Finished Good Omens. I’ve never read the book myself but I enjoyed it. And it was the perfect length, I think had it gone passed 6 episodes it might have been too much
I thought the long awaited finale of Deadwood was great. It indulged in what would probably be considered fan service but given the train wreck I thought GoT was and how much I loved Endgame, I’m of the opinion that when a show or franchise has spent years being satisfying, some fan service is far preferable than tired messages about the costs of war and power.
I loved the Deadwood: The Movie. I found it both surprising, and totally satisfying.
I think, for me though, I wouldn't call it fan service or indulgent. For me, that implies that Milch was putting a desire to please, or to give the fans what they wanted, ahead of his own storytelling instincts. I can't know what was in his head, of course, but this didn't feel like pandering to me. It felt absolutely of a piece with the prior series, even if things
(MILD SPOILER SPACE- FAIR WARNING) * * * * * * * * Ended like a classical comedy (probably not a coincidence, former Yale English Literature lecturer that he is) rather than the tragedy we usually associate that show with. So in that way, there were some real surprises for me as a viewer, but decision by decision, character by character, I believed it. What happened felt grounded in what came before. Even if what we ended up seeing, the particular moment in time chosen to end with, was a little kinder to us as viewers than we might have expected.
By contrast, what did not work for me in the finale of GOT was not that it did not serve or indulge me as a fan, I did not want that. But rather that I didn't buy it. Decisions made by some of the powerful characters involved did not feel grounded in what had come before.
So, TLDR, I am agreeing with you that Deadwood: The Movie was great, and satisfying. But I don't think it was because its intent was to serve. It still felt like the story that Milch wanted to tell, and was continuing to tell.
I agree with everything you wrote: the characters never feel false, that's for sure. However, when I write "fan service" I don't mean it as pandering or somehow feeling false character-wise. I just mean it strictly as giving fans what they want and in this case offering resolution is just the start. (Even though the ending of season 3 left fans hoping for more, it suited the show.) To have Hearst return is an attempt to not only give the fans some resolution it's also exactly what they want: making sure Hearst gets some kind of payback. As you noted, ending like a classical comedy does not match the series. Although I buy the character interactions, I don't buy that that's how things would have gone down with Hearst. By ending as it does, it gives fans some joy. Surely someone like Hearst in that time period will continue to cause a great deal of problems for the town (is he going to leave Trixie alone? I see no reason why he would), but the show ends on him getting his comeuppance, even if it's temporary.
My issue with GoT is the same as yours, and I agree that it's not "fan service" to have the characters develop organically, but I threw it in there because I think it's an example of a show that could have benefited with more thought as to what fans would want. I think an attempt at "fan service" would have been preferable since their goal - illustrate two banal themes (war is hell and power corrupts) - wasn't worth the destruction of a truly original and flawed hero.
As one who loved Deadwood and thought it didn't stay on TV long enough, I absolutely loved the wrap up film. Getting reacquainted with these characters and that glorious dialogue has been one of the TV highlights of the year thus far. A big thank you to creator David Milch and HBO for that.
I can't recommend When They See Us enough; truly one of the most powerful stories I’ve ever seen on TV. I will love Director Ava DuVernay forever for this. Moonlight's Jharrel Jerome gives the performance of the year in the 4th episode. I'm a fan for life. Yes, it's hard to watch. I fluctuated between anger, sadness, and yes, sometimes joy, through all 4 episodes but I truly believe it's a story that everyone, regardless of race, needs to watch.
The new Netflix produced season of Lucifer is awesome. If you like Lucifer. I do.
I tried to watch Good Omens... I got about a half hour into it, and left it forever. I would never have expected Gaiman to have written such boring, stale dialogue. It was paced too slowly, as well, I thought. I love David Tennant, but didn't care for him in this.
I tried to watch Good Omens... I got about a half hour into it, and left it forever. I would never have expected Gaiman to have written such boring, stale dialogue. It was paced too slowly, as well, I thought. I love David Tennant, but didn't care for him in this.
Compared to most TV adaptations of novels these days—see American Gods, et al.—the pacing was at an absolute breakneck speed. Frankly it felt like a breath of fresh air in comparison. The only segment that dragged for me was the first half of episode three. They could have cut five or ten minutes out of that and gotten the point across just fine. Maybe then they could have put in some of the Four Horsemen scenes from the book they cut out for the series.
Most of the dialogue is just slightly tweaked from what was written in the book (co-written by Terry Pratchett) nearly 30 years ago. All things considered, I think it aged fairly well. A few jokes fell flat, but I laughed out loud a couple of times as well, even though I knew the jokes were coming.
