3 Body Problem (Show Spoilers Only)

[IFR]

I'm very excited for this one. The embargo for reviews has lifted, so professional critics have released their reviews. It's always a joy to establish yet again how highly incompetent professional critics tend to be at evaluating the quality of a show, but there is still value in examining what they have to say.

It appears that aside from character deviations (such as splitting the protagonist of the first book into five characters) the show follows the narrative of the book closely, which is encouraging. I love the trilogy, but I will readily acknowledge that the characters are virtually non-existent. That's a very trivial point to me, since this is a broad scope tale that is all about the creative ideas, epic scale, and cosmic horror, so the characters really don't need to be developed for the story to work. But certainly improvement in that area couldn't hurt either.

A few critics still find the characters undercooked in the show. Of course doubt is cast on the opinions of these critics when one examines deeper into what they consider good character drama. Alan Sepinwall, for instance, gave one of the harsher reviews for this show, but considers the latest season of True Detective a masterpiece. But he also likes Shogun. What do Shogun and season four of True Detective have in common? Exaggerated, soapy character drama. Of course Shogun, in its excellence, does the legwork of ensuring the details that go into the characters' actions make sense, and the show has a lot of subtly, whereas True Detective utterly ignores such things as details and logic, and has the subtlety of a truncheon. But Sepinwall doesn't seem to be the type to care how the machine works, so long as he gets his flashy lights. Additionally Sepinwall didn't seem to like the first book (he didn't continue to the next two), which in my mind further demonstrates that he is not the target audience.

Also, the denoument has received some criticism as very understated and not climactic enough. Apparently this season not only covers the first book, but also sets up the succeeding novels, so it sounds like it has the same structure as The Expanse, which is awkward with the first season on its own, but works much better with the entire show available.

At any rate, I'm hoping this show turns out well. Not just because I absolutely adore the book series, but also from their interviews I rather like David Benioff and Dan Weiss. And of any showrunner out there, they've probably been subject to the most fan vitriol. The vitriol is to such a staggering extent that it legitimately comes off as a mental illness. It's completely disgusting.

People are unable to realize they they are not owed the ending they want. Game of Thrones is a piece of entertainment, nothing more than a luxury item. George RR Martin doesn't owe us an ending, and Benioff and Weiss didn't owe us whatever ending fans think would please them. The fan entitlement is obnoxious and beyond repulsive, and I hope Benioff and Weiss find continued success just for the satisfaction of seeing these hostile fans stymied in their insane retributive hate.

Anyway, all episodes will be released on the 21st of this month. Let's hope it's good!

Edited April 8 by IFR

[Caligula_K3]

I'm looking forward to the show too, and god knows I find the vitriol directed against Weiss and Benioff to be ridiculous and a sad reflection of the state of media discourse. I'm not sure I see the need to discount Sepinwall's opinions: he's a respected and very thoughtful critic. That doesn't mean I agree with every opinion he's had, but let's not say he's only in it for the flashy lights. His review essentially is saying that despite Weiss and Benioff's best efforts, it's too hard a series to adapt... which may well be true.

We'll see in a couple of weeks. The first book was my least favourite of the trilogy, interesting cultural revolution stuff aside, so even if it's not an amazing first season, hopefully the next two seasons can get to the next level.

 

 

[Mexal]

First book was fine. It was lofty as fuck and hard for me to understand the urgency behind everything. I can see why it's a very very hard task to adapt. Weiss and Benioff even said it was an insanely difficult task and if they can get people watching through this season, it's only up from there.

[IFR]

1 hour ago, Caligula_K3 said:

I'm not sure I see the need to discount Sepinwall's opinions: he's a respected and very thoughtful critic.

Wasn't Henry Kissinger respected at some point?

I joke. But while some may find him thoughtful, I haven't found that since I've paid attention to his reviews (he recently published a review on the True Detective finale, and thoughtful is certainly not a term I would use to describe it).

In this particular review, there were a few passages that stood out to me.

Quote

I’ve only read the first novel, The Three-Body Problem, and it is the hardest of hard sci-fi: heavy on theory, meandering in plot, all but nonexistent in characterization. Large swaths of it take place inside a virtual reality game where players visit different eras of human history in an attempt to solve an astrophysics problem. The book bounces back and forth between the present and the aftermath of China’s Cultural Revolution; Wang Miao, the protagonist of the novel’s modern section, barely even qualifies as having two dimensions. The books are a worldwide sensation, but nobody’s reading them for the characters, when characters are almost always what gets audiences hooked on ongoing TV shows. For all the dragon attacks and ice zombie hordes, would anyone have cared about Game of Thrones if they weren’t already invested in Arya Stark, Tyrion Lannister, and so many other vivid figures Benioff and Weiss were gifted by George R.R. Martin?

