What is the last Television series you watched?

[Glóin the Dark 1,516]

I’m crying like a little child at the mere thought of being arrested by the police.

[Quintus 5,702]

Alex probably had a stern upbringing, I recall he's expressed similar reactions or beliefs like this in the past. Kids respond to stress differently depending on their personality and their environment. I forgot to finish this series, but I thought the kid's behaviour was quite realistic in the two episodes I watched. He only cries occasionally, probably due to feeling scared and overwhelmed. I didn't find this annoying like Alex seems to have done.

[Yavar Moradi 3,585]

On 29/05/2025 at 10:51 PM, Schilkeman said:

You make a lot of assumptions about people who disagree with you. I don't know, maybe stop doing that.

 

The assumption I made was that you hadn't finished the show based on what you wrote. And... it turns out I was correct in that assumption (just off by one season, in my guess of how far you made it).

 

You clearly made an assumption that JMS wrote the "One moment of perfect beauty" bit that you mocked; an assumption which I corrected by pointing out who actually wrote that episode.

 

What other assumptions did I make in my post, that you take issue with?

 

On 29/05/2025 at 10:51 PM, Schilkeman said:

I do agree with this point. That bit was just eye-rollingly didactic. I have far bigger issues with Londo.

 

I'm glad that you also see G'Kar's character as the high point of the show. I don't know why you found that scene with him "eye-rollingly didactic"; his character was asked a question and he did his best to explain his perspective on it.

 

Are your "far bigger issues with Londo" in regards to the character himself (where I think pretty much every Babylon 5 fan would agree with you... we are obviously supposed to hate much of what he does), or how he is written? If it's the latter, what exactly are your big issues? I think his "fall to the dark side" as it were is a much more nuanced, realistic, and terrifying one than the "fall" of Anakin Skywalker to the Dark Side in the Star Wars prequel trilogy, which (as far as I recall) you greatly admire and defend. Much better written, and much better acted. The Londo/G'Kar dynamic is one of the only parts of the show which emerges unscathed during the (generally) quite bad first half of season 5.

 

On 29/05/2025 at 10:51 PM, Schilkeman said:

I watched through the end of season 3, and couldn't stand anymore.

 

You couldn't stand "Passing Through Gethsemene" with a powerhouse Brad Dourif performance, G'Kar and Londo in "Dust to Dust" (to say nothing of Walter Koenig in the best role of his career), Ron Howard's dad showing his acting chops in "Interludes and Examinations", or the awesome montage sequence at the end of "And the Rock Cried Out, No Hiding Place" while the titular hymn is sung? You weren't impressed with the crazy writing fix (dealing with the fact that the original series lead departed the show after season 1) that was the two-parter "World Without End"? And most of all, you couldn't stand the impressive three-episode arc of "Messages from Earth", "Point of No Return", and "Severed Dreams", which ultimately won a Hugo Award for Best Dramatic Presentation, besting Star Trek: First Contact, Independence Day, Mars Attacks!, and the excellent "Trials and Tribble-ations" special anniversary episode of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine? You rolled your eyes at all of that?

 

I guess there really is no accounting for taste.

 

On 29/05/2025 at 10:51 PM, Schilkeman said:

I don't care if season 4 was the second coming of Cowboy Bebop

 

You're getting Babylon 5 confused with Firefly, maybe.

 

On 29/05/2025 at 10:51 PM, Schilkeman said:

I don't care if season 4 was the second coming of Cowboy Bebop, if a show can't hold up for 3 (supposedly 4)/5ths of its runtime, it isn't worth watching.

 

Oh, but it does hold up, for most people. Even the first two seasons despite the occasional clunky episode (usually not written by JMS, by the way, like the one you made fun of) are far, FAR better than say the first two seasons of Star Trek: The Next Generation (and I actually like those more than most people... Pulaski > Crusher, any day). I'd also say they're better than the first two seasons of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (apart from "Duet" which might well be the best single episode of that excellent series), with which Babylon 5 is often compared.

 

On 29/05/2025 at 10:51 PM, Schilkeman said:

I could illustrate my points, but this person did a write up with which I more or less agree

 

I would much rather you illustrate your own points, because that write up you just subjected me to was incredibly juvenile ("Babylon 5, from beginning to end, both sucks and blows."), inaccurate (I guess that's where you got the idea that JMS wrote every single episode of the show, even though he only wrote half of the second season, and well under half of the first season), and well, devoid of almost any insight (the "analysis" of Londo is particularly shocking in its superficiality). What you shared is not a nuanced or interesting view of the series, analyzing its flaws. It's clearly written by a fairly immature person (the comments field reveals she was in her early 20s when she wrote this, 20 years ago) who wants to seem edgy and cool by throwing shade at a successful writer ("J. Michael Straczynski is not only a talentless hack, he's a talentless hack who truly believes himself to be God's gift to the writing profession." -- oh, now showrunners are not allowed to have egos?) 

 

I suspect it's also a case of wanting to distance herself from her juvenile fandom and appear more mature, because she ends on this doozy (after making out the series to be a completely worthless piece of trash):

"If I hate the show so much, why did I love it ten years ago, and why have I breezed through it again now, constantly eager for the next installment of the story? Why does the fifth season make me so angry if I think so little of the previous four? For all its many failures, there is something to Babylon 5. I can't put my finger on it--maybe it's just that unearned sense of profundity, getting to me as thoroughly now as it did when I was a callow teenager--but I care about this world. I may be cracking snarky comments every five minutes, but when it comes down to it, and the music swells and the heroes strike their pose and the lovers are reunited, I'm touched, and I want more. I can't stand any of the parts, but I still love the whole."

