien, which was solid, if unspectacular, but good fun overall. Tudyk was great.

Yep, I felt the same. Tudyk really makes it.

I picked up the comic version recently and it’s interesting how similar it is in some ways but how different in others. It’s an adaptation that made good choices I think.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Rocket, Steve Sensible

[Steve Sensible]

Dave wrote:

I picked up the comic version recently and it’s interesting how similar it is in some ways but how different in others. It’s an adaptation that made good choices I think.

Since they’re doing a season 2, does the story continue in the comics, or will they be breaking new ground?

• This reply was modified 3 years, 8 months ago by Steve Sensible.

The omnibus I have contains only the first three story arcs (of six, I think) and I’m only two-thirds of the way through that, but even at this early point it already seems quite separate from what was in the first season of the show in terms of the storyline and plot specifics.

The concept, setting and (some of the) characters are very recognisable from the book though. The TV show feels like a remix of the same ideas rather than a direct adaptation of the comic.

Who knows though, I guess the second season could mine the comics further for inspiration.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Rocket, Steve Sensible

For fans of Resident Alien

https://twitter.com/AlanTudyk/status/1385703350335770624?s=20

1 user thanked author for this post.

Dave

I initially misread that and thought the poor girl was ill or something. She’s very good in it.

I’m half way into season 2 of 90s Fantastic Four and it’s a fair step up from the first.

There are a lot of changes, to the point where it’s a soft reboot: a new opening theme, which is certainly a nice bit of music though I’m not convinced it’s entirely suited to the FF. There’s a new visual tone to the show, with a moodier palette and better character models (including dark blue FF uniforms) but while there’s a new animation studio I wouldn’t necessarily say it’s better than the previous one. Well, ok, yes it is definitely better, but though there are some very well directed moments, it’s still a bit roughly animated in the details at times (but such is 90s network animation, I guess).

The writing has also changed, with Ron Freidman out, taking his awful comedy landlady with him. The show still has a comedic undercurrent through the Thing’s constant griping, but there’s generally a much more dramatic tone, less over-wrought nonsense than most of s1. It’s still largely adaptations of Lee/Kirby stories but more faithfully done – to odd degrees at times. It does a three part adaptation of the original Inhumans story but decides to keep Johnny swooning over Medusa and then immediately falling for Crystal instead, even though in the original issues that reads like an on-the-fly change of plan rather than an intentional story arc. These Lee/Kirby stories are mixed in with adaptations of later stuff, which makes for an odd mix. One episode is the introduction of the Black Panther, the next has Ghost Rider turning up out of nowhere to use his penance stare on Galactus, who is saved by Frankie Ray. The Inhuman saga is followed by the Psycho Man story where Sue becomes Malice (a bold choice for family friendly animation). It all broadly works though.

Another key change is casting. Most of the FF have the same voice, only Johnny is replaced by someone who doesn’t sound that different to the previous guy. But the guest casts are largely different and I guess on a larger budget. Gone are Marvel Productions regulars like Neil Ross, Jim Cummings and Gregg Berger and in are the likes of Kathy Ireland (Crystal), Keith David (T’Challa) and Mark Hamill (Maximus). That actually works pretty well. Doom gets a new voice (Simon Templeton, an ex-pat Brit who seems to get by playing posh guys in America) dropping the previous two actors’ attempts at a pseudo-Eastern European accent and just going for haughty Transatlantic. John Rhys-Davies shows up a couple of times as Thor, exemplifying that classic, pretentious pseudo-Shakespearean take on the character. The Inhuman royal family is more interesting now than it would have been at the time, I think. For characters that are mostly white, they’re largely voiced by non-white actors: Iona Morris as Medusa, Michael Dorn as Gorgon, Rocky Carroll as Triton, Clyde Cusatsu as Karnak. It’s the kind of colour-blind casting that’s being jeopardised by the recent spate of “only black actors can voice black characters” type thinking.

