Watched, Watched, Watching: It's not the plane, it's the pilot

[DaveSumm]

It’s impossible to respond when the show is so complicated. I had a look at some of my old Reddit posts and I literally can’t remember what the fuck I was talking about, and I don’t have the inclination to re-familiarise myself enough to re-explain. Something about a duplicate Martha that made no sense, and an awful lot of hand-waiving (someone “exploited the time freeze”, OK). I know there’s plenty of ‘Dark explained’ videos and posts out there, I read them all back in the day, and none of them adequately explain what quantum entanglement actually is (in Dark) and how it produced a second Martha.

I’m not sure which specific plot devises are being discussed but it’s certainly conceivable to have a bad one that meets all your criteria. As @polishgenius said; super-convenient ones. 

[dbunting]

4 hours ago, Heartofice said:

Agree with this.. except Dark which has a really dramatic downward spiral and crashes into a black hole.

Did Dark not end well? I still haven't gotten around to watch the last season. It just seemed to become tedious to watch it.

[dbunting]

I watched Nope this weekend. I think it was pretty good and a fresh take on the subject at hand but I didn't think it was the greatest thing since sliced bread like some reviews I saw and don't think I'll watch it again.

Spoiler

I like that the "UFO" was actually the animal itself and not a ship. I also like that the stuff falling, keys and what not was basically the animal pooping. One thing though, in the initial shot when his dad died you can see the items falling way off in the distance and close by and we know from later in the film that it can't do that since the stuff falls out of the opening in the bottom so they kind of messed up there.

Overall I would recommend this to anyone who is curious or is fans of the actors.

[dog-days]

18 minutes ago, DaveSumm said:

It’s impossible to respond when the show is so complicated. I had a look at some of my old Reddit posts and I literally can’t remember what the fuck I was talking about, and I don’t have the inclination to re-familiarise myself enough to re-explain.

Glad it's not just me experiencing memory white-out. I went back to read an old reaction post (ETA - one by @Annara Snow) that mentioned all the characters, and it was a fight to remember who most of them were. 

Pretty sure I enjoyed S3, though I probably came to it with lower expectations than a lot of you. It was a stylish, atmospheric show, though not one I feel tempted to rewatch. Like a lot of thriller/mystery-type stories, once the cat is out of the bag I don't much care to revisit the lead-up. 

Edited July 25 by dog-days

[Annara Snow]

23 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

It’s not necessarily about the plot devices not making sense. It can be that devices need to be added to fix the problems the plot sets up without feeling satisfactory within the original premise.

In terms of Dark my issue is that the show initially sets itself a difficult problem narratively, which made the show stand out and kept me gripped. That being that time is unchangeable and almost predetermined, everything in a cycle of events. It has this setup of 3 time periods which worked to loop into each other. It was a great concept.

The problem is it made telling a story very difficult and there was little way to resolve the conundrums in the show without introducing new elements and rules which will have to break the previous rules.

And that is what the show did. 
 

Because it looked like events could not be changed, the show had to create other time loops, another time period, different versions of characters. It had to solve problems by making it all about something that can’t be defined, like love.

It had to basically rely on a number of much less interesting or clever plot devices to get the job done, and that to me is the main reason why the show failed. 

And what is the original premise, in your opinion? Who decided that only 3 time periods can be a part of a timrle travel loop, and why? You seem to have decided that only things revealed by episode 1x08 are acceptable as ules of the world...in which case, even season 1 would be bad because it introduces the fourth timeline at the end..

The show opened with a narration by a certain character about the nature of time, who also gave that exposition in 1x08 about dualism being a mistake and the importance of a the number 3. That character ended up being the most important one for the plot, the closest to a god figure, in an unexpected way. And the ending was all about the third option, and a third character coming up with that solution after everything had been presented andplayed out apparently as a dualistic eternal war between two opposing philosophical and emotional stances (heavily inspired by Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, both quoted at different points throughout the show.

Betraying the original premise? I don't think so. The premise just wasn't what you thought it was.

I've seen your post in that thread. I get your complaints  but they are just a matter of taste. You didn't like the show getting more SciFi, and more fantastical (which is true - the SciFi, mythological and symbolic elements become more and more pronounced) and you thought certain figures - versions of characters - didn't feel relatable. Which was the point - how much people can change and become almost like different people, the way you can be your own worst enemy: the show takes those metaphors and makes them real. But while other characters had more relatable down to Earth plans and motives, I found the motives and development of these two figures completely understandable and relatable in context. In fact, the one you said was particularly unrelatable was the one whose motives I related to more.

