I still don't see the appeal to 30 Rock.
There, go.
Tina Fey.
I will say Tina Fey is at her best when she's behind the camera. As a screenwriter, she's pretty good. As an actress/joke dispenser, not so much.
Quote from: Comeau on February 04, 2013, 12:44:16 PM
Tina Fey.
I've honestly never found her funny.
When she was a writer she had moments, but I just don't get her charisma.
It's just one of those quirky shows you gotta want to like.
I hated The Office(US) when I first saw a few episodes, but I grew to love it.
Right up until whoever's playing the new boss.
Is that show still making new episodes even..!?
Oh. And I love British tv, but I can't stand the original version.
Quote from: Kiddington on February 04, 2013, 01:35:58 AMI still don't see the appeal to 30 Rock.
There is none.
But I just crammed 6 seasons of it in the last 2 months anyway.
The only redeeming thing about 30 Rock is Alec Baldwin's character, and even then that's only sometimes.
Quote from: Comeau on February 04, 2013, 12:44:16 PM
Tina Fey.
Yeah, that's what people say, but I just don't see it.
As an actress, she just does nothing for me.
Nothing. And as superficial as it may seem, I cannot get that damn Palin skit out of my head.
I actually liked her Palin bits, personally.
So, what's the big deal behind Arrested Development? I honestly don't get it.
Quote from: Avaitor on February 07, 2013, 05:42:12 PM
So, what's the big deal behind Arrested Development? I honestly don't get it.
Same with me and Zach Braff. He honestly rubs me wrong.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on February 07, 2013, 05:44:09 PM
Quote from: Avaitor on February 07, 2013, 05:42:12 PM
So, what's the big deal behind Arrested Development? I honestly don't get it.
Same with me and Zach Braff. He honestly rubs me wrong.
But that's not an unpopular opinion. Scrubs is literally the most hit or miss show ever made.
Hating AD seems to be a worse crime than pedophilia on the internet.
Quote from: Avaitor on February 07, 2013, 05:47:13 PM
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on February 07, 2013, 05:44:09 PM
Quote from: Avaitor on February 07, 2013, 05:42:12 PM
So, what's the big deal behind Arrested Development? I honestly don't get it.
Same with me and Zach Braff. He honestly rubs me wrong.
But that's not an unpopular opinion. Scrubs is literally the most hit or miss show ever made.
Hating AD seems to be a worse crime than pedophilia on the internet.
Well, I don't just mean Scrubs, I mean stuff like Garden State that the hipster kids raved over. I just don't get it.
AD people like because they like to laugh at rich people, I guess. I used to like it, but my tolerance for it sort of blew out. The characters grate on me now.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on February 07, 2013, 05:51:58 PM
Well, I don't just mean Scrubs, I mean stuff like Garden State that the hipster kids raved over. I just don't get it.
[/quote]
I couldn't even finish that movie. Zach Braff stook around on Scrubs for a reason- he really isn't a very good director.
Quote from: Avaitor on February 07, 2013, 05:42:12 PM
So, what's the big deal behind Arrested Development? I honestly don't get it.
It's a satire of the family drama one sees in Dallas or Six Feet Under, where the idiocy of the family once their head is taken away from them is played for comedy instead of angst. Absurdism was utilized to a maximum degree, showing how "therapist" is a very odd-sounding word or how much gay innuendo a writer can shove into a single character's dialogue. So much that repeat viewings are often required to get all the wordplay. Both high-brow and low-brow jokes were combined to create a land full of pretentious cavemen and slack-jawed aristocrats, and Michael is basically our eyes and ears regarding these series of fiascos. Even then, most of the humor comes from how Michael isn't all that different from the family that he's completely estranged from. No matter how many times Michael takes George Michael go for a new land, the two inevitably gets tangled once again in the chaos that is the Bluth family not only because of a deranged sense of family loyalty that still lingers in Michael no matter how much he wishes to be rid of such a trait, but how he knows that he's the only way these people don't go crazy and kill each other. But as seasons pass, Michael's unpeeled to be just as eccentric, as psychotic, and as maladjusted as anyone of his fellow family members (even Buster). And since Michael is the audience surrogate, the show's major joke is that no one is as sane as they think they are.
TLDR: Koo-koo Ka-cha.
Well, there you go.
Huh. That's the most detailed answer we have in this thread.
I think that's worth a prize.
Speaking of, have the Netflix episodes started yet?
Should be interesting to see how the quality fares compared to a network budget.
I think they're still working on adding in Ron Howard's narration. He recently tweeted a production jacket with a Netflix patch.
Quote from: Avaitor on February 07, 2013, 05:42:12 PM
So, what's the big deal behind Arrested Development? I honestly don't get it.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F24.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_m5v49uSLGE1qiu3clo1_1280.png&hash=088ba18137f33bcd5c66bcb72ce66c3cd1ee95df)
Mr. Toto's old avatar.
Huh.
Quote from: Kiddington on February 04, 2013, 01:35:58 AM
I still don't see the appeal to 30 Rock.
My turn to become analytical!
30 Rock is about the disillusionment of the ever-changing world of television, and uses NBC and GE as whole for a surrogate for how out of date relying on the main 3 networks and the standard tropes of obtaining ratings have become in this day in age, which was especially pertinent at the time, since the show started during the age of Zucker. In an age where cable shows like The Walking Dead are cracking the top rated programs of the season and trending topics on Twitter are becoming legitimate methods to weigh ratings, it's easy to see where they're coming from in the show.
The battles between Liz Lemon and Jack Donaghy have been considered the core of the show, and very much are so. Liz represents the long-suffering creative mind behind television programming, typically left-minded and supposedly thought-provoking, but more often than not, derivative and hypocritical of their own beliefs. Jack meanwhile, is your average right-winged executive who doesn't care about quality but rather money, which is why he pays for low-quality material like MILF Island. They're both portrayed as smart but unsensible people to indicate the idea that both methods of creative running have their advantages, but at the end of the day, balance is needed or you'll go too far in either the side of self-righteous drivel or commercialized pandering, which even the best creative minds have been guilty of reaching both sides in their careers (Pixar, HBO, Kurosawa, etc).
I think Kenneth's character is the most important to this debate, though, as he reflects both sides fairly well. Here we have a country-fried simpleton, not exactly an idiot but certainly naive, whose believes strongly in television and its merits, and seems to want a combination between crowd-pleasing and unmoronic programming, which NBC had been able to great success such as Cheers, Seinfeld, ER and, lest we forget, SNL. Said programs are becoming harder and harder to find, especially as hits, but 30 Rock at least attempted to combine high and low brow humor together, and kept most of it in tune to character. Kenneth's well-meaning agenda rewards him by the end of the show, as he is given the head position of NBC, and takes this job to his advantage.