This second season is definitely worth watching, altho be aware that Disney+ has mangled quite a lot of it by very noticeably dimming scenes that have bright lights in them, I assume as an epilepsy precaution. I don’t know how dangerous the show was, but it really sticks out like a sore thumb.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Rocket, Todd, JRCarter

More4 aired the final episode of season 4 of The Good Fight tonight, called The Gang Discovers Who Killed Jeffrey Epstein. The show always deals with current events, but this properly goes into the details of Epstein’s death (and then has the firm going down the rabbit hole of some crazy sounding conspiracy). It actually works as an episode, despite how ridiculous it sounds, because, well Epstein’s life was bizarre enough for everything to seem plausible but also it keeps characters on the side to go “this is ridiculous”. Given that this episode plays so freely with references to Ghislaine Maxwell and Prince Andrew, I wonder if it’s why the series was delayed airing over here for so long.

After an odd first episode, it’s been a fun series actually. David Lee, one of the best supporting characters from the Good Wife has been brought in, along with John Laroquette as the head of a firm that’s bought up Reddick Boseman. Michael J Fox makes some appearances and Michael Boatman’s character gets a cool running subplot, which unfortunately does get curtailed by the pandemic.

I know Paul was dismissive because Delroy Lindo and Cush Jumbo aren’t in the next series, but their exits have been building suitably here and it’s been confirmed they’re both doing the first episode of season 5 to tie things up, so it hopefully won’t be entirely abrupt. The turnover of characters doesn’t bother me entirely, as the show has always been more about Diane than anyone else and the rest of the cast is entertaining enough to pick up the slack (the show hasn’t suffered at all from the exit of Rose Leslie, for instance).

Hopefully series 5 will air more promptly over here than 4.

1 user thanked author for this post.

paul f

Martin Smith wrote:

Hopefully series 5 will air more promptly over here than 4.

I think they only started filming fairly recently, so the show’s not expected back in the US until near the end of the year.

The show’s been so focused on Trump’s America for the last four years, it’ll be interesting to see how they deal with him not being around anymore. I imagine the pandemic gives them a lot of possible new types of courtroom rules and wacky judge antics though, which could be fun.

paul f wrote:

Martin Smith wrote:

Hopefully series 5 will air more promptly over here than 4.

I think they only started filming fairly recently, so the show’s not expected back in the US until near the end of the year.

The show’s been so focused on Trump’s America for the last four years, it’ll be interesting to see how they deal with him not being around anymore. I imagine the pandemic gives them a lot of possible new types of courtroom rules and wacky judge antics though, which could be fun.

Yeah, I meant promptly relative to the US airing, whenever that might be. This series airing after Trump had been voted out already did defang some parts of it a bit – although it was less Trump focused than previous series. The report I read about Jumbo and Lindo returning mentioned Mandy Patinkin appearing as a character with no legal training who’s set up his own court in the back room of a shop, so that sounds like it could be fun.

Saw the first season of Ted Lasso. I was not expecting to enjoy it as much as I did but once I started it I just couldn’t stop. Sort of like a box of Thorntons. The ensemble works really well together but it is absolutely Jason Sudeikis who carries this thing with a wonderful performance. Pulling off a fish-out-of-water character who is entirely earnest without making him seem like an idiot or a pushover, while also fleshing out a skit character to a fully-fledged lead character, in addition to remembering to be funny, is a tall ask but he nailed it. Happy to learn that season 2 is not far away.

One minor thing that did irritate me was how they had Lasso learning how to use English vernacular as a recurring point throughout the show and yet they absolutely insist on having everyone call football games that end without a win or a loss a “tie” rather than a “draw”.  Not just Lasso but everyone, even the drunks in the pub, despite nobody ever using the word “tie” in British football. A weird point for the writers/producers to get hung up on.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Andrew, Will_C, Martin Smith

New This Time With Alan Partridge was fun tonight I thought. Not a great departure from the first series but lots of amusing moments with some great details.

Dave wrote:

New This Time With Alan Partridge was fun tonight I thought. Not a great departure from the first series but lots of amusing moments with some great details.

I feel like Steve Coogan is afraid to act the clown these days. We watched “I’m Alan Partridge” recently, and Coogan visibly aged the character and made him more grotesque and ridiculous. Now he has a nice suit, a better haircut, and the character looks 20 years younger than he did 15 years ago.

There are still some funny bits, but he’s too polished and nothing like as weird and tragic as he used to be. Also I can’t believe they’re still doing the same gag with Tim Key not being able to navigate his touchscreen.

The stuff with Tim Key was awful and I totally zoned out of it, but I enjoyed the rest, even if – so far – it doesn’t really seem to have any new ideas. The body language section was the best bit.