Spoiler

Adam and Eva both feel they are saving the world, while also responding to this incredibly messed up loop emotionally in two completely different ways. In the face of an apparent impossibility of changing the loop, Adam is an old tired Jonas who has decided non-existence is better than constant suffering. Eva, OTOH, decided even back when she was young Martha that she would fight to preserve life/existence no matter what, and that's all worth it: even though it's a loop of tragedy, she prefers it to erasing all life out of existence, which Adam is trying to do. Or in other words, she is fighting to stop her ex lover from killing her and their son and erasing them all (including himself). 

Neither option is good, but as far as they know, there is no third one - and they have opposing views on what the "lesser evil" is.

I understand why the show was no more to your taste. But that sure doesn't make the final season "stupid".

[Annara Snow]

49 minutes ago, dbunting said:

Did Dark not end well? I still haven't gotten around to watch the last season. It just seemed to become tedious to watch it.

According to most people whose reactions I've seen, it had one of the best endings ever. But obviously there are also people who disagree, like @Heartofice.

[Heartofice]

6 minutes ago, Annara Snow said:

And what is the original premise, in your opinion? Who decided that only 3 time periods can be a part of a timrle travel loop, and why? You seem to have decided that only things revealed by episode 1x08 are acceptable as ules of the world...in which case, even season 1 would be bad because it introduces the fourth timeline at the end..

Yes the part I liked most about the show was the point where it seemed that those were the rules, that’s when the story was at its strongest. I knew from the ending of season one and the reveal of the extra time period that there were going to be problems moving forward. Then the ending of season 2 did the same thing and introduced the concept of other loops.

You could say that was always the story as intended, and maybe it was. But actually it doesn’t matter, because to me those elements wrecked the potential of what the show could have been. 
 

Anyway I wrote extensively about my thoughts previously, I don’t have the energy to go through it again. I do disagree that it was seen as one of the best finales ever, I really don’t think that is true, on here, outside of here I’ve seen very mixed reaction, and very few people have said to me they loved that last season. 

[Annara Snow]

1 hour ago, DaveSumm said:

It’s impossible to respond when the show is so complicated. I had a look at some of my old Reddit posts and I literally can’t remember what the fuck I was talking about, and I don’t have the inclination to re-familiarise myself enough to re-explain. Something about a duplicate Martha that made no sense, and an awful lot of hand-waiving (someone “exploited the time freeze”, OK). I know there’s plenty of ‘Dark explained’ videos and posts out there, I read them all back in the day, and none of them adequately explain what quantum entanglement actually is (in Dark) and how it produced a second Martha.

I’m not sure which specific plot devises are being discussed but it’s certainly conceivable to have a bad one that meets all your criteria. As @polishgenius said; super-convenient ones. 

So time travel, explained through wormholes and radioactivity and *insert a bunch of other quantum physics SF babble* was deemed perfectly realistic and acceptable, but AUs and alternative timelines of character lives based on *insert more SF quantum physics babble explanations* are a step too far!

This is like if someone read AGOT and went "oh there are dragons, and zonbies resurrected and controlled by a mysterious omnicidal species of ice beings who thrive on the cold? A dead hand can move by itself? Makes perfect sense, not too fantastical" and them read ACOK and said "What, there are also shadow babies? Well, that crosses the line! What a super-convenient plot device to kill Renly! The series is stupid now"

[WarGalley]

I watched.... Cannibal Women in the Avocado Jungle of Death with Shannon Tweed and Bill Maher. I was with a friend when this came on through his (Youtube?) recommendations. I was fully expecting an absolutely terrible, direct to DVD sexploitation experience and went into it with large reservations, expecting to shut it off within the first 10 or 15 minutes. But it was a lot funnier than it had the right to be and we ended sticking with it through the end (particularly once Maher's character shows up). The humor reminded me a little of Blazing Saddles, and I'm sure Maher had some input into the dialogue which carries the movie regardless of how absurd it gets. My friend and I both laughed out loud at several scenes and over-the-top lines throughout the movie (though granted we were smoking a joint along the way).