One of the biggest questions of the show revolves around Kenneth's mortality, as he has hinted in numerous occasions that he is much older than he seems, and we even see him about 90 years in the future still holding onto his position, not aging a day. This article (http://www.overthinkingit.com/2013/02/04/30-rock-immortality-kenneth-parcell/) suggests that Kenneth is immortal and has revitalized himself for numerous generations to remain a page for NBC, being unrecognized by staff members. This supports the theory that Kenneth is meant to be the eternal television fan, one who believes in comedy you can laugh with and drama you can take to heart, and that there will always be supporters of this media.
Not every attempt is especially successful, and 30 Rock has had plenty of lows over its run, but the show has a heart and at least attempts to keep it in its right place.
In other words, here comes the Funcooker!
Fair enough. Good read, by the way.
I suppose one of these days I should give it another once-over, just to see if my opinion changes in any way. It'll be tough, though. I just... I just don't like Tina Fey (as an actress, I should specify; as a writer she's fine). There's that, and the fact that I just wasn't impressed with what I'd seen the first time around.
We'll see.
It's possible that the show isn't for you. That's not a big deal. Nothing is going to please every single person alive, otherwise life would be boring.
I also had more in mind in my post, with Liz representing the modern-age woman (not exactly hidden subtext in the show, though), Kabletown's buying of GE = cable stealing broadcast's thunder, and the dark but uplifting messages the show tries to sell, but oh well.
After thinking about it and seeing the praise throughout these forums, none of these 90s Nickelodeon live-action shows seem as good as I remember them to be at all. The only difference writing-wise between iCarly and Clarissa is that one show uses the word "chillax". I mean, All That's writing was probably the same throughout. It's just that the New Era cast were unfamiliar and just rather unappealing to an audience that was used to seeing Josh Server's face for years on end.
Do you think that you're dimply too old for shows like these? It's no big deal if you are.
Quote from: Avaitor on February 11, 2013, 10:43:15 AM
Do you think that you're dimply too old for shows like these? It's no big deal if you are.
To be fair, aren't we all a bit too old?
Quote from: Dr. Insomniac on February 11, 2013, 10:44:28 AM
Quote from: Avaitor on February 11, 2013, 10:43:15 AM
Do you think that you're dimply too old for shows like these? It's no big deal if you are.
To be fair, aren't we all a bit too old?
I guess, but I like what I like.
I dunno, I can still enjoy Clarissa and Salute Your Shorts. Can't say the same about Power Rangers.
To be honest, I don't think I've ever liked Power Rangers. Even as a kid.
There, I said it.
Quote from: Kiddington on February 11, 2013, 12:34:48 PM
To be honest, I don't think I've ever liked Power Rangers. Even as a kid.
There, I said it.
Same. I could always tell how stupid and badly made it was.
I only vaguely remember watching Lightspeed Rescue and Time Force, and that was more for the theme song and super powers then anything else.
I was one of the typical 90's kids that loved MMPR, but yeah, my interest faded out fast after In Space.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F24.media.tumblr.com%2F04a18497ef87dc3ab6ae24e12c29df5c%2Ftumblr_mhqa2mfPx31r0dkh5o1_500.png&hash=b59ea7a69937bab4d608c048aee373818c583385)
Yeah, a show becomes questionable when even the alumni think it's crap.
Quote from: Kiddington on February 11, 2013, 12:34:48 PM
To be honest, I don't think I've ever liked Power Rangers. Even as a kid.
There, I said it.
I was twelve when it first started, and it aired while I was in school. I think, even then, it was something I would have enjoyed while younger. But it wasn't something I sought out.
Then season of of Power Rangers aired against season two of "Gargoyles" and we all know which show I watched. I know it's petty, but I never quite forgave it for beating "Gargoyles" in the ratings wars.
^Power Rangers also killed Sonic's SatAm incarnation.
I loved Mighty Morphin when I was little, but I already lost interest in it just before they changed to Zeo. I got back into it when Wild Force came on because I thought that season's Zords were cool (and they were) and it reminded me of the original seasons because the mechs were animals again. I fell out again when they went to SPD. I genuinely like Time Force (so much so I rewatched it all on YouTube) and kinda felt SPD would be a poor man's version of it.
I also still like Ninja Storm and Dino Thunder.
I like Power Rangers, but I'm not all too into sentai as a whole so my appreciation for it isn't as high as some.
I am WAITING for Netflix Watch Instant to start picking up classic Nick live-action shows... By that time, they'll have done something stupid like drop the Britcoms or shows I still haven't gotten around to yet (Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Sunny in Philadelphia, How I Met Your Mother, Red Dwarf, Buffy the Vampire Slayer- yes, I am going to re-watch that show sometime in the near future).
Oh yeah... they re-uploaded Coupling... with 5 minutes cut per episode AND curse words censored. I could kick Netflix right now. And I don't mean drop them. Unless you thought that meant over a cliff.
Anyway, weird sideline rant, I want to see if Clarissa is any better or worse than I remember but I just remember enjoying it. And Salute, YCDToT, etc. I don't remember most shows from my childhood being good or bad. Just enjoying them.
And, I freaking loved the Power Rangers when I was a kid. For awhile, there was no pressure on kids where I came from to hate the show. And, I still watch it when I can. Only, I do it entirely in guilty pleasure mode. I know it's terrible now but I adore watching the first 3 seasons (and a little bit of Zeo). And I skip a semi-significant portion of the battle scenes. Because I agree- they all go exactly the same way. Except, I do watch some of the final monster battles. Depending on what monster the Rangers are fighting. You might not believe this but I love different parts of the show for different reasons. It can be tossed a little credit- the costumes, powers, and zords are actually freaking awesome. Still. The monsters are silly and ridiculously easy to defeat but... guess what? I love watching them. I even have favorites (I have been wanting to make a concrete list for some time and for that I'll have to watch the entire first 3 seasons again). I watch the "teens going about their normal lives" portion because Angel Grove doesn't resemble a single recognizable place in America... or maybe on Earth. Which is the opposite of, let's say, wanting to watch something like Pollyanna or Lady and the Tramp because it reminds you of a by-gone era. It's not just that the other high schoolers look anywhere from 30 to 47 years old. Or that all dialogue from almost any extra is dubbed. And that is not a reference to footage of Japanese crowds running carried over from the original Japanese series. The people look fake. Everything everywhere pretty much looks fake. Frankly, people dress like they're from another continent cut off from the rest of civilization and have their television, movies, and music bussed in, ala- The Truman Show. I've never seen another movie or television show that was as freakishly (and compellingly) artificial. Cheap though it may be.