The Tim Key bit was made for me by the chocolate bar wrappers coming out of his pockets.

Shadow And Bone was a rather fun little series, hopefully they get to complete the story.

[Ian Smith]

Watched The Mitchells vs. The Machines on Netflix and bloody loved it. Fantastic animation and a sweet, but not overly sappy story, that has tons of laughs

• This reply was modified 3 years, 8 months ago by Ian Smith.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Uncle Retrospective, Dave

[Ian Smith]

Ian Smith wrote:

Watched The Mitchells vs. The Machines on Netflix and bloody loved it. Fantastic animation and a sweet, but not overly sappy story, that has tons of laughs

• This reply was modified 3 years, 8 months ago by Ian Smith.

Yeah, I enjoyed it a lot. Great animation, a great soundtrack, and very funny, even if it gets a bit repetitive occasionally. I’d have loved to have seen it in the cinema though.

Another triumph for Lord and Miller, who are very good at this.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Dave

I thought The Mitchells vs. The Machines was a bit disappointing. There were a couple of good gags (notably dog/pig) but the characters were 99% cliché and I didn’t even think the voice-acting was up to much. I like Danny McBride usually, but I didn’t think his voice fit the character (it looked like they were hoping for John Goodman) and the little brother’s voice was just weirdly mature for that character.

Also, you don’t get to make fun of the idea that the bad guy will be defeated by “the power of lurrrve” then have them be defeated by something equally sappy. And it spent most of the movie bemoaning the evils of social media, then completely caved at the end with that line about “but I guess if it lets you show people your lame videos than it’s not all bad!”

I’d hoped for more since Lord and Miller produced it, but I thought it was a bit of a letdown. Not bad, exactly, just kind of ho-hum.

Without Remorse

They should have called this Without Clarity.  As too often you will not be able to see much of what is going on.  Sequences are too murky and suffer because of it.

The plot is the usual US patriotism bollocks where “I’m a patriot” is code for doing any and all kinds of bullshit nefarious activity.  Which, of course, gets hushed up.

But let’s not forget its equality credentials: A black American secret agent is as great at shooting Russians as a white one.

Even with it being bundled with Amazon, I’d like those near two hours back please.

Watched The Mitchells vs The Machines tonight with the kids. It was decent – a fun premise with likeable characters and lots of big laughs as well as some cool animation flourishes, and it really connected with them on their level.

[Steve Sensible]

Just started watching Mare of Easttown, HBO’s new murder-mystery-drama, and it’s a relief to finally have a new meaty drama series to sink my teeth into. I was concerned with a British actress playing an American as it can sometimes be distracting, but at no point have I looked at her and thought, “that’s Kate Winslet” – she’s just Mare Sheehan. Ably supported by a great cast including Guy Pearce and Evan Peters, who is fast becoming one of my favourite performers.

The world-building is good, it’s not afraid to have a little fun amongst the bleakness of the subject matter, the only fly in the ointment is my personal pet peeve of the detective also having a tragic back-story, which is fast becoming a well-worn cliché.

Aside from that, it’s great stuff so far.

• This reply was modified 3 years, 8 months ago by Steve Sensible.

1 user thanked author for this post.

njerry

Watched Stowaway on Netflix.

It’s an interesting movie – some of the choices work, like keeping the cast and setting very limited and the story simple and relatively small-scale.

But it also does that serious-sci-fi-movie thing of making space quite dull and boring, and having long stretches where not a huge amount happens. It even takes quite a while just to get to the development that we all know is coming from the title.

But the actors do a good job with their characters and the central dilemma makes for some compelling drama – although having said that, I was expecting a stronger ending than what we get.

1 user thanked author for this post.

DavidM

Yeah I watched that one… I was also quite disappointed by the weak sudden ending, not a satisfying conclusion tbh.

Continuing my 90s Marvel cartoon revisitation, I started on Incredible Hulk the other day. Watched just the first episode, went to carry on with it tonight only to discover it’s disappeared from Disney+. Cue yet another chat with their support, who assure me it’s only temporarily removed, but won’t say why.

The same thing happened with the 90s Spider-Man cartoon a week or two back, but that returned with the episodes properly broken up into series. But Hulk’s already organised properly, so who knows why it’s gone. They still haven’t organised X-Men though.

