The TV and Streaming Thread: Summer Re-reruns (it's always summer somewhere)

[Hurlshort]

12 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

I keep wanting to watch Its Always Sunny in Philadelphia but then I see it has 15 seasons and it takes the wind out of my sails. Aint nobody got no time to catch up 15 seasons.  

The seasons are all fairly short, as are the episodes. It's easily my favorite comedy. I've rewatched quite a few seasons.

[Lexx]

I wasn't able to make it through the first season. I just can't with those people, they infuriate me. It's a shame, because some of the episodes are absolutely epic.

Edited March 9, 2023 by Lexx

[uuuhhii]

tried to watch early season of always sunny and feel a little weak

new season are decent but leave little memory after a few month

[Lexx]

Kept watching s3 of Stargate SG-1. I completely forgot that every other planet is covered in canadian forest.

[Amentep]

16 hours ago, LadyCrimson said:

I tried to watch Psych once. Felt too sitcom-y for me maybe or I wasn't in the mood. I might try again someday. There's also the comedic series Chuck, which someone I know loved but I never got around to trying, tho I do know who Z. Levi is because of clips and his VA role in Tangled was great/fun.

Nearing the end of season1 The Mentalist. Still liking the rewatch, both with full attention/TV and as something to have on while cooking etc.

I hated Psych's pilot episode.  I thought Shawn was a terrible person and was in no way interestetd in his adventures.  I was pursuaded to watch more, and thought it improved a good bit, but a lot of the fun of the show is the humor, rather than the mysteries, IMO.

[LadyCrimson]

^ I think I lost most of my ability to find what many TV/films billed as comedies think is humorous, back in the early 90's.

[Bartimaeus]

5 hours ago, Amentep said:

I hated Psych's pilot episode.  I thought Shawn was a terrible person and was in no way interestetd in his adventures.  I was pursuaded to watch more, and thought it improved a good bit, but a lot of the fun of the show is the humor, rather than the mysteries, IMO.

Like most shows of its type, the plots of each episode are largely just a vehicle for the characters and humor. If you hate the characters, you should loathe the show. Don't really see it being any different compared to something like Monk, Sherlock, or any other investigative/procedural show. Well, Sherlock doesn't really even pretend to have any investigative stuff, as all of the actual work and "deduction" either happens off-screen or devolves into almost literal omniscient wizardry on the part of the titular character, but that just means even more that you need to love the characters for it to work.

Edited March 9, 2023 by Bartimaeus

[Amentep]

I didn't like Serlock, and Monk's first season was its best.

[uuuhhii]

sherlock was pretty bad

much prefer elementary

[Bartimaeus]

If I had enjoyed the characters and their dynamics, I'm sure that I could've overlooked that Sherlock was made by people who either A. didn't know how intelligent people actually problem solve and deduct things, instead believing it to essentially be a magic power, or B. did know but decided the aforementioned portrayal made for more exciting television. Either the creators are stupid or think their audience is (and it's especially grating given that this runs completely contrary to the spirit of being a Sherlock Holmes adaptation), but really, I just didn't like the characters, so...forgiving that was impossible. Characters you consistently like and/or care about trump most everything else for multiple season TV series that want to attract a loyal audience.

Edited March 10, 2023 by Bartimaeus

[Zoraptor]

Not a massive fan of Sherlock*, but I actually thought the communication of thought process was fine. The fundamental problem is similar to trying to communicate synaethesia to someone who doesn't have it, ie how can you portray someone who 'sees' colours when hearing music? vs how do you portray someone with savant like deduction skills to someone who doesn't have them? However you portray it it will look odd because to a 'normal' person it is odd.

I always find the hating characters thing to be interesting because for me it's only an issue if they're also badly written, otherwise love a good villain protagonist. In particular, I'm kind of baffled by the people who insist Walter White or Tony Soprano are good people just because they're the protagonist and are well written, and constantly make excuses for them on that basis...

*like most Stephen Moffat series** its ability to maintain a plausible story got progressively less as time went on, and his version of the Reichenbach Falls was the epitome of seems very good on first viewing, but was an utterly awful idea in hindsight.