And, if I've never mentioned it here before (I think I mentioned it on UD), the pilot episode of the show went in an extremely different direction. I predict it would have been a legitimately interesting (and maybe even good) show if it had stuck to that formula. I actually laughed. At something they intended to be humorous. (The show as we know it should be infamous for its' abysmal attempts at humor. No, I don't care how many cakes you fall face-first into: it's not funny. Anyone else notice the show had a real Cake Curse? If you ever see one, it will soon be married to Bulk's face. Or, in one episode, Bulk's mother's face.) As a group, the rangers weren't turned into role models or ultra-clean and sparklingly moral dorks. They were just having fun and had to get physical when Bulk's gang showed up and got in their face. Which was also extremely different than on the show we know. Bulk and the people in his gang were much less goofy. The music wasn't full of "wah-wah" horns and lame sound effects. They stormed in and really messed with the rangers. I think it was the original yellow ranger (who was French, I believe, instead of Asian) - whose character's name I don't remember - Bulk or someone really grabbed in closeup and tried to yank away like some kind of RoboCop biker / street criminal. Then the fight scenes were actually really violent. Just the scenes with Bulk's gang. The kicks were real and shown a lot more close or with more impact. Instead of prat falls (or whatever the terms are) and "brain over brawl," Jason, Zack, and the Yellow Ranger character really beat the hell out of Bulk and his gang. For a kids' show. There were a lot more differences. Mostly in terms of style. But the dialogue and characters were written so much more realistically.
I don't know if saying that I never liked Power Rangers as a kid is accurate, I just never really paid attention to it. I watched a lot of Fox Kids in those days, but I remember nine times out of ten I would tune out before the show came on. It just wasn't a big thing for me.
The only real memory I have of anything Power Rangers was my little bro had a Blue Ranger action figure, which not too long after he got it I broke one of the arms off. He was upset about it initially, but he got over it rather quickly.
Oh, and I had this stupid thing at one point in time:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/MINT-VINTAGE-MIGHTY-MORPHIN-POWER-RANGERS-TV-PROJECTOR-BEDSIDE-LIGHT-low-tech-/221185178526?_trksid=p2047675.m1850&_trkparms=aid%3D222002%26algo%3DSIC.FIT%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D11%26meid%3D5857429365041520713%26pid%3D100011%26prg%3D1005%26rk%3D2%26sd%3D221167872096%26
God only knows what happened to it, or why I had it in the first place.
haha
I don't know if I've mentioned this before, but my first crushes as a kid were Kimberly the Pink Ranger and Clarissa Darling. Moreso the characters than the actors themselves, but I do think AJJ and MJH have aged well.
The Young Ones and Spaced are the only funny British TV comedies ever made.
Quote from: Avaitor on March 04, 2013, 06:39:20 PM
The Young Ones and Spaced are the only funny British TV comedies ever made.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg254.imageshack.us%2Fimg254%2F9623%2Fbasilfawlty3ql.jpg&hash=9e544a09a4af30377685e8fa399435bfe34a96a9)
Eh, the only time I've ever found John Cleese funny was when he was on Cheers.
Some things just don't translate to everyone, sorry.
They're in English. Any translation kerfuffles or references everyone won't get come from high-brow sitcoms like Yes, Minister. Otherwise, most Britcoms have humor that's rather accessible. Absolutely Fabulous has two women being awful to everyone else. Fawlty Towers has the absurdity of a man who hates people having to work in an occupation where he's forced to socialize with other people. Father Ted is about priests becoming the very figures that their religion abhors. It's about how conflict results in hilarity.
That's like someone saying, "Hey, I Love Lucy, Frasier, and most other American sitcoms suck because I just don't understand those jokes. Whatevs."
But I just don't find the lot of them funny. That's it. Fine for everyone else, but nothing can appeal to every single person alive.
At least you didn't say the Office.
British comedy, which I freaking love, isn't as laugh-out-loud funny as American comedy but it's typically far more carefully written and often if not usually smarter.
Fawlty Towers is genius. It's a farce though; I can't think of almost anything American that comes close to being similar.
I think my favorite right now is
French and Saunders.
AbFab really is limited to the few seasons, Jennifer Saunders wrote more material for F&S and it's lasted longer. Speaking of laugh-out-loud, this sketch (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unR_ZwAIw1s) gets quite a few good audible laughs out of me. I actually think their sit-down conversation skits are some of the funniest stuff they do.
Quote from: Avaitor on March 04, 2013, 06:52:43 PMEh, the only time I've ever found John Cleese funny was when he was on Cheers.
Cheers is one of the most boring sitcoms in television history.
Quote from: No-Personality on March 10, 2013, 05:59:56 AM
British comedy, which I freaking love, isn't as laugh-out-loud funny as American comedy but it's typically far more carefully written and often if not usually smarter.
I actually find it
more laugh-out-loud funny because of that. ;)
I'm also a bit slower to pick up on it than some.
Kuuga is the only truly great Heisei Kamen Rider.
Quote from: No-Personality on March 10, 2013, 05:59:56 AM
Quote from: Avaitor on March 04, 2013, 06:52:43 PMEh, the only time I've ever found John Cleese funny was when he was on Cheers.
Cheers is one of the most boring sitcoms in television history.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F24.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_m5mlf6TTkI1qdxpbvo6_1280.jpg&hash=c8316412f014ceef2aafac5e50cea60d467b0968)
but yeah, name a show for me to watch after M*A*S*H. Party Down can wait
Zatoichi, the TV series.
I was aiming for a Britcom, actually.
Space Sheriff Shaider is better than every and all toku made in the last 30 years (except Akibaranger and Kuuga).
I watched an episode or two of both Buffy and Angel, and I just couldn't get into either. I liked Firefly though from what I watched of it, though needless to say that's not an unpopular opinion.
I don't like Star Trek. At all.
In fact, this J. Michael Straczynski quote sums it up for me, perfectly.
QuoteAs for the notion that it could use "a little of Trek's humanism," I don't much like the way that's been defined there. Seems to me that that version of "humanism" is placid, unpassionate, orderly and for the most part, with some exceptions, bloodless. To me, humanism means embracing our flaws as well as our nobilities, and saying that we don't have to shed our basic humanity in order to go to the stars, but that we remain *humans*, with all that entails. And we somehow persevere in SPITE of our flaws. I find the process of overcoming more interesting, and more human, than assuming that we've already overcome everything. The kind of humanism you're referring to isn't humanism, by my book. It's "we should all be nice to one another, and nobody should have any problems except the ones forced on us by bad guy aliens"...it's humanity as written by Barney the Dinosaur.
"I suspect this is something a lot of people already knew--people who watched the show when they were older than 15, the age I was when I became a fan, and people who have gone back to it in the intervening years. More than anything else, Babylon 5 is a show for teenagers. The overblown dialogue, the broad humor, the melodramatic plots, the frequent monologues and speeches, and just in general the show's palpable sense of its own profundity must have been irresistible to the teenage set--to viewers looking for something grand and inspiring who weren't too interested in, or capable of, noticing the bad writing and obvious plotting. Who but a teenager, after all, could watch an EarthGov representative, who has just negotiated a non-aggression treaty with the patently evil Centauri, blissfully announce that "we will finally have peace in our time" without rolling their eyes? Who else would put up with entire paragraphs from 1984 being turned into dialogue for Night Watch representatives?"