First season of the 90’s Hulk was better than the second. Kinda the reverse of the 90’s Iron Man and Fantastic Four animated series.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Todd

Martin Smith wrote:

Continuing my 90s Marvel cartoon revisitation,

Good.

I felt nostalgic and went to YouTube and found all the Marvel cartoons from the 60’s (You know… The ones that were barely animated using Kirby’s panels). I won’t see them all. I’ll just cherry pick the ones I like.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Todd

JRCarter wrote:

First season of the 90’s Hulk was better than the second. Kinda the reverse of the 90’s Iron Man and Fantastic Four animated series.

That’s how I remember it too, though I was surprised by the actual production timeline of them. When I was a kid, I remember season 1 of Incredibly Hulk airing concurrently with the bad first seasons of Fantastic Four and Iron Man (as the Marvel Action Hour) and when I later saw the second seasons of FF and IM, I thought they’d just moved them over to the animators who did the Hulk based on how good that looked. But it turns out Hulk was made after FF and IM. Weird they managed to circle back round to being rubbish.

I was surprised to see Neal McDonough (Dum Dum in Captain America and Damian Darkh in Arrow) was the voice of Banner in this series. Based just on episode 1, he’s pretty good.

I watched the new Dylan Moran special, Dr Cosmos, recorded back in 2019 in Australia. As enjoyable as ever, especially once he veers away from the already-very-dated political stuff at the start of the show.

The main difference between this and his older stuff is that he now actually is a middle-aged man, rather than just looking and sounding like he is. It definitely suits him.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Todd

Tried watching Monuments Men earlier. Jeez that’s bad. It has all the self-satisfaction of Clooney’s Ocean movies without any of the wit, charm, verve or, well, anything really. I stuck it out to the point where Hugh Bonneville is asked “are you a Catholic?” by some priests he’s helped to secure a church and replies “I am tonight”. ::eyeroll to infinity::

Ahead of the reboot of In Treatment starting later this month, I’ve been rewatching the original series. It’s a very good series, but the first season is a mixed bag.

The Mia Wasikowska and Blair Underwood storylines are brilliant, with excellent acting and writing, while the Josh Charles/Embeth Davidtz storyline is mostly just boring, and has Charles largely miscast as a regular working class guy.

The main problem is the Melissa George storyline, where we’re supposed to buy that Gabriel Byrne is in love with her, despite this never coming across in his performance and her being an almost entirely unlikable character. I’ve liked George in stuff since, but she’s awful here, and drags the show down.

1 user thanked author for this post.

I watched Hazbin Hotel and Helluva Boss on Youtube Vivziepop – YouTube

Fairly funny in the Adult Swim kind of way. Kinda like Gravity Falls as well but serious mature content. I had seen stuff on the shows for a while, but I thought it was something to do with the HELLS anime from about ten years ago. Very similar look and comedy styles, but Hazbin and Helluva are much more entertaining.

The Sunday evening Columbo repeats have wrapped round so they’re repeating themselves, which is annoying. It’s fine re-watching after several years, but not when I’ve only just seen them a few months ago.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Bruce, Martin Smith

DavidM wrote:

The Sunday evening Columbo repeats have wrapped round so they’re repeating themselves, which is annoying. It’s fine re-watching after several years, but not when I’ve only just seen them a few months ago.

Your post made me think of this:

1 user thanked author for this post.

Rocket

Todd wrote:

DavidM wrote:

The Sunday evening Columbo repeats have wrapped round so they’re repeating themselves, which is annoying. It’s fine re-watching after several years, but not when I’ve only just seen them a few months ago.

Your post made me think of this:

A bit of the history of the Mystery Movie: The NBC Mystery Movie

I still remember that theme and opening sequence from my childhood.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Rocket, DavidM

New series of Inside No. 9 was good tonight. Very silly, very clever, very funny.

Todd wrote:

A bit of the history of the Mystery Movie: The NBC Mystery Movie

I still remember that theme and opening sequence from my childhood.

That was such a great concept for broadcast television — instead of the same lead character week after week for a 1-hour adventure, it was a rotating roster of lead characters in movie-length adventures.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Rocket, Todd

I just remembered one of my favorites from back then: Banacek with George Peppard( from later fame as Hannibal Smith in the A team). That was from the NBC Wednesday Mystery Movie though so not included in the opening posted earlier.