**and a lot of other similar British series to be fair to him; eg Luther and even, eventually, Line of Duty.

[Bartimaeus]

54 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

I always find the hating characters thing to be interesting because for me it's only an issue if they're also badly written, otherwise love a good villain protagonist. In particular, I'm kind of baffled by the people who insist Walter White or Tony Soprano are good people just because they're the protagonist and are well written, and constantly make excuses for them on that basis...

"Liking" and "caring about" a character can both come in many shapes and sizes, IMO: there are many favorite characters of mine from media that I would not want to know in the event of them being real people, both good and terrible, both protagonist and antagonist. There is definitely something to be said about a character being written (and acted if applicable) genuinely well that can help overcome initial impressions, but there are still a few particular character archetypes that I would just rather never see in any media again ever, and there are also a few that I am especially prone to automatically taking a liking for as well. Shows like Sherlock and Psych have "strong" characters - in the sense that they make who and what they're about pretty clear from the get-go (often thanks to them being quite exaggerated and ridiculous by the standards of typical real life people) so if your immediate impression is "these guys are the worst", you should probably get out pretty quickly. With slower and more serious entertainment, it's likely to be harder to immediately discern...but if you have characters whom I have some manner of immediate positive impression towards, then I am much more likely to stick around to see you try to fully bake them versus characters I want to shove under the nearest bus.

Edited March 10, 2023 by Bartimaeus

[LadyCrimson]

I still love the first season of BBC's Sherlock. And that's as someone who's a fairly big nerd re: the original written stories. But it did go downhill quickly, even if it still had some good moments here and there and what they did with Moriarty was ... interesting. Elementary on the other hand - wasn't awful as a show itself, but the lead's interpretation didn't feel like the chr. Sherlock Holmes to me at all, not even in vague spirit. I didn't watch more than a few episodes I think.

My favorite not-named-Sherlock fictional US TV series "genius/slightly unhinged" detective was probably Vincent D'Onofrio in Law and Order: Criminal Intent. At least the first two or three seasons. I didn't watch much past that and I think Vincent became less prominent with shifting/different detective team leader/multi-actor focus and stuff.

[Lexx]

Oh, a new Picard episode is out!

Spoiler

 

 

[BruceVC]

I am watching several series that include
 

• Animal Kingdom S6 : Excellent crime drama about a family who are unrepentant criminals and fund their entire lifestyles from one job to another
• SWAT S5: A police drama about a well trained SWAT team in LA, its not bad. Its got some woke themes but its not overdone
• Yellowstone S2: All the seasons are now in SA. Its excellent, Kevin Costner is brilliant and I love the whole cowboy Montana lifestyle
• Power S4: A crime drama about a black gangster in NY, its similar to other crime drama stories with drug dealings and how various criminal gangs interact and work together. Its very entertaining

[LadyCrimson]

@Bartimaeus I'm curious what those archetypes that you tend to dislike, are.

I know a few archetypes that I tend to gravitate to (methodical, intense, and/or logical/rational, Spock, Data, Sherlock, certain villains), but if I almost immediately dislike a character it's usually because of something like "ugh, they remind me of someone I knew irl that I couldn't stand" and I can't disassociate, vs. an actual archetype. Or any character like this one (male, female, child, don't care, can't stand it):  Edit: I'm not sure if that's a true archetype or more a director's direction, thing.

 

Edited March 10, 2023 by LadyCrimson

[majestic]

9 hours ago, Lexx said:

Oh, a new Picard episode is out!

  Hide contents

 

 

Can't believe they're still "cautiously optimistic" after the last three really badly paced and badly paced episodes. Did I mention the pacing was terrible? More than anything else, they had three full episodes, almost three hours of Star Trek Picard, and the content of a 42 minute TNG episode for it, filled up with mostly pointless scenes on a dark, dreary ship, with character motivations that make no sense or are just rehashes.