-- Gene Roddenberry
Quote from: Foggle on May 13, 2013, 11:23:54 PM
"I suspect this is something a lot of people already knew--people who watched the show when they were older than 15, the age I was when I became a fan, and people who have gone back to it in the intervening years. More than anything else, Babylon 5 is a show for teenagers. The overblown dialogue, the broad humor, the melodramatic plots, the frequent monologues and speeches, and just in general the show's palpable sense of its own profundity must have been irresistible to the teenage set--to viewers looking for something grand and inspiring who weren't too interested in, or capable of, noticing the bad writing and obvious plotting. Who but a teenager, after all, could watch an EarthGov representative, who has just negotiated a non-aggression treaty with the patently evil Centauri, blissfully announce that "we will finally have peace in our time" without rolling their eyes? Who else would put up with entire paragraphs from 1984 being turned into dialogue for Night Watch representatives?"
-- Gene Roddenberry
That wasn't a Gene Roddenberry quote. That was a piece of comedy from a blogger.
"And the real plot is, as ever, white dudes being historic. Because Babylon 5 is dominated by white dudes. Let's pause here and note that Babylon 5 is actually one of the most impressively progressive shows of its time in terms of strong female characters and a diverse cast. It really is. But its lead is still a Great White Man of History both times such that the decision to have every single second in command be a woman is frustrating in the extreme. The only one of its three main alien ambassadors to be a woman is the one from the touchy-feely spiritual race. The chief of security position is always male. The station doctor is a man. Its female characters are reliably defined either by how they?re violated and used by men (either of the two main psychics) or rescued by dashing male heroes (Ivanova). And while it's reliably colorblind in its casting, it's colorblind in that frustrating way where they?ll cast any actor as long as the actor plays the part as if the character could just as easily be white. It?s telling that Straczynski freely filled in Ivanova?s Russian background as a major character trait, whereas Dr. Franklin, played by the (African American) Richard Biggs, never gets a single character trait that implies anything about his cultural heritage. And yes, of course this is all filed under the header of "but in the future we'll have eliminated racism," but that's the whole point - racism is eliminated by collapsing every culture into white European culture." - Phil Sandifer, PhD (http://www.philipsandifer.com/2012/11/pop-between-realities-home-in-time-for_21.html)
This is definitely not to say that B5 is a bad show. Not at all. When the series was good, everything could just be full of splendor. But JMS is not an infallible word on humanity, as recent works such as Ninja Assassin can attest.
As for my own unpopular opinion, Babylon 5 only became good after the first-half of the third season, with the fourth season being one of the most pristine pieces of SF storytelling I've seen on television. Payoff was happening in every single episode, while plotlines like the Shadow War were allowed to become as exotic as possible. However, a bad first season, a lukewarm second season, Lochley, the movies, the Lost Tales, and forgotten plot points (Talia, anyone?) mean that I can't really take the "Lightyears Ahead of Anything Else on Television" tagline with any seriousness.
Quote from: GregX on May 14, 2013, 12:11:24 AM
That wasn't a Gene Roddenberry quote. That was a piece of comedy from a blogger.
You don't say. ;D
Quote from: Foggle on May 14, 2013, 05:43:57 AM
Quote from: GregX on May 14, 2013, 12:11:24 AM
That wasn't a Gene Roddenberry quote. That was a piece of comedy from a blogger.
You don't say. ;D
Just wondering why you felt the need to do that. I don't mind the quote, but why attribute it to Roddenberry at all?
Quote from: GregX on May 14, 2013, 07:00:17 PM
Just wondering why you felt the need to do that. I don't mind the quote, but why attribute it to Roddenberry at all?
As a joke. I like Babylon 5, and certainly more than Star Trek.
Quote from: Foggle on May 14, 2013, 07:03:13 PM
Quote from: GregX on May 14, 2013, 07:00:17 PM
Just wondering why you felt the need to do that. I don't mind the quote, but why attribute it to Roddenberry at all?
As a joke. I like Babylon 5, and certainly more than Star Trek.
Ha ha ha! Okay, cool.
Okay... more unpopular opinions....
X-Files sucked. It was cool at first, but the novelty factor wore off really quick.
I've only seen a handful of X-Files episodes, but I do like what I've seen. Mostly stuff from the first few seasons.
X-Files seems like that "used to be really popular, but is now obscure as the boombox" show alongside others like Murphy Brown and Ally McBeal. Can't even remember the last time somebody praised that show.
I think it's a little higher regarded than those in recent years, but that isn't too far off of a comparison.
I also have a feeling that you can lump Lost in with that category in the near future.
You know, I've been talking to a friend about it, and we both seem to agree that Two and a Half Men would have been a better show if Alan wasn't a part of it. At least not in the way he's become in later years.
Charlie Sheen's material actually did have its moments overall, but Jon Cryer isn't on that same level at all, at least not as anything more than a straight man.
And I'm putting it in this thread since it seems to be an unpopular opinion that Men could be anything close to resembling a good show. It's far from perfect, but I do honestly think that the sheen-era episodes had their moments. It's still better than Lorre's other shows at least, unless you count Roseanne.
What are you talking about?
Roseanne sucks.
It's hella better than Big Bang Theory.
ps- Amy is just Sheldon with a vagina. I don't see the appeal of this character at all.
Chuck Lorre wasn't really in charge of Roseanne, though. He was one of many people behind that show.
Quote from: Avaitor on June 01, 2013, 12:32:19 PM
ps- Amy is just Sheldon with a vagina. I don't see the appeal of this character at all.
Your first sentence is the appeal.
That's why they're so perfect for each other. :blush:
Originally, Amy Farrah Fowler was basically Sheldon with 2 x chromosomes. The only other way that Amy was different from Sheldon was that she didn't share Sheldon's love for science fiction, so I can understand why the producers felt it necessary to alter Amy's character somewhat when she became a regular. The only thing that I don't particularly like about Amy is how she's now continually trying to force Sheldon into having a physical relationship with her. I like that Sheldon has zero desire to pursue a physical relationship with anyone. Asexual characters on TV shows are very rare. I'm an aromantic asexual, so it's a nice change of pace to see someone on TV who shares my own view on physical intimacy. I don't want to see Amy written off of the show, and it would be pretty cold hearted to just "leave her hanging" as it were, but at the same time, I'd hate to see Sheldon become a "regular guy" in a regular relationship, as that would ruin the character for me.
Quote from: Kiddington on May 31, 2013, 11:34:21 PM
What are you talking about?
Roseanne sucks.
Hell no, Roseanne is great.
Quote from: Comeau on June 04, 2013, 12:24:31 PM
Quote from: Kiddington on May 31, 2013, 11:34:21 PM
What are you talking about?
Roseanne sucks.
Hell no, Roseanne is great.
Final season aside, you mean? ;)
Quote from: Comeau on June 04, 2013, 12:24:31 PMHell no, Roseanne is great.
^ This.