2 users thanked author for this post.

njerry, Todd

njerry wrote:

Todd wrote:

A bit of the history of the Mystery Movie: The NBC Mystery Movie

I still remember that theme and opening sequence from my childhood.

That was such a great concept for broadcast television — instead of the same lead character week after week for a 1-hour adventure, it was a rotating roster of lead characters in movie-length adventures.

Back in the mid 1990s, there was the syndicated Action Pack. This wheel series is the source of the Hercules series.

Finished the latest season of Walking Dead. Did I mention that this is still a very good show?

Nice unexpected guest appearance by Matt Smith on Alan Partridge tonight.
I’m a little surprised the episode didn’t get spiked actually given it had an Israel-Palestine gag in it.

Saw the 2015 Fantastic Four movie. This really was as bad as the reports from the set made it sound. Everything about the movie shouts, This was stuck together with glue from the bits and pieces we could save. Also, there are some nice ideas, but the script was entirely off from the get-go; everything going on is just so dreary.

Tim Blake Nelson had some fun, I think.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Todd

Martin Smith wrote:

Nice unexpected guest appearance by Matt Smith on Alan Partridge tonight.
I’m a little surprised the episode didn’t get spiked actually given it had an Israel-Palestine gag in it.

My immediate thought was that I was surprised that gag wasn’t trimmed from that section.

Matt Smith was good, nice to see him turn up.

Christian wrote:

Tim Blake Nelson had some fun, I think.

He was also a scene-stealer in INCREDIBLE HULK in the early days of the MCU.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Christian, Todd

A few series I watched from the past week:

Queen of Meth: I think this is an exclusive on Discovery+ but DAMN, this was almost Tiger King levels of insane. It’s a 3-part doc about Lori Arnold (actor Tom Arnold’s sister) who back in the 1980s, ran a meth empire. Hearing Lori and Tom talk about their seriously fucked up childhoods and lives will leave your jaw on the floor. If you can see it, definitely watch it.

Birdgirl: A sort of sequel series to Harvey Birdman: Attorney at Law. Except for BG, it’s an entirely new cast. It’s more serialized and targeted towards a female demographic. Each episode is 30 minutes which is 15 minutes too long. (A problem with the Birdman special from a few years back.) It lacks the manic, anything-goes energy and tight writing of Birdman. Where Birdman mined the Hanna-Barbera library for much of its stories and humor, Birdgirl avoids it completely. I appreciate it trying to be its own thing (and I may not be the target audience) but it really falls flat. Serializing the series also didn’t help because the plots really weren’t enough to carry the series. It has some amusing bits here and there but it is far from must-see viewing. Go rewatch Harvey Birdman instead.

Castlevania: The final season wraps up everything though it felt disjointed. Many characters never interacted with each other due to the storylines which felt like a missed opportunity. The action sequences were top notch and there was some excellent character work and scenes. It did feel like the secondary characters had better and more complete character arcs than the main ones. The writing felt like it had more Warren Ellis “features” than “bugs”. I would say it was a mostly satisfying wrap up to the series though the last episode, pretty much entirely denouement, did feel a bit too pat in places. I think Season 3 really was the best one. Overall, I think it was a very good series that didn’t quite stick the landing.

1 user thanked author for this post.

njerry

[Andrew]

We rewatched Fight Club last night. Fincher is a regular topic on some of the podcasts I listen to, and while I did see Fight Club at the cinema when it was released in 1999, I think my opinion of its importance was swayed by Empire magazine declaring it the best film of the 90s in their year end 1999 release.

Wife had trepidation; in fact a few minutes in she was going to bail – but we stuck with it. The style of the film and the CGI is amazing, and the three lead performances (Pitt, Norton, Bonham-Carter) are rock solid. As with Taxi Driver and Scarface and other films there’s this difficult balance with the lead; they need to be captivating and “cool” enough to bring us along without making us agree with them – Tyler Durden is a bad guy, despite the swagger, the wardrobe, the polemics.

The twist is great, and knowing it made so many of the earlier bits of the film that much more impressive – but the overall point of the film… is there one? Sure, it’s bold for a major, flashy studio blockbuster to be anti-consumerist and kinda countercultural, but what is the big takeaway message?

