Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Moving Picture' started by Lady Day, Sep 3, 2007.
I’ve been catching up on “Stranger Things.” It’s interesting, at best.
The Rain. Danish serial.
Too many plot holes. Just need to power down the brain to enjoy the show.
Trying to like Sopranos after 1st episode. Everyone says it is the best serial but personally nothing comes close to Deadwood. That serial was just awesome since S01E01.
Agree. Sopranos is essentially a clever soapie about marriage and family made 'exciting' by its wiseguy setting. Deadwood took a couple of eps to grab me. But once it did it never let me go. I have never seen a stronger series. But the Wild West hyperbole isn't to everyone's taste.
I agree that Deadwood is great TV. My favourite of all time though is TheWire. It got a bit wobbly towards the end but that is the fate of many series that run over 2 or 3 seasons. The Wire did 6 seasons if I remember. Alas, Deadwood never got the opportunity to get old.
Everyone loves The Wire - I tried to watch it but I couldn't keep track of the story or care too much about anything in it. More a reflection on my interests than the show, which I am sure was beautifully produced.
I love both The Wire and Deadwood. Deadwood is Shakespeare and incredibly rich writing. If you want more of that Shakespeare, go watch David Milch with NYPD Blue. It's all there (except the cussing). You'll even recognize many of the actors. The Wire got a little preachy and dragged a bit in the union season (season 3?), and if urban settings and minority struggles trigger low interest, I can definitely understand not getting sucked into it. That's not a judgment either. The series is about much more than that, but it is what it is as well. I admit that urban plight isn't high on my priority list of ways to spend my time and emotions, but the story was so compelling that I fell into it anyway. Deadwood really is beautiful in so many ways, while The Wire is an ugly story beautifully told.
Plus I had a man crush on Omar! He pops up in many other series and when my wife and I spot him we shout at the TV...."Its Omar!!!"
Michael K. Williams is magnetic. He was one of the better parts of Boardwalk Empire as well. And The Night Of, which was otherwise mostly a disappointment. I never did see Hap and Leonard. He did an interesting series on Vice called Black Market. The guy gives a good interview too.
Not sure if he made it up but his story of the facial scar is that it came from a bar fight. True or a false claim of bona fides? Not sure but a good story nonetheless.
I'm now well into series 2 of Peaky Blinders. Rewatching the show on Netflix, with the fifth series due to drop on the BBC over the weekend. I should finish the first four in time to be able to binge the fifth series in one go rather than have to wait week to week.
Second time around it's still fantastic. I'm especially enjoying the historical accuracy of the subplots regarding Ireland; it's also refreshnig to see Churchill played as more of the game-player he was than the older, WW2 Mythical version.
Thanks to Amazon Prime, I'm revisiting tv shows from years and years ago, commercial-free. Peter Gunn (season 1, episodes 1 and 2) with Craig Stevens as a dapper, jazz-friendly PI, and Arnie Nuvo--- I mean, Herschel Bernardi, - as the world-weary police lieutenant; Danger Man, later revamped into Secret Agent (season 1, ep. 1, in which Patrick McGoohan seems to be an American agent); The Life and Legend of Wyatt Earp (season 1, ep. 1, 2, 3), plus Tombstone Territory and Yancy Derringer (several episodes into each series).
Watched the new documentary on 'Woodstock' on Netflix. It struck me that the tag line should read...."Three days of Peace, Love and pulling horseshoes out of your ass." This thing should have failed on so many levels and sheer dumb luck saved their asses from having the deaths of many people on their conscience. Like much of that era Woodstock represented the very thin veneer of the Age of Aquarius that once scratched exposed the marketing and rush to profit from the phenomenon.
While it was a business venture to start, I've never got the impression it was quite like you're alluding here. However, the Boomers sure did become selfish, opportunistic, pull the ladder up as they go fiends as they grew out of that time. Then again, I've concluded that a heck of a lot of the stuff that still gets talked about from the 60s was created, enjoyed, and held together by a small minority. We have this false idea that EVERYONE was doing this or that, when it wasn't a great percentage of the population. Enough people to fracture things? Clearly, but the cultural stuff we still love about the 60s was not of the status quo.
I think what leaves a sour tasste for me aboyut the whole romanticisation of Woodstock is that it was never suppsoed to be a free festival: some folks tried - they were clueless, but they tried - to do something, and then several thousand, selfish types under the "freedom" excuse came along and demanded to gert it all for free.
Finished Peakies, now bring on Series 5!
Woodstock started as a pure business venture but due to the organizer's inexperience and gross incompetence they had zero choice but to declare it free and try to salvage something from the debacle. It was a logistical fubar from the get go and without Daddy's deep pockets it would have gone down in history as an incredible display of incompetence.
I don't disagree with nay of that - my issue is that this is what everyone remembers, not the greed and selfishness of the entitled hippy attendees who saw no reason why they should pay for the show. I regard that as thed biggeast insult to the performing artists, certainly.
It's anotehr good example, though, of how history gts distorted. Hendrix's Woodstock set is now regarded as oneo f the most significant musical performances in history, which it can only possibly have been because it was recorded and thus available after the fact. As memory serves, due to various delays it was past dawn when he finally got on stage, and an awful lot of people had already gone home or burned out.
Yes, his contract stipulated he HAD to be the last performer. 9:00AM Monday morning he finally appeared on stage and at that point most of the attendees had hit the road home.
I'm miffed by the utter contempt some of you fellas have for that whole Woodstock situation. Most success stories are rife with good fortune and were blessed with the luxury of luck. I suppose it makes sense considering the demographics of this site. Just rather odd considering how positive the whole thing ended up being. I'm not much of a fan of opportunists myself, but it's a bit unrealistic to think people are going to walk up to an event without fences, without a gate, without much of a parameter, and not just walk into the place. They would have ended up sitting in their cars for three days.
As I was watching the doc, I wondered why they didn't try passing the hat (many of them). I bet a lot of those people would have dropped some cash in a hat if they were asked to do so. But then I realized how dangerous that could have been. Money wasn't involved in the thing, so it existed on level X, but had tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of cash money were located somewhere on the premises, who knows what kind of deviant behavior that might have invited. The air of the entire event would have likely changed and existed on level Y. Lots of dumb luck, but good for everyone. Capitalism and predation being present at a minimum, and people getting along at a maximum. What a big surprise, eh?
That rings completely true. I have a number of friends who were in their teens and twenties in the 1960's. They wouldn't know the difference between Janis Joplin and Judy Collins. The music, dress, drugs and lifestyles of the period made almost no impression on them at all. They tend to see the period as pretentious, narcissistic displays of the pseudo-alternative.
Yellowstone, Schitts Creek, and The Andy Griffith Show, but not much else.