Edited March 10, 2023 by majestic

[Raithe]

Another sign of blink and "damn, I'm getting old"

Buffy the Vampire Slayer tv show premiered 26th years ago.

 

[InsaneCommander]

Picard 3.4

7 of 9 gets a crew member killed for no reason. Is she so stupid she has no idea of how to do something secretively?

Also, why not choose a less obvious person to be

Spoiler

the changeling? They had just shown La Forge on the bridge piloting the ship. Why would she leave?

 

 

Edited March 10, 2023 by InsaneCommander

[Raithe]

Noticed the X-Files was accessible via DisneyPlus and had some nostalgia going through season 1 in the background this week.

Kind of amusing to see how they take all those conspiracy theories so few people were aware of back in the early 90's. It just reeks of that cultural time zone.

 

Also, caught the new Luther "film / extended episode" that Netflix released today. Wasn't hugely impressed, even with Serkis sinking into the main bad guy role.

[Bartimaeus]

8 hours ago, LadyCrimson said:

I'm curious what those archetypes that you tend to dislike, are.

I know a few archetypes that I tend to gravitate to (methodical, intense, and/or logical/rational, Spock, Data, Sherlock, certain villains), but if I almost immediately dislike a character it's usually because of something like "ugh, they remind me of someone I knew irl that I couldn't stand" and I can't disassociate, vs. an actual archetype. Or any character like this one (male, female, child, don't care, can't stand it):  Edit: I'm not sure if that's a true archetype or more a director's direction, thing.

Strong hero man/boy and the slack-jaw are two that come to mind immediately. The former can be found in about a million different shows and movies predominantly aimed at men, presumably with the intent for them to be able to self-insert. The latter...recently, Dominic from The Banshees of Inisherin would be a good example. I have been told his character is in fact good and very sympathetic (the actor won this past year's BAFTA for best supporting actor in his portrayal of this character), but all I could think anytime he was on screen that I really wish one of the other characters would just do him in. Two others, usually specific to cartoons/children's media, are the diminutive comic relief or overly talkative/expressive sidekick (and these can sometimes be packed into one character, possibly in the form of the unholy abomination that is the talking animal companion). Disney's Frozen has a good example of each of these, as it has both Sven the Reindeer and Olaf the Snowman. I also virtually always hate any kind of bad boy or "smooth" manwhore type character. Off the top of my head, I tend to immediately like crazy cat lady-like types, femme fatales (bonus points if they're also wacky, insane, or outright psychopathic), unlikely heroes, and probably others...

I don't know the 'official' names for most character archetypes, but I'd say Willie from The Temple of Doom should be called the screamer, .

Edited March 11, 2023 by Bartimaeus
**** -> whore

[uuuhhii]

53 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

Strong hero man/boy and the slack-jaw are two that come to mind immediately. The former can be found in about a million different shows and movies predominantly aimed at men, presumably with the intent for them to be able to self-insert. The latter...recently, Dominic from The Banshees of Inisherin would be a good example. I have been told his character is in fact good and very sympathetic (the actor won this past year's BAFTA for best supporting actor in his portrayal of this character), but all I could think anytime he was on screen that I really wish one of the other characters would just do him in. Two others, usually specific to cartoons/children's media, are the diminutive comic relief or overly talkative/expressive sidekick (and these can sometimes be packed into one character, possibly in the form of the unholy abomination that is the talking animal companion). Disney's Frozen has a good example of each of these, as it has both Sven the Reindeer and Olaf the Snowman. I also virtually always hate any kind of bad boy or "smooth" manwhore type character. Off the top of my head, I tend to immediately like crazy cat lady-like types, femme fatales (bonus points if they're also wacky, insane, or outright psychopathic), unlikely heroes, and probably others...