Don't make me give the same speeches as I used to on Ultimate-Disney,
Roseanne is in my opinion easily one of the greatest television shows ever broadcast. And is, in fact, a superb television series. It did suffer from inconsistency throughout the first 3 and final 4 seasons, which didn't even cripple the show- it merely trivialized chunks of a given episode, but was always (except for season 9) a far smarter, funnier, better executed family sitcom than anything else. Not only were characters intelligently written and it remains an iconic, progressive work for the representation of gays, blue collar black families, and modern day feminism when their competition thought the definition of harmony between the sexes was for its "Tool Man" to apologize on national TV for doing the same stupid things to his wife day after day, showing he never learned a damn thing (which shows he had about as much respect for his wife as he did for her friends- all of whom I seem to remember he hated and mocked for really bad jokes). It excelled in often stunningly even-handed and solid debates between parents and children, and spot-on rendering of stupid socio-political points of view.
It also knew how to tap into what it feels like to be an abused, neglected employee, mother, father, teenager, minority, etc. It clearly drew real life inspiration from victims of domestic abuse because I see serious parallels between Roseanne's family (the family she was the daughter in, the Harris's) and my own. I can tell you for a fact this is THE ONLY show I've seen where it got exactly what it feels like and then shot it like it was giving people a moment to honestly express their true thoughts and feelings. People forget this all the time but almost no sitcoms really take the time to let a character speak from a place of vulnerability or pain. This show did it every 3-5 or so episodes, given the season. Every episode gave someone the time to at least speak their mind clearly. And even then, it was a point of view real people have. That's why the show was so important. There are endless moments I could refer to that prove why the show is as good as it is. Even just reactions or phrasings or pauses that characters/actors had with/to a line that put the show SO FAR above average. The show also had a real knack for covering topics no other show would cover. I'm actually referring to stuff like gross-out comic books and riot grrrl bands. Imagine my surprise when Daisy Chainsaw (the band Darlene and Molly went to see in Season 5's "Good Girls, Bad Girls") actually turned out to be a real band.
I really hope that Walking Dead becomes the next Lost- the sci-fi alternative to the better drama alternatives which quickly gets forgotten after it ends.
As you can tell, I really don't care for either show.
I don't mind when shows I don't care for become popular except when everyone you know won't talk about anything else except said show.
In that way it was kind of nice that Heroes went bad so I didn't have to hear about it all the time.
Quote from: Avaitor on July 09, 2013, 03:28:59 PM
I really hope that Walking Dead becomes the next Lost- the sci-fi alternative to the better drama alternatives which quickly gets forgotten after it ends.
As you can tell, I really don't care for either show.
I think both Lost and Walking Dead are awesome. :P
Also, not sure how unpopular this opinion is but I think Curb Your Enthusiasm is funnier than Seinfeld was.
Curb's pretty good, but too much for me to handle sometimes. Half the time I feel like Larry should just go on a violent rampage towards the people he deals with, while the other half I feel like he should be killed himself.
Yeah, it's like Seinfeld cranked up to 11 without any downtime. I got burnt out on it pretty fast.
I despise The Walking Dead. Of course, that's because the people who love it love it as a drama and I hate it because it's more of this push for MUST BE REALISTIC TO BE HORRIFIC b.s. which has killed horror. It's forced, unoriginal, overused beyond the point of defense, and not the slightest bit creative.
The comics do just that right.
One weird thing I've learned about the internet is that this is pretty much the only place where you can find people who don't like Friends.
Ugh I remember back in high school I was the only one who didn't want to watch it in class.
Quote from: Avaitor on September 04, 2013, 06:28:17 PM
One weird thing I've learned about the internet is that this is pretty much the only place where you can find people who don't like Friends.
Quoting for truth.
It really seems to be such a crime to most everyone to not like this show. Why, I'll never know.
I think Friends is a good show, but wasn't great enough to justify it's enormous fanbase and critical praise when it was originally airing, which is why a lot of people who don't care for the show hold it in a stronger negative light than they would have otherwise (this seems to be a case with the detractors of a lot of popular, overrated shows, from my experience at least). I myself like Friends, but when people call it the best or funniest show ever or something, I do get a little irritated. I gotta say, though, even on the internet, it's kinda hard to find people who legitimately do not like Friends, especially people with a reasonable opinion as to why. :sweat:
This Animaniacs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TILSsO8QiTY) parody of Friends kinda sums up what's not good and what people who don't like the show don't like it for. I always get a laugh out of it. :il_hahaha:
Quote from: Cartoon X on October 13, 2013, 01:22:48 PM
I think Friends is a good show, but wasn't great enough to justify it's enormous fanbase and critical praise when it was originally airing, which is why a lot of people who don't care for the show hold it in a stronger negative light than they would have otherwise (this seems to be a case with the detractors of a lot of popular, overrated shows, from my experience at least). I myself like Friends, but when people call it the best or funniest show ever or something, I do get a little irritated. I gotta say, though, even on the internet, it's kinda hard to find people who legitimately do not like Friends, especially people with a reasonable opinion as to why. :sweat:
This Animaniacs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TILSsO8QiTY) parody of Friends kinda sums up what's not good and what people who don't like the show don't like it for. I always get a laugh out of it. :il_hahaha:
I might have to watch that episode of Animaniacs.
Quote from: gunswordfist on October 13, 2013, 01:50:47 PM
Quote from: Cartoon X on October 13, 2013, 01:22:48 PM
I think Friends is a good show, but wasn't great enough to justify it's enormous fanbase and critical praise when it was originally airing, which is why a lot of people who don't care for the show hold it in a stronger negative light than they would have otherwise (this seems to be a case with the detractors of a lot of popular, overrated shows, from my experience at least). I myself like Friends, but when people call it the best or funniest show ever or something, I do get a little irritated. I gotta say, though, even on the internet, it's kinda hard to find people who legitimately do not like Friends, especially people with a reasonable opinion as to why. :sweat:
This Animaniacs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TILSsO8QiTY) parody of Friends kinda sums up what's not good and what people who don't like the show don't like it for. I always get a laugh out of it. :il_hahaha:
I might have to watch that episode of Animaniacs.
Here you go. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TILSsO8QiTY)
But honestly, Friends isn't even a bad show. It's certainly better than basically all of the lesser, forgotten clones of it and Seinfeld that NBC had air next to them back in the day (although you could argue that Friends was a Seinfeld clone that got it make it through and became its own thing in no time), and the earlier seasons has some strong gags and great episodes. I just feel like watching repeats of it has lessened its entertainment value for me in a way that hasn't happened for a lot of other comedies, and its flaws are very apparent. The cast never really felt like friends, especially when you could tell that they were getting tired of the show by the end, a lot of relationship storylines never came off as much of anything but filler, and the only one with good character moments beyond simple love woes was Phoebe.
Again, not a bad show, but why this is the one series that people my age continue to gravitate to baffles me. And if someone brings it up, I've actually talked to Spark about it before, and we both seem to agree that HIMYM is a case where the student as surpassed the master.
