3 Body Problem (Show Spoilers Only)

[IFR]

8 hours ago, karaddin said:

These spoiler boxes in the last day are all book spoilers not show spoilers right? Could you please precede spoiler boxes with "book spoilers" or "show spoilers" just so it's explicit? It's got me considering reading the books so I'd rather avoid concrete spoilers for now.

The entire discussion past Spockydog's request for book spoilers are all book spoilers.

I recommend you read the books. Some people find the first book rough, though I personally enjoyed it. The other two books are very much a different experience though. It's worth avoiding spoilers and enjoying it without knowing what you are getting into. I think the story is still excellent even knowing what's ahead, but there's a good deal of pleasure in the rollercoaster ride of the wild events that occur. I was fortunate to go in knowing nothing about the books other than they were highly recommended in scifi circles, and it was glorious.

@JGP

The show runners have stated in interviews that they hope for four seasons. This makes sense to me. The second season should cover book two and perhaps some of book three. Book three is extremely eventful and sprawling, and can easily be divided into two seasons.

Also, to further you discussion with Deadlines, here's my submission to the argument.

Consider a magician. They engage in their trade via deception. They don't have to verbally communicate, yet they manage to deceive. Yet it would be highly unconventional to term their trade as lying. It is deception.

Book two prologue and book one spoilers:

Spoiler

Of course the San-Ti would not be able to engage in the magician trade - it's merely provided as an example of how a distinction between the two ideas may be made. As Deadline says, they reveal themselves in communication. The key point of knowledge here is that the San-Ti communication and thought process involves the direct emission of electromagnetic radiation. As they think, they essentially are sending radiowaves (among other frequencies of EM radiation). They also have organic "antennas", so they simultaneously receive the thoughts of other San-Ti. Like all EM waves, these thought waves can be attenuated by shielding and distance. So an isolated San-Ti can hide their intentions simply by acting in isolation from other San-Ti or in heavy shielding. But deception in direct communication is impossible because in that context "thinking" is the exact same thing as "communicating".

So from this you can reasonably extrapolate the limits of how they are able to deceive and what they would perceive as lying versus deception. You may agree or disagree with the author's idea of the distinction, but everything occurs around this premise.

 

[Mudguard]

14 hours ago, Spockydog said:

Holy shit. 

The books are really worth reading.  I probably will listen to them again as audiobooks to refresh my memory.  There's nothing comparable to them that I can think of, with how interactions with alien civs are depicted, weaponry, and what happens to humanity in the future.  Completely different than the Star Trek / Star Wars type universes that dominate science fiction.  The books are packed with so many interesting ideas that make up for relatively weak character development, which is one area that the show really improves on.

[Heartofice]

31 minutes ago, Mudguard said:

The books are packed with so many interesting ideas that make up for relatively weak character development, which is one area that the show really improves on.

I'm halfway through the series, and my general thoughts are that I find the concepts and ideas far more interesting than many of the characters, so maybe that weakness isn't totally improved. 

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

7 hours ago, IFR said:

The show runners have stated in interviews that they hope for four seasons.

That might be possible if you were talking about *minimum* 10 episodes per season. 12 would be better. 

They've set up the main cast and the show will obviously focus in them, but you can't do that at the expense of humanity. Humanity has to get stuffed in there somewhere; and it can't just be clips of people rioting or staring up at the sky.

I also worry about the way this story goes forward through time. and the stuff that happens in those time periods. You could do a season for each of the "era's" in this series; which would yield seven seasons in total.  

[Isis]

Not really a surprise that nobody has mentioned Sam Tarly yet (despite multiple GOT mentions). I guess because the actor is bland and forgettable in this. There are a few ok to good performances here but what a shame the Oxford five (lol) hit so many bum notes.

I read the first book and I enjoyed it but it felt a bit ?cold. I didn't really feel any strong connection to it. It was interesting but I didn't feel any desire to read further books. However, I binged the show in two days. As the final credits rolled, we pondered whether it would get axed before it reaches its second season. 