As for Tennant, while I’d agree this wasn’t the best performance of his career, I thought he was fine overall. He didn’t really have much to do in the first 30 minutes of the series, so you didn’t see his best scenes, which come in the subsequent episodes, once the backstory is out of the way and all the characters, and there are quite a few characters, are introduced.
After over 25 years of trying to bring Sandman to the screen, it looks like it will finally happen... at Netflix.
More fascinated about what that means for internal Warner politics than the actual show at this point. Glad its Heinberg rather than Goyer running the show though (I wonder if his exec producer role is contractual due to earlier development work or actively creative?)
I’ve been on a Ken Burns kick. Watched the Civil War. Now onto Baseball
I LOVE Ken Burns. I think he is without a doubt the best historical documentarian there is. Baseball is awesome, especially if you are a baseball fan but my favorite is World War 2 documentary The War.
Just saw Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer. Yeesh. So many problems with this. If Marvel ever pulls off a great FF film they can truly do anything. At best though, I find it hard to imagine them pulling off anything more than an Ant Man-level achievement. Seeing Mr. Fantastic's powers again also made me remember that making a man who can stretch is not something I have ever seen look remotely "realistic", no matter the level of CGI, even recently on the Flash.
Conan the Barbarian. Hadn’t seen it in years still pretty cool. Was this the first film to feature a Marvel character on screen
Conan isn't really a Marvel character any more than Star Wars is. I don’t even consider him a comic book character, per se, since he was around for 40 years before he was ever put in a comic book. Yes, Marvel was publishing Conan comics at the time the movie was made, but they had no input into the film other than the fact that Roy Thomas (who ironically was exclusive to DC at the time) wrote a screenplay for it that wasn’t used.
Captain America first appeared on screen in 1944 in a movie serial. But if you want to limit it to feature films, then the correct answer is Howard the Duck in 1986.
Conan the Barbarian. Hadn’t seen it in years still pretty cool. Was this the first film to feature a Marvel character on screen
Conan isn't really a Marvel character any more than Star Wars is. I don’t even consider him a comic book character, per se, since he was around for 40 years before he was ever put in a comic book. Yes, Marvel was publishing Conan comics at the time the movie was made, but they had no input into the film other than the fact that Roy Thomas (who ironically was exclusive to DC at the time) wrote a screenplay for it that wasn’t used.
Captain America first appeared on screen in 1944 in a movie serial. But if you want to limit it to feature films, then the correct answer is Howard the Duck in 1986.
Unless you count the Captain America Serial... in 1944.
Concerning Conan... he is now part of the Savage Avengers, and has/will-be bonded with the Venom Symbiote at some time.
This is a weird turn for a licensed character at Marvel, reminiscent of the days of ROM and Micronauts... wherein the licensed character were tightly interwoven with the Marvel Universe.... which has led to a ton of issues that can't be reprinted due to licensing rights.
Conan the Barbarian. Hadn’t seen it in years still pretty cool. Was this the first film to feature a Marvel character on screen
Conan isn't really a Marvel character any more than Star Wars is. I don’t even consider him a comic book character, per se, since he was around for 40 years before he was ever put in a comic book. Yes, Marvel was publishing Conan comics at the time the movie was made, but they had no input into the film other than the fact that Roy Thomas (who ironically was exclusive to DC at the time) wrote a screenplay for it that wasn’t used.
Captain America first appeared on screen in 1944 in a movie serial. But if you want to limit it to feature films, then the correct answer is Howard the Duck in 1986.
Unless you count the Captain America Serial... in 1944.
This is a weird turn for a licensed character at Marvel, reminiscent of the days of ROM and Micronauts... wherein the licensed character were tightly interwoven with the Marvel Universe.... which has led to a ton of issues that can't be reprinted due to licensing rights.
I guess now that they have Disney money behind them, Marvel isn’t too worried about losing the license any time soon. And I’m guessing the Conan Properties Intl., Inc. people see it as a better way to position themselves for marketing and branding opportunities, and will let Marvel do pretty much whatever they want with Conan.
Just finished up Hap and Leonard, on Netflix, which originally aired on the Sundance Channel. Probably some of the best character building I have ever seen. The main characters are complex and nuanced. Each season is adapted from one of the 10 or so books that feature them, by Joe R. Landsdale, who also wrote a number of comics, notably Batman.
It's dark, gritty, violent, and often funny. I really recommend it.
Hap&Leonard is one of the best shows that no one I know watched. Wish it had lasted longer.
Been rewatching the 6 seasons of OitNB to prepare for the final season tomorrow.
The Boys: I’m kind of mixed. I certainly enjoyed the dynamic between the members of the team. But there were times where it felt too dark and mean spirited, And yes I realize that Garth Ennis doesn’t write about puppies and sunshine
Comments
I thought the long awaited finale of Deadwood was great. It indulged in what would probably be considered fan service but given the train wreck I thought GoT was and how much I loved Endgame, I’m of the opinion that when a show or franchise has spent years being satisfying, some fan service is far preferable than tired messages about the costs of war and power.