To me, the way this is worded comes off as a negative description of the book. Heavy on theory is a good thing, and the "meandering" structure was a positive quality of the book. The characterization was a trivial part of the book and not important. Based on his reviews, Sepinwall has the opposite opinion: characterization is the most important thing, and theory is less interesting.

This is further demonstrated with this passage:

Quote

The best thing I can say about 3 Body Problem is that it is a very, very smart piece of adaptation. Benioff, Weiss, and Woo (a longtime writer on True Blood and the creator of Season Two of AMC’s horror anthology The Terror) have done everything they can to blend the big ideas from the books with people who have clear personalities and inner lives, rather than ones who exist entirely as plot functionaries.

Again, he praises that Benioff and Weiss have improved upon the character development of the books, but then says it's not enough. He is placing too much importance on characters and insufficient importance on the scifi concepts and existential issues.

The rest of the review goes on to describe how the core of the story itself is too abstruse and not compelling to him. Which to me clearly indicates that he isn't the target audience, and his qualitative opinion is not a good indication of the quality of the show for people who are the target audience.

But, as always when it comes to opinions, I speak subjectively. I find Sepinwall's reviews comically out of touch, which is why I've enjoyed mocking his reviews, but if his opinion has, historically, greatly aligned with yours, then of course for you he is worth listening to.

1 hour ago, Caligula_K3 said:

We'll see in a couple of weeks. The first book was my least favourite of the trilogy, interesting cultural revolution stuff aside, so even if it's not an amazing first season, hopefully the next two seasons can get to the next level.

I like the first book a lot, but I also consider it my least favorite of the trilogy. It's really just a prologue staging the rest of the story. Even Benioff and Weiss say as much. Which is a very risky gambit for television (House of the Dragon had a similar situation, where the first season, while engaging, was really setting things up for the main events). 

I do hope it pays off. There is literally nothing like the ambition of the full series that has been done in television or movies.

Edited March 9 by IFR

[Mexal]

4 minutes ago, IFR said:

Wasn't Henry Kissinger respected at some point?

I joke. But while some may find him thoughtful, I haven't found that since I've paid attention to his reviews (he recently published a review on the True Detective finale, and thoughtful is certainly not a term I would use to describe it).

In this particular review, there were a few passages that stood out to me.

To me, the way this is worded comes off as a negative description of the book. Heavy on theory is a good thing, and the "meandering" structure was a positive quality of the book. The characterization was a trivial part of the book and not important. Based on his reviews, Sepinwall has the opposite opinion: characterization is the most important thing, and theory is less interesting.

This is further demonstrated with this passage:

Again, he praises that Benioff and Weiss have improved upon the character development of the books, but then says it's not enough. He is placing too much importance on characters and insufficient importance on the scifi concepts and existential issues.

The rest of the review goes on to describe how the core of the story itself is too abstruse and not compelling to him. Which to me clearly indicates that he isn't the target audience, and his qualitative opinion is not a good indication of the quality of the show for people who are the target audience.

But, as always when it comes to opinions, I speak subjectively. I find Sepinwall's reviews comically out of touch, which is why I've enjoyed mocking his reviews, but if his opinion has, historically, greatly aligned with yours, then of course for you he is worth listening to.

I like the first book a lot, but I also consider it my least favorite of the trilogy. It's really just a prologue staging the rest of the story. Even Benioff and Weiss say as much. Which is a very risky gambit for television (House of the Dragon had a similar situation, where the first season, while engaging, was really setting things up for the main events). 

I do hope it pays off. There is literally nothing like the ambition of the full series that has been done in television or movies.

So basically he's not the target audience and it didn't entirely work for him. Heavy on theory is a good thing for SOME people, not everyone. It certainly isn't for me. More characterization and less hard sci fi and existential issues is also aligned to what I like. And I agree with him that story itself is too abstruse and not compelling to me. So I get not agreeing with his opinion because the things he doesn't like are things you do, but calling him comically out of touch seems particularly harsh just because he disagrees with what you want from the show vs him.

[IFR]

2 minutes ago, Mexal said:

So basically he's not the target audience and it didn't entirely work for him. Heavy on theory is a good thing for SOME people, not everyone. It certainly isn't for me. More characterization and less hard sci fi and existential issues is also aligned to what I like. And I agree with him that story itself is too abstruse and not compelling to me. So I get not agreeing with his opinion because the things he doesn't like are things you do, but calling him comically out of touch seems particularly harsh just because he disagrees with what you want from the show vs him.

When I call him comically out of touch, I'm not speaking objectively. I am speaking in reference to my own opinion. It is impossible to objectively make this assertion, which is why I didn't feel the need to specify that it was a subjective evaluation. If someone uniformly agrees with the majority of critics, then naturally my own assessment would not be reliable to that person, since they would find themselves agreeing with critics and not agreeing with me. It would be foolish for them to listen to me in that case, because their opinions would not be aligned with mine.