HIMYM takes the Friends formula and does it better in every way, yes.
My biggest issue is that Friends has always been scatter-shot at best to me, and frustrating at worst. Having so many main characters is a good idea, but it doesn't help when they're marketed as young people growing up who stay constantly static. It leads to repetitive jokes and stale plots that get reused. Seinfeld succeeded at it because it was just marketed as a shallow comedy- nobody goes to Seinfeld for anything except a laugh. Friends gets talked about so much because of the relationships- not the comedy. Being that it's a sitcom it's a bit of a weakness because the relationships are completely static and never really change.
I don't loathe Friends as much as I do Dharma & Greg and Will & Grace ("unfunny stereotypes are funny if we repeat them without adding anything to the jokes!") which are entirely un-enjoyable for failing on a base level of simply not being funny at all. Friends is basically a good idea that doesn't really go anywhere and for that I just find it average.
But I still never fail to change the channel when it comes on.
Quote from: Avaitor on September 04, 2013, 06:28:17 PMOne weird thing I've learned about the internet is that this is pretty much the only place where you can find people who don't like Friends.
I replied to this on Facebook but I have nothing special against the show. Mostly because I remain out of the loop- I almost never actually watch it and I feel like if I don't rewatch things every now and then, I lose perspective. But when I did watch it, I pretty much knew it was simple comfort television. Like a "hip"
Cheers for the 90's with "20-somethings" (not sure how much that's stretching things). Though I always felt the writing was lousy. I mean, it was like
Seinfeld in a way - the characters were similarly fairly-unlikable people - with no bite to it. So, it was trendier. Light characterization. Not like
Seinfeld, which was more classic and deep into layered comedic concepts and heavy characterization. For my money, I'd rather watch
That 70's Show which felt a little like a goofier
Friends with teens (played by Real 20-somethings...and Mila Kunis, who WAS a teen). Well, rather watch that than
Friends is what I mean.
Quote from: Cartoon X on October 13, 2013, 01:22:48 PMThis Animaniacs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TILSsO8QiTY) parody of Friends kinda sums up what's not good and what people who don't like the show don't like it for. I always get a laugh out of it. :il_hahaha:
Oooh, no: Avaitor knows how I feel about that parody. It's a perfect example of hating what you're spoofing rather than loving the jokes you get out of it. It's a really nasty, mean-spirited short. I find it extremely unfunny and tasteless. And, again, I don't even care about
Friends. Especially the Monica jokes. I mean, they're not even jokes. It's just:
you're terrified of being fat, now - poof - you're fat, bitch. Happy now? It doesn't even make sense, what's their beef? That the women in the cast are thin? Furthermore, it makes me dislike the Warners. A lot.
Quote from: Spark Of Spirit on October 14, 2013, 05:13:51 PMI don't loathe Friends as much as I do Dharma & Greg and Will & Grace ("unfunny stereotypes are funny if we repeat them without adding anything to the jokes!") which are entirely un-enjoyable for failing on a base level of simply not being funny at all.
Actually, I find the writing on
Will & Grace top-notch. The dialogue is extremely clever, the side characters and cameos are usually made of pure gold, and... it's a viewer-cliche but, the women rule on that show. I had the Will and Jack problems after just a few episodes with them but after really watching the show (I own the first 4 seasons and have rewatched them countless times), I find that other people's problems with the characters are kind of stupid. It is actually woven right into the show that any character who gets significant screentime is generally not very successful. It's a classic formula: that humor comes from consummate screw-ups. There's also a little
Seinfeld influence here: almost every quirky situation the characters get into ends oddly or badly, the only difference being the fact that they laugh it off at the end. I could come up with a list of these ironic, twisty storylines that end badly because the characters were the same kind of idiots that the
Seinfeld'ers were. Especially with Grace. Who is a fantastic character, by the way. If you pay attention. There's a lot of stuff you learn about her that makes her extremely likable, given again the fact that the show is yet another quirky 90's comedy about unapologetically selfish, superficial attractive trendy people. (In a city.) But, frankly, I find the characters interesting. And I firmly believe the show extended beyond stereotypes.
Daryl Dixon is one of the lamest excuses for a badass in all of media.
Discuss.
Quote from: Avaitor on November 30, 2013, 07:03:35 PM
Daryl Dixon is one of the lamest excuses for a badass in all of media.
Discuss.
I would discuss if he was even intended to be the show's badass. But alas. .3.
Oh, I got him confused with Rick.
Every character in that show sucks though.
Quote from: Avaitor on December 10, 2013, 08:23:08 PM
Oh, I got him confused with Rick.
Every character in that show sucks though.
I disagree with everything about this post. Expect me to knock at your door tomorrow afternoon with a sharp object. I'll give you some time to run for now.
I don't really like "The Contest". Maybe it's just been the effect of 20 years of masturbation jokes since, but the episode just doesn't feel that fresh anymore, especially compared to other Seinfeld episodes.
Although I definitely give it credit for introducing George's mom. Their bits together easily made for some of the highlights of the episode.
Quote from: talonmalon333 on December 10, 2013, 08:28:43 PM
Quote from: Avaitor on December 10, 2013, 08:23:08 PM
Oh, I got him confused with Rick.
Every character in that show sucks though.
I disagree with everything about this post. Expect me to knock at your door tomorrow afternoon with a sharp object. I'll give you some time to run for now.
Wait, you actually like The Walking Dead?
Quote from: gunswordfist on February 17, 2014, 10:25:56 PM
Quote from: talonmalon333 on December 10, 2013, 08:28:43 PM
Quote from: Avaitor on December 10, 2013, 08:23:08 PM
Oh, I got him confused with Rick.
Every character in that show sucks though.
I disagree with everything about this post. Expect me to knock at your door tomorrow afternoon with a sharp object. I'll give you some time to run for now.
Wait, you actually like The Walking Dead?
You can't tell that's what I was getting at in that post from months ago?
Is that a no? :sly:
Just to clear things up for the idiot of Animation Revelation, yes I do like The Walking Dead television series. I like how it's essentially a drama with zombies in it, and not a mere zombie show, in that it creates an apocalypse and focuses on how the people deal with the situation. The zombies are really just a plot device for that.
Though it's not perfect. There are a few characters in it that make me want to jump into a river, and I feel as if the writers sometimes struggle with writing female characters in general. But at the very least, all of the characters I initially disliked have either been killed off, or have grown into better characters.
So yeah, I think it's one of the better shows currently on television. And I post this quote in response to anything else. :P
Quote from: talonmalon333 on December 12, 2013, 12:25:33 PM
Quote from: Avaitor on December 12, 2013, 09:50:27 AM
Quote from: talonmalon333 on December 11, 2013, 11:18:16 PM
I suppose that's an unpopular opinion on this site, by far.
Yeah, it really is.
And I will never change it.