I don't know the 'official' names for most character archetypes, but I'd say Willie from The Temple of Doom should be called the screamer, .

mostly hate certain type of character if they are main character

like brooding driven by revenge type or high born idealist

doesn't hate most type of side character unless author does very bad job at it

[LadyCrimson]

^ Hm. I started wondering if what we are both referring to should be labeled as tropes, not archetypes. Which led me down a small rabbithole of trying to find what's the bloody difference. Far as I can tell, there would be far less archetypes and they tend to have deeper human nature reveals/purposes, and tropes, while similar, have a broader/shallower focus, thus why there's 7 million of them. I think tropes are close to cliche's then archetypes but I profess I'm still confuddled on what the difference is, at least in terms of TV/film.

Rapid fire, over-talkative sidekicks tend to annoy me as well. I think I'm one of the few who does not find Mr. Pesci all that amusing in the Lethal Weapon series, although he does get a few really good one liners. I seem to recall mostly liking the reindeer in Frozen - probably because it was "cute", heh - but the snowman I wanted to melt with a hairdryer. But it's not like I loved Frozen overall to begin with.

I still haven't watched Banshees. I still want/meant to. I just haven't.

Edited March 11, 2023 by LadyCrimson

[Bartimaeus]

4 hours ago, LadyCrimson said:

^ Hm. I started wondering if what we are both referring to should be labeled as tropes, not archetypes. Which led me down a small rabbithole of trying to find what's the bloody difference. Far as I can tell, there would be far less archetypes and they tend to have deeper human nature reveals/purposes, and tropes, while similar, have a broader/shallower focus, thus why there's 7 million of them. I think tropes are close to cliche's then archetypes but I profess I'm still confuddled on what the difference is, at least in terms of TV/film.

Rapid fire, over-talkative sidekicks tend to annoy me as well. I think I'm one of the few who does not find Mr. Pesci all that amusing in the Lethal Weapon series, although he does get a few really good one liners. I seem to recall mostly liking the reindeer in Frozen - probably because it was "cute", heh - but the snowman I wanted to melt with a hairdryer. But it's not like I loved Frozen overall to begin with.

I still haven't watched Banshees. I still want/meant to. I just haven't.

Yeah, there is some overlap, because character archetypes seem to be made of or at least heavily imply certain tropes, but I think they're just basic starting outlines for different character types. The 'every man' is an archetype that's suggestive of the character being fairly normal with reasonable but unexceptional characteristics and behaviors that's supposed to be a rough stand-in for the average person (and viewer), but you can develop and implement additional tropes for them as you go along with your story to help flesh them out beyond that. Where you start with a character obviously isn't where you end with them - Willie from Indiana Jones being a "screamer" isn't really an archetype but more of a trope. She's...actually, I guess she's probably the fish-out-of-water every man for The Temple of Doom, given that she had presumably been living a pretty normal and safe life before being forced into insane circumstances that her other two main characters were clearly already very experienced with. How would someone living a hitherto safe and stable life with no experience of danger or adventuring do when suddenly put into the same circumstances? Probably not well.

@uuuhhii has a point in necessarily being more sensitive towards the main character(s) of a story - if an archetype or trope that I hate appears for a character that's only in a very small percentage of the overall work, I'm not gonna care nearly as much even it's still momentarily painful. With TV shows, sometimes you'll have a supporting character that you hate appearing throughout a series but it isn't typically a big deal because, well, they're usually not around all the time because they're just supporting. But then there'll be an episode here and there where that supporting character temporarily becomes a main character - if you're like me and you have watched a bit of Star Trek TNG and Voyager, you probably have a character or two in those shows that you're less than fond of and whose focus episodes you are not keen on revisiting. I think Councillor Troi is the absolute worst and I cannot imagine how anyone can enjoy her focus episodes, but clearly people must, she's apparently a bit of a fan favorite. I think Worf is perfectly fine as a supporting character, but he and his crazy Klingon problems are pretty awful in his focus episodes as well, .

Edited March 11, 2023 by Bartimaeus

[Raithe]

11 hours ago, Bartimaeus said:

I don't know the 'official' names for most character archetypes, but I'd say Willie from The Temple of Doom should be called the screamer, .

Shall we start you off on the crazy rabbit hole that is https://tvtropes.org/ for your further education and obscene amount of tabs it can leave open on your browser?