So to be clear. Sepinwall is comically out of touch to me. What he looks for in shows and what I look for in shows are very different.

I can still make fun of why he looks for what he does in shows, and I do. It would be like people who enjoy trashy reality shows. There is nothing wrong with that preference. Liking trashy reality shows indicates nothing about you as a person other than you like trashy reality shows. But in a general sense, that audience tends to have such preferences subject of some teasing. Likewise, there's nothing inherently wrong with Sepinwall having substandard tastes (this is a joke: I reiterate that there is no universal metric for "good" taste), but it is funny that he does, especially since he is paid to evaluate the quality of shows - yet he's so bad at that!

[kissdbyfire]

The trailer I saw had one of the Ds saying something along the lines of, "book fans will have a few surprises".

Once bitten and all that, I'm gonna wait for the whole 1st series to drop and then I'll see how people feel/think about it and then I'll decide whether to give it a go. 

[SeanF]

5 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

The trailer I saw had one of the Ds saying something along the lines of, "book fans will have a few surprises".

Once bitten and all that, I'm gonna wait for the whole 1st series to drop and then I'll see how people feel/think about it and then I'll decide whether to give it a go. 

Once bitten, twice shy, is exactly my view of this.

[kissdbyfire]

23 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Once bitten, twice shy, is exactly my view of this.

And it wasn't wasn't just any bite... it was a bite from a rabid monster w/ a filthy mouth full of all sorts of flesh eating bacteria that led to the amputarion of the bitten limb but that wasn't enough and it led to septicaemia and death!

[IFR]

36 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

The trailer I saw had one of the Ds saying something along the lines of, "book fans will have a few surprises".

Once bitten and all that, I'm gonna wait for the whole 1st series to drop and then I'll see how people feel/think about it and then I'll decide whether to give it a go. 

This is a fair take. 3 Body Problem, if it comes even close to truly adapting the books, is the most ambitious series on television. There is a lot that can go disastrously wrong.

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

Holy fuck.

Rian Johnson is credited as an executive producer on this thing. The goddamn trifecta.

If they fuck this up, the nerd rage will split the planet in half. I am so not looking forward to the usual social media dipshits debating whether the series is "woke" or not. 

That said, I'm really looking forward to this. Most of GoT is still some of the best prestige cable ever. And I don't buy this, "they had George's source material" stuff. It is perfectly possible to do a terrible adaptation of great source material and vise versa.

I haven't read the books so I get to evaluate it based solely on its quality as a prestige cable TV show. "Book fans." Amirite?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that this is a series that doesn't exactly lend itself to a super-direct adaptation. True?

[IFR]

3 hours ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that this is a series that doesn't exactly lend itself to a super-direct adaptation. True?

Very true. If they pull this off, it cannot be overstated how impressive an accomplishment that would be. I do not exaggerate in stating that this is the most ambitious tv project in production.

[Spockydog]

We're currently rewatching the entire run of GoT. One episode per Friday night.

The "created by" in the opening titles still irks. Adapting ain't creating. They didn't "create" jack shit. 

Edited March 10 by Spockydog

[Relic]

Why anyone would entrust another adaptation to these clowns is beyond me. 

[Ser Rodrigo Belmonte II]

6 minutes ago, Relic said:

Why anyone would entrust another adaptation to these clowns is beyond me. 

GoT Season 1-4 were genuinely good, i think they got fucked by the lack of source material as well as their own faults... 

[SeanF]

6 hours ago, Spockydog said:

We're currently rewatching the entire run of GoT. One episode per Friday night.

The "created by" in the opening titles still irks. Adapting ain't creating. They didn't "create" jack shit. 

After Seasons 7 and 8 (which only appear worse with hindsight), GOT has no rewatch value, for me.

[IFR]

1 hour ago, Relic said:

Why anyone would entrust another adaptation to these clowns is beyond me. 

They took a series of books that were deliberately written to be unadaptable and made them into one of the most popular and critically acclaimed shows ever? That sort of thing apparently impressed Netflix.

Who in television do you think is better suited to adapt the Remembrance of Earth's Past trilogy?

[SeanF]

4 hours ago, Ser Rodrigo Belmonte II said:

GoT Season 1-4 were genuinely good, i think they got fucked by the lack of source material as well as their own faults... 

They got high on their own supply.  They didn’t possess the writing skills needed to produce a tragedy, and they did not realise that they lacked those writing skills.

[Ser Rodrigo Belmonte II]

Sure but GRRM also carries alot of blame for not leaving them with much more than some notes and a discussion on how to tackle the remaining story....

[SeanF]

11 minutes ago, Ser Rodrigo Belmonte II said:

Sure but GRRM also carries alot of blame for not leaving them with much more than some notes and a discussion on how to tackle the remaining story....

I also agree with that.