[DaveSumm]

1 hour ago, Annara Snow said:

So time travel, explained through wormholes and radioactivity and *insert a bunch of other quantum physics SF babble* was deemed perfectly realistic and acceptable, but AUs and alternative timelines of character lives based on *insert more SF quantum physics babble explanations* are a step too far!

Time travel was the premise from the get go, and as time travel stories go, a catastrophe at a nuclear plant with some time-loopy attempts to stop it actually catalysing it? That’s pretty strong. That was a firm foundation for two seasons. Pretty much everything that happened in those two seasons worked off of that foundation.

If you think what happened in season 3 was that coherent, then good for you. But I’ve directed you to the old thread where I think I explain my problems; there is nothing remotely that coherent about how entanglement, or duplicates, or special freezes, or magic tunnels, or existing-just-long-enough-to-fix-the-thing, work. I know it’s a cop out to say I can’t actually remember the details of why that is right now, because it would take hours and probably a whole rewatch to rediscover those conclusions. But there it is. 

Anyway, I don’t think a strong case has been made that the show has really resonated long after it ended. I was a huge, huge fan and I just haven’t really thought about it or seen it discussed since then. Maybe 1899 will raise Dark’s profile if it’s good, I hope it is and I hope it does.

[Spockydog]

Got about half-an-hour into Chris Pratt's The Terminal List. Jesus, what a load of shite. Absolutely horrible. Someone give that man some prunes to eat.

 

 

Edited July 26 by Spockydog

[Corvinus85]

5 hours ago, dbunting said:

I watched Nope this weekend. I think it was pretty good and a fresh take on the subject at hand but I didn't think it was the greatest thing since sliced bread like some reviews I saw and don't think I'll watch it again.

  Hide contents

I like that the "UFO" was actually the animal itself and not a ship. I also like that the stuff falling, keys and what not was basically the animal pooping. One thing though, in the initial shot when his dad died you can see the items falling way off in the distance and close by and we know from later in the film that it can't do that since the stuff falls out of the opening in the bottom so they kind of messed up there.

Overall I would recommend this to anyone who is curious or is fans of the actors.

Spoiler

In the beginning, they couldn't see the alien, right? So if it was higher up, the dispersal area of the object would have been greater.

 

[Annara Snow]

5 hours ago, DaveSumm said:

Time travel was the premise from the get go, and as time travel stories go, a catastrophe at a nuclear plant with some time-loopy attempts to stop it actually catalysing it? That’s pretty strong. That was a firm foundation for two seasons. Pretty much everything that happened in those two seasons worked off of that foundation.

If you think what happened in season 3 was that coherent, then good for you. But I’ve directed you to the old thread where I think I explain my problems; there is nothing remotely that coherent about how entanglement, or duplicates, or special freezes, or magic tunnels, or existing-just-long-enough-to-fix-the-thing, work. I know it’s a cop out to say I can’t actually remember the details of why that is right now, because it would take hours and probably a whole rewatch to rediscover those conclusions. But there it is. 

Anyway, I don’t think a strong case has been made that the show has really resonated long after it ended. I was a huge, huge fan and I just haven’t really thought about it or seen it discussed since then. Maybe 1899 will raise Dark’s profile if it’s good, I hope it is and I hope it does.

Using yourself and whether you've thought about Dark in a while as evidence that the show has not "resonated" and is not talked about anymore... I like the solipsism of that. 

Meanwhile, I just did a YouTube search  and learned about 3 more YouTube reactors who have started their Dark reactions within the last month, in addition to those 20 or so I've already watched. Reactors are known for picking up unpopular and forgotten shows, it's not like they pick what to react based on the number of fan suggestions because it's about making money on Patreon. No, you must be right, the show is completely forgotten, after all, Baran Bo Odar only has 278 thousand followers on Instagram, a really small number for a showrunner/ director, and Dark's two main stars, Louis Hoffman and Lisa Vicari  might have over 1 million followers each, but that's probably due to...German films they've done or something. And the most active Dark fan account has only 135 thousand followers and got just over 25,000 thousand likes on it's latest post, clearly a sign of a show that's faded into obscurity.

[polishgenius]

[Veltigar]

I went to see Everything, Everywhere All At Once. Totally worth waiting to see it in the cinema and I cannot do anything but echo all the praise that has already been posted everywhere, because all of it is true (and that all at once).

If I might just add my two cents:

1. This is the type of film that makes other people want to make films. I expect reading articles with up and coming directors 30 years from now and seeing this cited as a major influence.

