Watch, Watched, Watching: No Dragons Allowed

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

3 minutes ago, DMC said:

The most annoying part of Season 2 is 

  Reveal hidden contents

the constant build up to the plane(s) crash, which was a really bad payoff.  Frankly all that foreshadowing seems like an idea the writer's room fell in love with without a solid plan how to end it.

 

I found that payoff to be so fucking annoying. 

S3 E1 tomorrow morning while doing yoga. And yes, I recognize that's very weird. 

[Veltigar]

I watched all 11 episodes of Sandman. Beautiful stuff and I want more. I'll probably also buy the books.

EDIT: I also watched the second episode of House of the Dragon. It was a good episode, though high on set up and low on pay-off. The type of episode that is necessary for the long-term development of the story but that will probably not be anyone's favourite. 

So far, I am liking the confidence with with the writers' are embellishing the story. I do wonder whether some later characters 

Spoiler

especially Breakbones will be added or whether the children will be Cole's, as they have such a lean story at the moment. It would be a shame to endanger that.

 

[Nictarion]

The Grand Budapest Hotel. I’ve seen it multiple times at this point, but I find myself appreciating it more and more with each viewing. Wes Anderson really wrote some of his best lines for Monsieur Gustave.

[TheLastWolf]

8 minutes ago, Nictarion said:

The Grand Budapest Hotel. I’ve seen it multiple times at this point, but I find myself appreciating it more and more with each viewing. Wes Anderson really wrote some of his best lines for Monsieur Gustave.

It's shot like a painting! And the symmetrical frames are just wooow!

[Heartofice]

Licorice Pizza is a movie I am struggling to form an opinion of. My first thought is it feels like a companion piece to PTA's other movie that I love, Punch Drunk Love. So much of it feels similar at times, from the way its shot, it's sense of romance and love, some scenes feel almost identical at times, especially right at the end.

But whereas Punch Drunk Love blows you away with its style and performances, Licorice Pizza is a bit more low key and rambling. It has some brilliant moments, including Bradley Cooper being amazing, but it also just doesn't seem very focused. 

Overall I really liked it, but it's not top tier PTA. 

[TheLastWolf]

14 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Licorice Pizza is a movie I am struggling to form an opinion of. My first thought is it feels like a companion piece to PTA's other movie that I love, Punch Drunk Love. So much of it feels similar at times, from the way its shot, it's sense of romance and love, some scenes feel almost identical at times, especially right at the end.

But whereas Punch Drunk Love blows you away with its style and performances, Licorice Pizza is a bit more low key and rambling. It has some brilliant moments, including Bradley Cooper being amazing, but it also just doesn't seem very focused. 

Overall I really liked it, but it's not top tier PTA. 

Ppl compare it to OUATI...H

Is it warranted?

[Heartofice]

5 minutes ago, TheLastWolf said:

Ppl compare it to OUATI...H

Is it warranted?

Once upon a time in Hollywood? I guess I can sort of see similarities, that feels like a Tarantino movie and this definitely feels like a PTA movie. This feels much more like a smaller indie movie that nobody notices ever got made, which I guess it sort of is. 

[Darryk]

27 minutes ago, TheLastWolf said:

Ppl compare it to OUATI...H

Is it warranted?

I would say no. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood has an edgier plot and elements of a crime film while Licorice Pizza is bending more toward romantic comedy.

Personally I was completely engrossed in Once Upon a Time but didn't really know what to make of Licorice Pizza.

[dog-days]

3 hours ago, TheLastWolf said:

It's shot like a painting! And the symmetrical frames are just wooow!

Totally. It's a beautiful film, but not just quirky and elegant - the ending has huge pathos. 

[Veltigar]

I saw the first episode of 1883, the Yellowstone prequel yesterday. I don't have anything else to watch at the moment, I like Westerns and Sam Elliot so I'll probably struggle through. Based on that first episode though, 1883 is not going to pull a HotD on us and overshadow its predecessor. 

Don't know if anyone here watched it but I would be curious to know what others think of it? I'm not that knowledgeable of the whole trek of the pioneers they are basing themselves on, but it does feel like we are getting a rather conservative interpretation of history.

Apart from that, my biggest gripe is the pretentious and yet again wholly unnecessary voice over. If there is anything that will make me quit, it is this.

[Spockydog]

2 hours ago, Veltigar said:

I saw the first episode of 1883, the Yellowstone prequel yesterday. I don't have anything else to watch at the moment, I like Westerns and Sam Elliot so I'll probably struggle through. Based on that first episode though, 1883 is not going to pull a HotD on us and overshadow its predecessor. 

Don't know if anyone here watched it but I would be curious to know what others think of it? I'm not that knowledgeable of the whole trek of the pioneers they are basing themselves on, but it does feel like we are getting a rather conservative interpretation of history.

Well, for starters, I doubt there is any queer representation in this show. According to Elliott, nobody in the West was gay. Not ever. No, sirree.

 

[GallowKnight]

7 hours ago, Veltigar said:

I saw the first episode of 1883, the Yellowstone prequel yesterday. I don't have anything else to watch at the moment, I like Westerns and Sam Elliot so I'll probably struggle through. Based on that first episode though, 1883 is not going to pull a HotD on us and overshadow its predecessor. 

Don't know if anyone here watched it but I would be curious to know what others think of it? I'm not that knowledgeable of the whole trek of the pioneers they are basing themselves on, but it does feel like we are getting a rather conservative interpretation of history.

Apart from that, my biggest gripe is the pretentious and yet again wholly unnecessary voice over. If there is anything that will make me quit, it is this.