[Scott_N]

Up to episode four but got so annoyed by the sheer stupidity of everything about that raid I will pause my viewing for awhile. I'm still sufficiently interested in seeing where the story goes to pick it up again later, I think.

Some occasional silliness aside, my only real gripe up until now has been how unconvincing many of the actors are. From the main cast only Jess Hong and Rosalind Chao are good. The rest of the Oxford Five - I can't even be bothered to look up their names - range from forgettable (Saul) to poor (Will, Auggie) to joke (Rooney). Then again, these are all cardboard characters, and this clearly isn't a character-driven show, so maybe it shouldn't matter that much.

[Ser Rodrigo Belmonte II]

So is the show any good for people who’ve never read the books ? Also wasnt the author a Chinese communist party sympathiser? Surprised it got green lit. 

Edited March 30 by Ser Rodrigo Belmonte II

[House Cambodia]

21 hours ago, Isis said:

Not really a surprise that nobody has mentioned Sam Tarly yet (despite multiple GOT mentions). I guess because the actor is bland and forgettable in this. There are a few ok to good performances here but what a shame the Oxford five (lol) hit so many bum notes.

I read the first book and I enjoyed it but it felt a bit ?cold. I didn't really feel any strong connection to it. It was interesting but I didn't feel any desire to read further books. However, I binged the show in two days. As the final credits rolled, we pondered whether it would get axed before it reaches its second season. 

I'd say "Sam Tarly" was there to be a bit of comic relief mainly. In the book the Chinese detective gets the best humorous lines and for me, it's a shame they were taken away from him and given to a superfluous character.

Personally, I loved the books, but I fully understand why many readers wouldn't, chiefly because Cixin Liu is not good at deep characterisation, so if you're a 'characters over plot' person, it's not for you. In that sense, the Netflix show improves on the books, although it might have been better if the 'Oxford 5' were condensed into four or maybe three so each one has more depth to relate to.

[House Cambodia]

2 minutes ago, Ser Rodrigo Belmonte II said:

Also wasnt the author a Chinese communist party sympathiser? Surprised it got green lit. 

Well, that's a whole other can of worms. He's come out in favour of the state's policy on Uyghurs. For us westerners that's anathema. What I'd say is that any Chinese person who's lived only in China, have only ever had one side of the truth - should they be condemned for that? Would you condemn an American who's never left the US for buying into the American Dream or American Exceptionalism, or Americans in the '60s supporting their government's war on Vietnam?

What is more valid, in my view, is how he portrays Chinese history - i.e. The Cultural Revolution. That's raised hackles within the Chinese government. You might say it's surprising the books got 'green lit' by China.

[House Cambodia]

On 3/28/2024 at 10:54 PM, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

That might be possible if you were talking about *minimum* 10 episodes per season. 12 would be better. 

They've set up the main cast and the show will obviously focus in them, but you can't do that at the expense of humanity. Humanity has to get stuffed in there somewhere; and it can't just be clips of people rioting or staring up at the sky.

I also worry about the way this story goes forward through time. and the stuff that happens in those time periods. You could do a season for each of the "era's" in this series; which would yield seven seasons in total.  

It will be tricky to create engaging characters in a story that spans literal millions of years. However ...

Spoiler

It's briefly mentioned in the show that Wade will enter cryogenic hibernation - that's book canon. I expect D&D will expand that to chuck all their favs into suspended animation so they pop up time and again down the centuries and millennia.

 

[Nictarion]

On 3/29/2024 at 9:46 AM, Scott_N said:

From the main cast only Jess Hong and Rosalind Chao are good. The rest of the Oxford Five - I can't even be bothered to look up their names - range from forgettable (Saul) to poor (Will, Auggie) to joke (Rooney). Then again, these are all cardboard characters, and this clearly isn't a character-driven show, so maybe it shouldn't matter that much.