2. Apart from amazing visuals, action, acting, plotting, etc. I felt like the emotional core of the film strongly resonated with me. For me it is the type of movie that compels you to pick up the phone and call your loved ones. 

17 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

You're in for a treat.

Looking forward to it. Tonight probably the latest Better Call Saul episode and then from tomorrow more Yellowjackets 

17 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Same, I'm halfway through S1. The first few episodes are hit or miss and then it just flies and never stops until the end of the series. Wish it was a bigger hit.

The biggest crime of Die Another Day is that it didn't launch Toby Stephens' career into the stratosphere. It's probably that he didn't want to be a big movie star (him being acting royalty and all), but he demonstrates in Black Sails that he's the real thing every single episode.

18 hours ago, Annara Snow said:

I haven't had the rkind of esponses to the characters you name here (which seem heavily and only  from Walt's POV), so I don't see it like that.

  Reveal hidden contents

To be fair, I have been kind of spoiled from the start by GRRM's comment that "Walter White is a bigger monster than anyone in Westeros"... although that sounds like a typical GRRM exaggeration (come on, George... I don't know how bad he will get, but I doubt he's gonna be worse than Ramsay, Gregor, Rorge and the Bloody Mummers, or even Tywin Lannister for that matter.

But anyway: while it's hard not to have sympathy for Walt due to his situation, and I do relate to him a lot in some aspects - the resentment of being underpaid and underappreciated in your work in spite of your high skills - and the fact he's been told he is going to die soon and can't even provide for his treatment or for his family (and this feels like a social criticism: something is very wrong with the fact that you can't make a living or pay for your medical  treatment as a teacher, but earn tons of money as a drug dealer; though on the other side, there's also the fact that Walt being a white middle class respectable-looking family guy is why no one suspects him). But it's also clear from the beginning that a lot of what he does it not just out of necessity, but pride. He has a massive chip on his shoulder, pride is why he refuses help from Gretchen and Elliot, and he even resents the idea of charity; and he enjoys the status of a man who can make a lot of money off his skills and provide for his family. It is not just a necessity, it's like a power trip - and that's even evident in the pilot, with how it affects his sexuality and the drug dealing makes him feel virile again. It becomes even more obvious by season 2 - he is clearly very proud of the fact that he is the best at what he does and that he is finally getting the recognition and money that he should based on his skills. Multiple times, he refers to it as you would to a normal job and cleatly gets self-fulfilmment from it. He only decides (temporarily) to quit in season 3 because of Skyler's reaction and because he doesn't want to lose his family,

But even those things are kinda relatable - the pride, the wish for professional self-fulfilment, for respect... The trailts that feel really disturbing to me and that make Walt less sympathetic are his arrogance and his disdain for people he sees as lesser - such as drug addicts - and how blase he was about the deaths of such people (the meth addicts, Combo...) - as opposed to Jesse, who was shaken deeply every time - and it all culminates when he lets Jane die - which is his act so far (as of 4x01) I find the least forgivable. It's also a part of his toxic relationship with Jesse - Walt genuinely cares about him (as seen in season 3) but he also has an incredibly patronizing attitude and treats Jesse like crap most of the time. Maybe feeling superior is a part of it (and maybe one of the reasons Walt is trying to play a pseudo-father because he is losing that status at home due to the divorce, and also, we've seen how jealous Walt is of his son looking up to Hank more than him). Another disturbing trait is how good Walt is at rationalizing his actions and finding excuses for them. Although my sympathy was restored somewhat when I saw he did feel real guilt (especially over Jane, when he nearly spilled out the secret to Jesse in 3x10, which was a great bottle episode where technically nothing happened aside from trying to kill a fly, but I was at the edge of my seat multiple times when it seemed Walt was on the verge of telling the truth).

Jesse is a major screw-up that no one takes seriously, but he also - as it becomes more apparent over time - has more heart than Walt and finds it harder to be as ruthless. Even when he really tries to be, as in season 3, when he was angry, clean of drugs post-rehab and reeling from Jane's death and also looking for revenge for Combo. But his impulsive actions messed things up even worse, forced Walt to take more extreme actions to protect both his life and Jesse's life, and eventually, to make Jesse commit a premeditated murder. So, after season 3, I can say that not only is Walt toxic to Jesse, but they have one of these "We can make each other worse" relationships.