• This reply was modified 3 years, 8 months ago by Andrew.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Will_C, lorcan_nagle, Todd

[Andrew]

Andrew wrote:

We rewatched Fight Club last night. Fincher is a regular topic on some of the podcasts I listen to, and while I did see Fight Club at the cinema when it was released in 1999, I think my opinion of its importance was swayed by Empire magazine declaring it the best film of the 90s in their year end 1999 release.

Wife had trepidation; in fact a few minutes in she was going to bail – but we stuck with it. The style of the film and the CGI is amazing, and the three lead performances (Pitt, Norton, Bonham-Carter) are rock solid. As with Taxi Driver and Scarface and other films there’s this difficult balance with the lead; they need to be captivating and “cool” enough to bring us along without making us agree with them – Tyler Durden is a bad guy, despite the swagger, the wardrobe, the polemics.

The twist is great, and knowing it made so many of the earlier bits of the film that much more impressive – but the overall point of the film… is there one? Sure, it’s bold for a major, flashy studio blockbuster to be anti-consumerist and kinda countercultural, but what is the big takeaway message?

• This reply was modified 3 years, 8 months ago by Andrew.

The message I took with me is that you should not listen to the crap a crazy guy who lives in a derelict house says about anti-consumerism and counterculture. Think for yourself instead.

I’ve read articles where the writer seems to think that Tylers bullshit is the films message. And I really don’t understand how they reached that conclusion. It’s like thinking that the message in Return of the Jedi is that the dark side is stronger — because the Emperor says so!

3 users thanked author for this post.

Andrew, Will_C, lorcan_nagle

I’ve always seen Fight Club as an indictment of toxic masculinity. Tyler represented everything wrong with macho, traditional male stereotypes.

5 users thanked author for this post.

Uncle Retrospective, Rocket, Andrew, Will_C, lorcan_nagle

Andrew wrote:

The twist is great, and knowing it made so many of the earlier bits of the film that much more impressive – but the overall point of the film… is there one? Sure, it’s bold for a major, flashy studio blockbuster to be anti-consumerist and kinda countercultural, but what is the big takeaway message?

It’s basically an analysis and commentary on toxic masculinity but before the term was popularised. The message is that men are often poorly served by our society and we don’t give a shit. But we should because otherwise it’s really easy for them to get drawn in by a charismatic maniac who’ll give them violent purpose.

Probably should have listened back in 1999.

6 users thanked author for this post.

Uncle Retrospective, Rocket, Andrew, Todd, Ben, Will_C

Tyler Durden decries “we’re a generation of men raised by women” and his plan is to return humanity to some kind of hunter-gatherer lifestyle, the implication being that men can be men again. His whole thing is about killing the “woman” in modern men.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Todd, Ben

Baby Driver – an OK film but marred by an improbable escape from death in the finale that did major damage.  Ending was all right.

Incoming – utter crap.  Not even good as a “crap action movie”, as it didn’t have much action.  It’s also shot in this weird monochrome that doesn’t do anything for it.  Si far Adkins has yet to better Ip Man 4 and the Debt Collector duo.

Ghost Rider – Now this? This is a guilty pleasure but a very fun one.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Todd

I’ve been watching Line of Duty with Audrey, we’re up to the end of series 5.

It’s a lot of fun, despite an outward veneer of realism (using all the jargon they never explain, which can be part of the fun) there is a level of ludicrousness to it like the police death count in one investigation is about 5 times the real UK average, but it really is worth just going with it.

The plotting is so intricate I don’t know how Jed Mercurio does it, maybe his stage magician name is a clue. The way minor characters re-appear from 5 series back with a key role does reward binge viewing. I love the way the first episode sets up a fairly familiar plotline and then always goes somewhere completely different to what you’d guessed.

Then there’s the performances, the ‘guest’ actors that turn up in each series are invariably brilliant. Looking forward to the 6th series to see what Kelly McDonald will do.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Sean Robinson, Dave

Todd wrote:

Birdgirl: A sort of sequel series to Harvey Birdman: Attorney at Law. Except for BG, it’s an entirely new cast. It’s more serialized and targeted towards a female demographic. Each episode is 30 minutes which is 15 minutes too long. (A problem with the Birdman special from a few years back.) It lacks the manic, anything-goes energy and tight writing of Birdman. Where Birdman mined the Hanna-Barbera library for much of its stories and humor, Birdgirl avoids it completely. I appreciate it trying to be its own thing (and I may not be the target audience) but it really falls flat. Serializing the series also didn’t help because the plots really weren’t enough to carry the series. It has some amusing bits here and there but it is far from must-see viewing. Go rewatch Harvey Birdman instead.