It's not great. The Americans are all though, rugged and awesome at everything and the immigrants are literally too dumb to live. The voice over will not get better.

It's a great looking show though.

[Mexal]

8 hours ago, Veltigar said:

I saw the first episode of 1883, the Yellowstone prequel yesterday. I don't have anything else to watch at the moment, I like Westerns and Sam Elliot so I'll probably struggle through. Based on that first episode though, 1883 is not going to pull a HotD on us and overshadow its predecessor. 

Don't know if anyone here watched it but I would be curious to know what others think of it? I'm not that knowledgeable of the whole trek of the pioneers they are basing themselves on, but it does feel like we are getting a rather conservative interpretation of history.

Apart from that, my biggest gripe is the pretentious and yet again wholly unnecessary voice over. If there is anything that will make me quit, it is this.

I really enjoyed it. Taylor Sheridan is a fairly conservative dude so no surprise there. Also, the immigrants grow a bit but no real surprise that they have no idea how to handle the west. It was fucking intense and dangerous. The rugged dudes barely can.

[Zorral]

5 hours ago, Spockydog said:

Well, for starters, I doubt there is any queer representation in this show. According to Elliott, nobody in the West was gay. Not ever. No, sirree.

 

If it is 1883, there were cowboys and cattle drives.  And cowboys are well known to be frequently secretly fond of each other around the campfires at night.  (Newsflash -- a lot of the cowboys were um, you know, Black.)

Why yes, having grown up in these regions I imbibed information and history about this era -- my state was not yet quite a state, but people (including mine)  were definitely taking advantage of the Homesteading Act and settling even the Dakotas!  -- this is the Deadwood era, that of T Roosevelt -- who was a stockman out there for a while, and wrote books about it -- and all sorts of significant figures and events that are part of the plutocratic robber baron free-for-all Gilded Age. 

Now a lot of the mythology got started immediately and is directly antithetical to what actually happened in this Glorious Age of Capitalist Extraction and Native Genocide, but my courses in grad school in American History began correcting all that very quickly. 

I won't be seeing this show because I don't subscribe to that service, and because I'm sick to death of White Men running the show, particularly those guys from back then.

 

[dbunting]

3 hours ago, Zorral said:

If it is 1883, there were cowboys and cattle drives.  And cowboys are well known to be frequently secretly fond of each other around the campfires at night.  (Newsflash -- a lot of the cowboys were um, you know, Black.)

 

Hey now, much like when in prison that doesn't count!

[DMC]

10 hours ago, dbunting said:

Hey now, much like when in prison that doesn't count!

Well you get a pass for that...

 

[TheLastWolf]

13 hours ago, Zorral said:

20 hours ago, Spockydog said:

Well, for starters, I doubt there is any queer representation in this show. According to Elliott, nobody in the West was gay. Not ever. No, sirree.

If it is 1883, there were cowboys and cattle drives.  And cowboys are well known to be frequently secretly fond of each other around the campfires at night.  (Newsflash -- a lot of the cowboys were um, you know, Black.)

Power of the Dog, watched it exactly 90 days ago, Oscar snubs except for C(h)ampion

[Veltigar]

21 hours ago, GallowKnight said:

It's not great. The Americans are all though, rugged and awesome at everything and the immigrants are literally too dumb to live. The voice over will not get better.

It's a great looking show though.

 

20 hours ago, Mexal said:

I really enjoyed it. Taylor Sheridan is a fairly conservative dude so no surprise there. Also, the immigrants grow a bit but no real surprise that they have no idea how to handle the west. It was fucking intense and dangerous. The rugged dudes barely can.

I know it shouldn't be the part that bothers me the most, but voice-over really is the bane of my existence. I'll give it a shot but if it indeed stays like this I'm pretty sure I'll be quitting this show in a couple of episodes time.

I do wonder about Sheridan's approach however. Like, I can totally get that you want to present a conservative interpretation of the facts of history, but what little that I know of the time he indeed seems to just ignore the facts all together (e.g. regarding the representation of African-Americans. I once read that like 1/3 of all cowboys were black but you don't see any indication of that here). I know I shouldn't be surprised about that, but still, it irks me.

[Ran]

On 9/1/2022 at 12:23 PM, Spockydog said:

According to Elliott, nobody in the West was gay. Not ever. No, sirree.

I don't know what creative input he has on the show, but that's not actually what he said, re: the representation of cowboys in The Power of the Dog . His issue wasn't homosexual cowboys but the sexualization of cowboys walking around shirtless wearing nothing but chaps and the like, which he felt was a very clear intrusion of the modern directorial hand rather than an honest attempt to show how cowboys actually were.

He liked Brokeback Mountain just fine and thought the relationship between the leads was quite interesting.

[Spockydog]

49 minutes ago, Ran said:

I don't know what creative input he has on the show, but that's not actually what he said, re: the representation of cowboys in The Power of the Dog . His issue wasn't homosexual cowboys but the sexualization of cowboys walking around shirtless wearing nothing but chaps and the like, which he felt was a very clear intrusion of the modern directorial hand rather than an honest attempt to show how cowboys actually were.

He liked Brokeback Mountain just fine and thought the relationship between the leads was quite interesting.

Who was wearing nothing but chaps in that movie? I don't recall.

And look, if Sam Elliott wants to try and tell me that a bunch of young, working class guys, working outdoors in hot conditions, aren't going to spend much of their summer stripped to the waist, getting all hot and sweaty, wearing nothing but hard-hats and cut-down denim shorts, there is a building site around the corner I can quickly go and take some pictures of.

Anyway, I can't remember exactly what he said and I don't care to look it up. I read his comments at the time, and I seem to remember him getting his point across well enough.