I thought Cunningham and Wong were both good. 

[Scott_N]

1 hour ago, Nictarion said:

I thought Cunningham and Wong were both good. 

Fair enough, Wong is always watchable but I'm not sure he is doing much acting. Whenever I see him (not an awful lot, I admit) he seems to play all his characters the same way. It works, to be fair, because he has presence. I don't think the same can be said for Cunningham.

[Heartofice]

It's like there are 2 shows going on with 3 Body Problem. There is the high concept alien story, with historic elements in China. And then there is the 'Oxford Five' show.

One is much more interesting than the other. I agree that Cunningham and Wong are knocking it out the park with their performances, and good enough that they can say any old crap and make it sound good.

The rest of the cast really don't have it. The Oxford 5 really are just a bunch of daytime tv quality actors thrown into an expensive production, one or two of them are really bad. Eliza Gonzalez is incredible looking and can't complain when she is on screen, but she is also not great, and as I mentioned before, her being one of the most beautiful women on the planet and having a hair and beauty regime required to maintain that doesn't really align to the idea she is some hard working scientist who spends all day in a lab. In fact none of them really seem to be that hard working. 

So that element is just really quite bad and silly. Very much 'Late Game of Thrones' level of writing.

The rest of the show I do quite enjoy though, and am kind of hoping they jump past this bit quickly

[House Cambodia]

1 hour ago, Scott_N said:

Fair enough, Wong is always watchable but I'm not sure he is doing much acting. Whenever I see him (not an awful lot, I admit) he seems to play all his characters the same way. It works, to be fair, because he has presence. I don't think the same can be said for Cunningham.

Wade is a pretty dull bureaucrat in the books. To me, Cunningham really brings him alive. He's probably my favourite character in the Netflix series.

[Spockydog]

Don't think I've ever heard anyone complain that Austin Butler is just too good looking to be a bomber pilot. Yet, it seems that every half a dozen posts here, someone feels the need to say that the actor playing Auggie is so hot she would never be a scientist. 

What a load of sexist, incel-lite horseshit

Edited March 31 by Spockydog

[Spockydog]

7 hours ago, Scott_N said:

Fair enough, Wong is always watchable but I'm not sure he is doing much acting. 

This is unquestionably his finest work to date. Zippidy doo. 

 

 

Edited March 31 by Spockydog

[Heartofice]

39 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

Don't think I've ever heard anyone complain that Austin Butler is just too good looking to be a bomber pilot. Yet, it seems that every half a dozen posts here, someone feels the need to say that the actor playing Auggie is so hot she would never be a scientist. 

What a load of sexist, incel-lite horseshit

lol.

Honestly, if Auggie was a man, but looked like Jason Momoa or Chris Hemsworth it would be just as distracting.

Edited March 31 by Heartofice

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

I don't remember anyone losing their shit when Hemsworth played a scientist in Spiderhead. 

[Heartofice]

Eh? Yeah Spiderhead.. that classic bit of movie making. Great example. 
 

But if we are doing that then:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-reviews/chris-hemsworth-miles-teller-netflix-spiderhead-film-1235163103/amp/

Quote

It may not have been the most appropriate casting, since the actor looks less like a scientist than a perfect human specimen created in a lab.

And

https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/spiderhead-movie-review-2022

Quote

He makes a stronger case for being recast, for someone who doesn't just take the "hot scientist wearing glasses" trope back.  

 

Edited March 31 by Heartofice

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

It's a perfect example. Whether or not it's a great film is changing the subject.

How about Matthew McConaughey as Rust Cole in True Detective? Not really plausible if you ask me. ';Not many cops that look like that. 'Not many men who look like that.  The amount that character was drinking and he's still got that shredded bod? Puh-lease. And not a single doughnut in site. So unbelievable. 

Ruined the show if you ask me.