Yeah this was quite disappointing… I understand not wanting/being able to use Birdman, Phil or the H-B library of toons, buuuut they could’ve still used some of those characters… like Peanut, Peanut should’ve been in the series.

Anyways, last episode I watched (4 I think) it got a lot more random, if not necessarily funnier, so we’ll see going forward, but yeah the first 3 episodes are weak, and the lenght is wrong.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Todd

garjones wrote:

I’ve been watching Line of Duty with Audrey, we’re up to the end of series 5.

We’ve been working through Line of Duty for the first time recently too, after lots of friends told us how great it was and urged us to watch it. We just started season 4.

I like it but not quite as much as my wife does. I often find it a bit silly and soap-y, but it’s entertaining enough and there’s always plenty of dramatic hooks to keep you watching – it’s the TV equivalent of a page-turner.

I don’t really agree on the quality of the plotting though if I’m honest, Mercurio seems to have been feted for this but for me there’s a lot of quite important plot stuff that doesn’t make sense when you stop and think about it. And often something will happen that makes you immediately asking questions that are only then asked by the (professional investigator) characters many hours – and sometimes several episodes – later, because it serves the drama for it to play out that way.

But that’s a minor grumble really because you can easily overlook that stuff as you’re swept along in the larger story. If Mercurio is a magician name then I think his magician’s skill is in making you look where he wants you to look, so that you’re not thinking about the stuff that he doesn’t want you dwelling on too long.

And so regardless of the plot wonkiness or logic gaps from time to time, there’s always lots of very compelling drama and tension. It’s very watchable. But I don’t take it very seriously.

I finished the first series of the 90s Incredible Hulk cartoon. It was ok. I’m not a huge Hulk fan and this doesn’t do much to convince me otherwise as it falls largely into a fairly standard formula: Banner either arrives somewhere intentionally to meet someone who is doing gamma research he thinks will cure him or he wakes up somewhere unexpected and runs into someone doing gamma research that might cure him. He nearly gets cured. It all goes wrong. He hulks out and beats stuff up for a while. He evades the Hulkbusters. The end.

Probably the most interesting aspect is all the cameos it has from the wider Marvel Universe and there are a lot. The Fantastic Four (well, mainly just the Thing) and Iron Man live on from their own series in guest spots here, there’s an episode with Thor, another with Ghost Rider (same VA as his appearance in FF – I hear they were angling to get him a solo series at the time), one with Sasquatch from Alpha Flight, the Wendigo and then, more understandably, She-Hulk. If it wasn’t for the Leader and Gargoyle always hanging out on the fringes of stuff, and the Hulkbusters I guess, there wouldn’t be much to make it feel like a “proper” Hulk series, beyond an episode with Zzaxx in.

I’m into season 2 now, which is only 8 episodes. It adds She-Hulk to the main cast (and title) and honestly, that actually kind of helps the show, she’s far more interesting than the Hulk and Betty (who, despite marrying Bruce at the end of season 1, is sidelined, it seems). It also introduces the Grey Hulk, though it hasn’t actually explained yet what the deal with him is and why/how Banner sometimes turns into him and not the green one. Or why he has an entirely different voice.

Todd wrote:

I’ve always seen Fight Club as an indictment of toxic masculinity. Tyler represented everything wrong with macho, traditional male stereotypes.

Yeah, but is there not more to it than that?

(And like with other similar characters across different media, he makes some good points, no? That’s part of the dilemma with these things – they make you feel bad/ conflicted.)

The thing with Tyler Durden is that his criticisms of consumerism/capitalism are mostly correct (hedging my bets with “mostly” because I haven’t seen the movie in like 10 years) but they’re rooted in the Narrator’s emasculation. He blames society, his society is consumerist, he correctly diagnoses what’s wrong with consumerism, but ultimately he just wants to feel like a he-man sex machine and blow shit up.

3 users thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle, Andrew, Todd

Andrew wrote:

Todd wrote:

I’ve always seen Fight Club as an indictment of toxic masculinity. Tyler represented everything wrong with macho, traditional male stereotypes.