I loved the Deadwood: The Movie. I found it both surprising, and totally satisfying.
I think, for me though, I wouldn't call it fan service or indulgent. For me, that implies that Milch was putting a desire to please, or to give the fans what they wanted, ahead of his own storytelling instincts. I can't know what was in his head, of course, but this didn't feel like pandering to me. It felt absolutely of a piece with the prior series, even if things
(MILD SPOILER SPACE- FAIR WARNING)
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Ended like a classical comedy (probably not a coincidence, former Yale English Literature lecturer that he is) rather than the tragedy we usually associate that show with. So in that way, there were some real surprises for me as a viewer, but decision by decision, character by character, I believed it. What happened felt grounded in what came before. Even if what we ended up seeing, the particular moment in time chosen to end with, was a little kinder to us as viewers than we might have expected.
By contrast, what did not work for me in the finale of GOT was not that it did not serve or indulge me as a fan, I did not want that. But rather that I didn't buy it. Decisions made by some of the powerful characters involved did not feel grounded in what had come before.
So, TLDR, I am agreeing with you that Deadwood: The Movie was great, and satisfying. But I don't think it was because its intent was to serve. It still felt like the story that Milch wanted to tell, and was continuing to tell.
I agree with everything you wrote: the characters never feel false, that's for sure. However, when I write "fan service" I don't mean it as pandering or somehow feeling false character-wise. I just mean it strictly as giving fans what they want and in this case offering resolution is just the start. (Even though the ending of season 3 left fans hoping for more, it suited the show.) To have Hearst return is an attempt to not only give the fans some resolution it's also exactly what they want: making sure Hearst gets some kind of payback. As you noted, ending like a classical comedy does not match the series. Although I buy the character interactions, I don't buy that that's how things would have gone down with Hearst. By ending as it does, it gives fans some joy. Surely someone like Hearst in that time period will continue to cause a great deal of problems for the town (is he going to leave Trixie alone? I see no reason why he would), but the show ends on him getting his comeuppance, even if it's temporary.
My issue with GoT is the same as yours, and I agree that it's not "fan service" to have the characters develop organically, but I threw it in there because I think it's an example of a show that could have benefited with more thought as to what fans would want. I think an attempt at "fan service" would have been preferable since their goal - illustrate two banal themes (war is hell and power corrupts) - wasn't worth the destruction of a truly original and flawed hero.
I can't recommend When They See Us enough; truly one of the most powerful stories I’ve ever seen on TV. I will love Director Ava DuVernay forever for this. Moonlight's Jharrel Jerome gives the performance of the year in the 4th episode. I'm a fan for life. Yes, it's hard to watch. I fluctuated between anger, sadness, and yes, sometimes joy, through all 4 episodes but I truly believe it's a story that everyone, regardless of race, needs to watch.
Wait until you hear about the “social media influencers” visiting Chernobyl.
Posting this as a shameless plug to watch Cobra Kai on YouTube
Watching deep space 9 season one. This episode deals with somebody dealing in weaponized dolomite
The part of me who watched too many 70s movies says damn straight you need to stop that vessel.
I tried to watch Good Omens... I got about a half hour into it, and left it forever. I would never have expected Gaiman to have written such boring, stale dialogue. It was paced too slowly, as well, I thought. I love David Tennant, but didn't care for him in this.
Most of the dialogue is just slightly tweaked from what was written in the book (co-written by Terry Pratchett) nearly 30 years ago. All things considered, I think it aged fairly well. A few jokes fell flat, but I laughed out loud a couple of times as well, even though I knew the jokes were coming.
As for Tennant, while I’d agree this wasn’t the best performance of his career, I thought he was fine overall. He didn’t really have much to do in the first 30 minutes of the series, so you didn’t see his best scenes, which come in the subsequent episodes, once the backstory is out of the way and all the characters, and there are quite a few characters, are introduced.
Captain America first appeared on screen in 1944 in a movie serial. But if you want to limit it to feature films, then the correct answer is Howard the Duck in 1986.
Concerning Conan... he is now part of the Savage Avengers, and has/will-be bonded with the Venom Symbiote at some time.
This is a weird turn for a licensed character at Marvel, reminiscent of the days of ROM and Micronauts... wherein the licensed character were tightly interwoven with the Marvel Universe.... which has led to a ton of issues that can't be reprinted due to licensing rights.
Been rewatching the 6 seasons of OitNB to prepare for the final season tomorrow.
Hap & Leonard is great.
I've been watching ds9 and the royal pains