I'm too spoiled by good Whedon (ie- not S.H.I.E.L.D.) and Game of Thrones to be able to tolerate TWD.
Meh. different strokes (https://animationrevelation.com/DifferentStrokes.jpg) for different blokes. I'll say, at the very least, season 1 did very little for me.
I was disappointed when I heard S.H.I.E.L.D is apparently just mediocre. Was considering checking it out.
Quote from: talonmalon333 on February 18, 2014, 12:37:59 PM
Meh. different strokes (https://animationrevelation.com/DifferentStrokes.jpg) for different blokes. I'll say, at the very least, season 1 did very little for me.
(https://animationrevelation.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg2-2.timeinc.net%2Few%2Fdynamic%2Fimgs%2F100629%2FDifferent-Strokes-Horton_300.jpg&hash=c00a43a75ceb521c86d1535806d98ba4237740e4)
Quote from: talonmalon333 on February 18, 2014, 12:16:51 PM
Just to clear things up for the idiot of Animation Revelation, yes I do like The Walking Dead television series. I like how it's essentially a drama with zombies in it, and not a mere zombie show, in that it creates an apocalypse and focuses on how the people deal with the situation. The zombies are really just a plot device for that.
Though it's not perfect. There are a few characters in it that make me want to jump into a river, and I feel as if the writers sometimes struggle with writing female characters in general. But at the very least, all of the characters I initially disliked have either been killed off, or have grown into better characters.
So yeah, I think it's one of the better shows currently on television. And I post this quote in response to anything else. :P
Quote from: talonmalon333 on December 12, 2013, 12:25:33 PM
Quote from: Avaitor on December 12, 2013, 09:50:27 AM
Quote from: talonmalon333 on December 11, 2013, 11:18:16 PM
I suppose that's an unpopular opinion on this site, by far.
Yeah, it really is.
And I will never change it.
I'm no longer the village idiot after hearing this.
Quote from: Avaitor on February 18, 2014, 12:32:16 PM
I'm too spoiled by good Whedon (ie- not S.H.I.E.L.D.) and Game of Thrones to be able to tolerate TWD.
You don't even need to be spoiled by Whedon. Having contact with mid-level shows like 24 should make The Walking Dead unwatchable. Everything good talon said about TWD (namely, it's not about the zombies but the people) is done infinitely better by the actually good comic books. Good read those instead. :thinkin:
You can't say that immedietely after posting this:
Quote from: gunswordfist on February 18, 2014, 02:24:50 PM
I love watching shows people have a mixed opinion on and then forming my opinion to share.
It sets you up for punishment. If anything, you've strengthened your title as "village idiot" by doing that and trying to write off my legitimate post simply because it doesn't like up with your thoughts. :humhumhum:
The Walking Dead makes Lost look like The Wire, bitch. :sly:
Lost makes everything look like garbage, so what's your point, moron?
So, I take it that you still haven't seen Breaking Bad yet?
Quote from: Ensatsu-ken on February 18, 2014, 09:37:31 PM
So, I take it that you still haven't seen Breaking Bad yet?
Not yet. Also, I wasn't serious about saying every show is bad compared to Lost. ;)
Yeah, you better clarify your last statement, feeb.
Quote from: talonmalon333 on February 18, 2014, 12:16:51 PMI like how it's essentially a drama with zombies in it, and not a mere zombie show, in that it creates an apocalypse and focuses on how the people deal with the situation. The zombies are really just a plot device for that.
I'm sorry but it's not like that's a big deal. I admit, it's been a winning formula and that makes it relevant but it's nowhere near revolutionary as a concept. People can slap any old thing they want to on television and call it drama. Look at the insane overload of cop-detective shows and most of what passes for drama on them. Drama is not highly valued by producers and writers. As a genre, in fact, even beyond television- I think drama has always been an insanely difficult thing for anyone to create. So, it winds up being a tone rather than a sense of striking depth or meaning in the actual written material. And I don't believe
Walking Dead is the beaming beacon of hope that now finally shatters that theory / pattern. Even on television.
Furthermore, I have found everything I've come into contact with on that show to have been fairly cheap, routine, or something I would have expected if I'd written a list of what I might see before I sat down to watch it. Hence why I can say with all confidence I hate this show, even if it's easily one of the better programs. (Again, the cop-detective shows... yes, there are shows worth hating a lot more. This one bothers me more because they can't deliver horror beyond their synthetic concept of what that actually is.)
NP, even tried the comics?
There are plenty of good shows out there. Most of them are on cable or streaming elsewhere and some of those are imports, but even the networks have good shows. It saddens me that the two series people seem to enjoy the most is a boring, stupid show about zombies with poorly written characters and disappointing action, and a show starring an awful caricature of a 30-year-old man with aspergers man with jokes that Leno would groan at.
What's "the other show"? I never keep up with modern shows because I feel like an idiot flocking to them and usually I'm right about how they aren't worth the time.
Quote from: gunswordfist on February 19, 2014, 03:46:16 PM
What's "the other show"? I never keep up with modern shows because I feel like an idiot flocking to them and usually I'm right about how they aren't worth the time.
BAZINGA!
Quote from: gunswordfist on February 19, 2014, 02:54:24 PMNP, even tried the comics?
You will never find anyone more ignorant than me when it comes to comic books. And newspaper strips.
:D You should give Volume 1 a try. I'm not the biggest comic book fan in the real but TWD is my favorite still running series. It's basically everything you wish the tv show did right, imo.
-I don't agree with the notion that Angel is a better show than Buffy.
-Speaking of Angel, I personally love the finale, which fit the show better than an abrupt happy ending would have.
-I don't personally get why people think of season 1 of Breaking Bad as a weak link. Personally, I was into it from the start, and the writing and acting still hold up just fine.
-Arrow, IMO, is the best comic book show currently airing. I don't much care for TWD, personally, since I feel like it doesn't really capture what makes the comic book series so great.
-I don't agree with the people who say that HBO should put Game of Thrones on hiatus until Martin finishes the book series. For one thing, that'll probably take AT LEAST another decade. And on top of that, the show has already taken so many liberties from the books as it is, yet has still remained just as good, so I trust the writers to move the show in their own direction and come up with their own ending.
-Speaking of HBO, I was disappointed that nothing ever came of Guillermo Del Toro's pitch for Monster to them. A lot of fans seem to believe that it should only remain as a manga and anime, but it's a great story, first and foremost, and I personally love the idea of it being opened up for a wider audience to experience, much like what Edge of Tomorrow did for the novel All You Need Is Kill (though unfortunately it didn't perform well despite praise from critics). Personally, I still kind of hope that Del Toro continues to pursue this project in the future.
things i've said before:
the walking dead is a terrible, terrible show unless it got super better after i gave up on it after less than 10 episodes into it.
monster could/would make a great live action series. the anime practically seems like one in animated form (if that makes any sense, which it shouldn't lol)
As I've been plowing through Monster again, I do think it could successfully work as a 3 season HBO endeavor, provided that it has the right staff involved, of course.