Yeah, but is there not more to it than that?

(And like with other similar characters across different media, he makes some good points, no? That’s part of the dilemma with these things – they make you feel bad/ conflicted.)

Tyler does make some good points about our consumer society but his solution is to take it to the opposite extreme so he and other males can be “real men”. His solution is actually an excuse to be toxic males.

Something fun to consider now about Fight Club: In the scene where the guys are watching TV to see the story about Project Mayhem, Angel Face (Jared Leto) comments that the female news reporter is hot. He’s objectifying a woman. That reporter is Lauren Sánchez (she is a real news reporter playing herself). Who is Lauren Sánchez currently dating? Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon.com, the ultimate consumer experience. Her “real man” was not some urban terrorist but a billionaire.

Rich nerd > Men of Project Mayhem

2 users thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle, Andrew

Dave wrote:

I don’t really agree on the quality of the plotting though if I’m honest, Mercurio seems to have been feted for this but for me there’s a lot of quite important plot stuff that doesn’t make sense when you stop and think about it. And often something will happen that makes you immediately asking questions that are only then asked by the (professional investigator) characters many hours – and sometimes several episodes – later, because it serves the drama for it to play out that way. But that’s a minor grumble really because you can easily overlook that stuff as you’re swept along in the larger story. If Mercurio is a magician name then I think his magician’s skill is in making you look where he wants you to look, so that you’re not thinking about the stuff that he doesn’t want you dwelling on too long.

I don’t really disagree there, if you delve into it there are logic holes but as you say he covers them up well and the thing he’s constructing is so complex it’s probably impossible not have some. There is an inherent silliness in the whole setup that you just have to ride with (and I think he winks at with tiny bits of self-parody at times).

It’s my personality though that if the main narrative engages I tend not to notice. If you have a twist I have worked out easily or a plot hole that ruins my enjoyment then you have really fucked up.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Dave

garjones wrote:

(and I think he winks at with tiny bits of self-parody at times).

Yeah there are some quite funny moments like that sprinkled throughout. As well as the drinking-game-style repetition of some lines (“I have the right to be questioned by an officer at least one rank superior”).

Will_C wrote:

The thing with Tyler Durden is that his criticisms of consumerism/capitalism are mostly correct (hedging my bets with “mostly” because I haven’t seen the movie in like 10 years) but they’re rooted in the Narrator’s emasculation. He blames society, his society is consumerist, he correctly diagnoses what’s wrong with consumerism, but ultimately he just wants to feel like a he-man sex machine and blow shit up.

Exactly this. Fight Club/Project Mayhem is essentially what we’re seeing today in groups like the Proud Boys, who claim to be protecting white male tradition… by getting potential members to recite the names of breakfast cereals while they’re punched repeatedly? They’re identifying an issue in modern society – the alienation of men, and blaming it on women and ethnic and social minorities getting a more fair share of attention.

5 users thanked author for this post.

Will_C, Christian, Uncle Retrospective, Andrew, Todd

Dave wrote:

Yeah there are some quite funny moments like that sprinkled throughout. As well as the drinking-game-style repetition of some lines (“I have the right to be questioned by an officer at least one rank superior”).

In truth it’s pretty much all of Hastings’ lines, he has more catchphrases than a character in Allo Allo.

Audrey keeps asking what ‘we’re sucking diesel now’ means and I have no idea. 😂

1 user thanked author for this post.

Dave

garjones wrote:

Dave wrote:

Yeah there are some quite funny moments like that sprinkled throughout. As well as the drinking-game-style repetition of some lines (“I have the right to be questioned by an officer at least one rank superior”).

In truth it’s pretty much all of Hastings’ lines, he has more catchphrases than a character in Allo Allo.

Audrey keeps asking what ‘we’re sucking diesel now’ means and I have no idea. 😂

Mother of god.

We’re midway through season four at the moment and I’m quite enjoying this one (and not just because Thandie Newton is in it) – I particularly like that they’re picking up on some of the casual low-key sexism from the likes of Hastings that we’ve seen throughout the series and actually making a story thread from it rather than letting it go unremarked upon.

It’s Thandiwe Newton now remember.

Yeah they don’t hold back on that sexism aspect in S4 and S5, not that it’s central but it’s acknowledged a few times.