As for the other characters, the only ones I did find really annoying in season 1 were Hank and Marie - Hank really went on my nerves with his overblown macho showboating attitude, and Marie was a bored kleptomaniac who lived in her own world. But after having seen seassns 2 and 3, they are among the most likable characters on the show.

I'm not sure why anyone would hate Walt Jr. except, I guess, TV viewers usually hate teenage children of main characters and find them annoying? One guy who watched BB that I talked to said he found the son the most annoying character. I didn't have any particular feelings about him to start with, but in seasons 2 and 3 I felt really sorry for him because he really believes his father is a good man and has no idea what's going on.

The Skyler hate, which I've heard a lot about, is perplexing. I didn't see anything annoying about her in season 1; in season 2, she was the only one who wasn't buying Walt's BS and was smart enough to start suspecting something was wrong, although he almost managed to fool her again; and calling her a shrew or whatever is just downright weird - she only had the nornal human reaction of anger to her husband lying to her and deceiving her while putting her and their family in such a terrible situation. I have a lot of sympathy for her because Walt put her in such a messed up situation with no good options (where the danger of disgrace and prison is bad enough, but Walt put the entire family in direct physical danger by getting involved iwth some very dangerous people), so I can understand why she's started to get involved with the money laundering and all. It's been clear from the start that, however angry she is, she can't find it in herself to report Walt and send him to prison, bring disgrace to the whole family  and break their son's heart, and she also still cares about Walt enough to worry about his safety, even though she doesn't want to take him back (and I hope she doesn't). She's trying to make the best out of a bad situation, but in the process she's become an accomplice. And while giving Marie money for Hank's recovery is understandable, she's doing to her sister the same Walt did to her. I can't imagine how Marie and Hank would feel if they knew his recovery was paid by drug money, and his brother-in-law was the drug-dealer he was looking for all that time. It's like Walt's increasing corruption is also corrupting people around him, like Skyler, which is making her an interesting and morally grey character too.

 

Good for you, although I think my reaction is a more extreme version of the usual response to the series. Sadly there are also people who never get over that first annoyance phase and who keep on hating on certain characters long past the initial set-up.

[Tywin et al.]

5 hours ago, Veltigar said:

The biggest crime of Die Another Day is that it didn't launch Toby Stephens' career into the stratosphere. It's probably that he didn't want to be a big movie star (him being acting royalty and all), but he demonstrates in Black Sails that he's the real thing every single episode.

Funny thing is during the first episode intro I was like, "I know that name, but from where?" After seeing his face I was certain I had seen him in something before and died laughing after looking him up on IMDB. That movie was so awful, but he was great in it.

I still can't wrap my head around why they thought it was a good idea to have an Asian man turn into a white guy.

[Isis]

I watched The Chair this week. Is that right, there were only six episodes? Seems pretty short for a US series. Is that what you would call an super ultra seriously limited series?

Having worked at a higher education institute for 20 years I see a lot of truth in the admin/old fashioned, set in their ways systems - so a lot of the procedural bits rang true with me. I liked the show and I wanted more than six eps to be honest. 

I'm now having a second stab at watching Yellow Jackets (on to ep 3). It's mildly intriguing and yet I am not fully hooked by it.

[IFR]

I absolutely love Dark, but the criticisms of the details of time travel in that show are quite valid. It's not a hard scifi show.

Spoiler

I thought how the show explained its version of "entanglement" was clear, though of course the mechanism of its triggering was left kind of vague (other than the magical dark matter apocalypse occurs, so superposition of timelines is now possible).

The non-deterministic resolution I thought worked, too. It followed the logic of the "science" presented in the show well enough, and was dramatically satisfying to me.

Great show.

[dbunting]

20 hours ago, Corvinus85 said:

  Hide contents

In the beginning, they couldn't see the alien, right? So if it was higher up, the dispersal area of the object would have been greater.

 

Except

Spoiler

They couldn't see it because they weren't looking for it and it was in a cloud. The dispersal area was HUGE. I can buy that as a reason but why was it never that high again?

 

[Veltigar]

23 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Funny thing is during the first episode intro I was like, "I know that name, but from where?" After seeing his face I was certain I had seen him in something before and died laughing after looking him up on IMDB. That movie was so awful, but he was great in it.

I still can't wrap my head around why they thought it was a good idea to have an Asian man turn into a white guy.

Nancy Reagan knows and she would have just said "no"