But I mean, it's Del Toro. About 3/4 of what he plans never makes it through development. Maybe someone else can take the property from him soon.
Speaking of retiring contracts, now that Universal (I think that's who had it?) lost their chance to make a Y: The Last Man movie, I think that it would make for a great TV series, either on HBO or Netflix. I hope Brian K. Vaughan agrees with me.
i'm scared to read that comic.
Monster could be done, but after re-reading the third volume omnibus (which technically covers up to volume 6 . . . out of 18, mind) and it only just reaches Munich. I'm not certain three seasons is the way to go since the material in the first three omnibuses is basically two seasons worth of material alone. You could trim a lot of the side-stories, but then you would instantly have an inferior adaption as the side-stories in Monster are all excellent and add tremendously to the world and the characters. The challenge would be adding to the story, which I'm not certain could be done considering how tightly Urasawa weaved everything together.
I also think Arrow is the best comic book adaption currently airing. I also think it improves on the comics in a few key ways, but I also think a lot of comic book adaptions blow away the source material.
It's hard to imagine how any adaption of Monster could add or improve on the series when everything in it is already so well-crafted and tight. I'm sure it can be done, but I'm not sure exactly how. At any rate, it would definitely need more than three seasons to tell the story properly.
I think you guys are assuming that a live-action show would move at the same pace as the anime. First of all, live-action covers material much faster than an anime would, especially with hour-long episodes as opposed to a half-hour. If the anime covered the story in 74 episodes, you could definitely fit it into 3 seasons worth of hour-long episodes, at about 12 or 13 episodes per season.
To be honest, I think they could easily do a full, unabridged adaptation of Monster in about 25 HBO-length episodes. Seriously, the anime's full 74 episode run is about 30 HBO episodes' worth of content, and the pacing in that was a bit slow at times compared to the manga.
For another point of reference, take Game of Thrones. A Song of Ice and Fire has 5 books out that range from 600-1,000 pages per book. Needless to say, it's A LOT longer than Monster is, and HBO will not only catch up to it, but will outright be passing it this season and going in its own direction, and that's in less than 50 episodes. Granted that, they did cut out a lot of backstory, but it's still an incredibly fast pace if you actually consider how much story has already been covered in 40 episodes alone (plus they've added in a lot of stuff as well).
Comparatively, Monster is a much more streamlined story and has less characters to deal with. It could definitely be adapted in just 3 seasons.
did i say human target is my favorite comic book live action tv show adaptation yet?
The general consensus on Dexter is that seasons 1-4 are great and that seasons 5-8 are mediocre to bad.
On the one hand, I actually enjoyed the latter seasons (except for season 6....that was just bad), but on the other hand, I never really found the first four seasons, despite being better, to he that great to begin with. The show on the whole, to me, was entertaining, but also incredibly stupid and repetitive in many ways, if that makes any sense. I mean, how the hell could none of his coworkers or family find out that he was serial-killer with the insane trail of obvious clues that he would have left behind?
That said, the show is still entertaining in that it's sort of like a dark version of Monk (if Monk killed the perpetrator after solving the crime), except Monk was a "fun" show that didn't take itself that seriously, whereas Dexter does, but the wtiting isn't really up to snuff, so it's not really a great show.
On another note, I'm loving Arrow's third season, and most of the people complaining about it make no sense.
On a third note, Agent Carter is a great show and deserves a renewal. I feel a bit saddened that something like AOS gets more viewership.
On a fourth note, I feel that Game of Thrones as a show works better the further away it gets from the novels. I love the books, but they work in a way that only literature can. The original story is too large and complex to translate well to a filmed medium, so as GOT has been becoming more of its own show and less of an adaptation of the source matetial, it has been improving in quality as a show.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 16, 2015, 11:50:55 PM
The general consensus on Dexter is that seasons 1-4 are great and that seasons 5-8 are mediocre to bad.
On the one hand, I actually enjoyed the latter seasons (except for season 6....that was just bad), but on the other hand, I never really found the first four seasons, despite being better, to he that great to begin with. The show on the whole, to me, was entertaining, but also incredibly stupid and repetitive in many ways, if that makes any sense. I mean, how the hell could none of his coworkers or family find out that he was serial-killer with the insane trail of obvious clues that he would have left behind?
This bothers me a lot more than it does most people. I don't consider it a bad show, but this just grates on my nerves.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 16, 2015, 11:50:55 PMOn another note, I'm loving Arrow's third season, and most of the people complaining about it make no sense.
Too much drama seems to be the number one complaint. Yeah, I don't get it either. On the other hand the recent season has shaken up the status quo on the show really hard. I find it really hard to argue they are running out of ideas or clever moves when they've managed to keep it going all season without a single stumble.
Quote from: Dr. Ensatsu-ken on April 16, 2015, 11:50:55 PMOn a third note, Agent Carter is a great show and deserves a renewal. I feel a bit saddened that something like AOS gets more viewership.
I'd be fine with getting a miniseries every now and then, but I don't think it necessarily needs an ongoing series. AoS getting a spin-off probably means they're going to wipe the slate clean and start from scratch since I don't think it'll get renewed.
I agree about Dexter. Hence why I said that even at its best, I still couldn't consider it to be a great show. It was just too ridiculous to see him get so much done yet go completely unnoticed by the authorities or his close friends or even his own sister for six whole seasons. It got to the point of being unintentionally hilarious.
As for Agent Carter, I just love the character, as well as Jarvis, and feel that there are just more fun adventures that they can go on. Each season can be like a mini-series featuring a new exciting story from that era that also helps to expand and flesh out the MCU history and mythos. I'd be up for it.
-Sepinwall is dead-on about calling House of Cards "a bad USA Network show tying to disguise itself as a good HBO show". I can't stand it.
-While Orange is the New Black is Netflix's trump card, it has the very likely ability to become too odd, and as such lose its likability. There were a couple of points in season 2 that showed signs of such.
-Orphan Black isn't the best-written show on TV, but it's the best acted. And not just because of Tatiana Maslany.
-The Americans, however, is the best of everything, It deserves all the awards.
-I feel that the reason Mad Men has difficulty catching on with a casual audience the same way that most of the other prestige series is its lack of a pretense of action. Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, The Wire, The Sopranos, these can be pretty slow themselves, but someone gets shot or stabbed in almost every episode. In Mad Men, uh, Roger and Joan got mugged once, and there was that one fist fight between Lane and Pete, but to a lot of people, the show is just men in suits discussing business.
-The complaint about Arrow that holds the most weight is that it's too trigger happy with its female characters. Otherwise, I can't agree with the lion's share.
I've only seen the first 3 episodes of House of Cards, and I really liked what I saw, personally, but it's hardly enough to judge the show on.
I most commonly hear people say that the show is great until the main character actually gains significant political power, after which point he inexplicably starts acting incompetent, but like I said, I can't judge it for myself until I see it all.