 

Wait... so she didn't just "love it ten years ago" but she (emphasis mine) "still loves the whole" despite trashing almost every element of the series? I don't know how anyone could read what you shared and take this person's opinion seriously. But since you do, I'll direct you to her follow-up article about season 4 of the show, which I agree with her is the best even though the storyline becomes unfortunately rushed (because it looked like season 5 wasn't going to happen):

[SPOILER WARNING: Nobody should follow the provided link if they want to avoid spoilers.]

"I suspect I'm alone in this, but I really do think that out of the show's three main 'battle arcs'--the original break from Earth ("Messages From Earth" through "Ceremonies of Light and Dark"), the final battle against the Shadows and the Vorlons ("The Summoning" through "Into the Fire"), and the fight to liberate Earth ("No Surrender, No Retreat" through "Endgame")--it's the last one that is the most successful and the best made. There's a darkness and a complexity to the storyline that simply wasn't there before...It's probably the most successful storyline in the show's run, the one that came closest to truly affecting me, and a good high point to end the story on."

https://wrongquestions.blogspot.com/2005/11/babylon-5-addenda.html

 

She is in fact not remotely alone in that opinion; in fact I'd say it's the majority one but I suppose she wants to come off as special and discerning. Unfortunately the rest of that article is full of more glaring inaccuracies and childish insults rather than fair and reasoned analysis. ("A moment of silence, please, for Jason Carter and his beautiful hair. Between them they brought more energy and charisma to their performance than the rest of the cast put together." -- wait, I thought she considered the performances of Andreas Katsulas (G'Kar) and Peter Jurasik (Londo) the high point of the show?)

 

She come off like the worst kind of obnoxious, toxic sci-fi fan... so much more full of herself than J. Michael Straczynski, despite having achieved far less to justify her attitude. And if one reads her participation the comments, one really gets the sense that she's throwing stones in glass houses.

 

On 29/05/2025 at 10:51 PM, Schilkeman said:

Long story short, I think it obfuscates because it doesn't have anything cogent to say.

 

What obfuscation? If anything I'd better understand the criticism being that the show is *too* obvious and heavy-handed with its examination of fascism. It's usually pretty nuanced, but I wouldn't say the show is exactly subtle about the points it's making. So where does it lack cogency, for you?

 

On 29/05/2025 at 10:51 PM, Schilkeman said:

Funny to see them praising Battlestar, which they eventually turned on as well. Another show, even the early seasons, that has not held up to my recent reappraisal. A lot of smoke and mirrors.

 

The Battlestar Galactica reboot has a lot of strengths (the cast in particular), and I definitely detect some positive Babylon 5 influence n it. Unfortunately that influence didn't extend to having the story planned out in advance, something that became painfully obvious to me during seasons 3 and 4 of the show. But yeah, even the superior first two seasons had a great many flaws, and I personally had a harder time forgiving them than I did the many flaws in Babylon 5 or any Berman-era Star Trek show.

 

Yavar

[Schilkeman 1,457]

12 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

The assumption I made was that you hadn't finished the show based on what you wrote.

That's not what you said, and I was referring to your tendency (at least with me) to start replies along the lines of "I assume you..." "Tell me you haven't heard x without telling me you haven't heard x." "I can't believe I'm bothering to reply to someone who likes x." And your patented, passive-aggressive laughing emoji. Indeed, most of your last reply could be excised if you spent less time reviewing the reviewer instead of the things they wrote. Ad hominem arguments only hurt the point you're trying to make.

 

I encourage you to read the comments, she clarifies many of her points, and yes, I did read the follow-up post. That she is still an active blogger and has not posted further on the subject in twenty years suggests to me that her opinion hasn’t changed, and since an appeal to maturity has been made, let me say, as someone who just had a 41st birthday, with two kids, a divorce, and two careers behind me, that I agree with everything she wrote.

 

12 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

You're getting Babylon 5 confused with Firefly, maybe.

I picked a space opera I consider unassailable. I suppose DS9 would have been closer, but I have almost as many issues with it as I do B5, only it's Star Trek, so I would actually care enough to re-watch the show to debate them. 

 

The point of the review was that the show fails at both the micro and macro aspects of storytelling. I was not given enough information on the galaxy-wide politicking at play to have a clear sense of character motivation, and how those character actions would effect the galaxy-wide politicking.

 

Having a large-scale conflict play out with a handful of people, probably a budget issue, was a lot of telling and not showing. I felt the show was written speech-first, with the plot built around it. As long as it kind of acts important (as much as the actors were capable of), no one will notice it doesn't make sense. My God, "Comes the Inquisitor" anyone? Well sorry, if I want great speeches, delivered by A+ actors, I'll watch TNG.

 

Suffice to say that for me, having spent a non-insignificant amount of my life working with abusers, and coming to understand the ubiquitousness of blame-shifting, I find Anakin about the most accurate and nuanced portrayal of a person who convinces themselves to do terrible things I have seen in popular fiction. Londo's motivation is bitterness, with an excuse of revenge, which isn't uncompelling, but too ramshackle in execution for me to care.

[Yavar Moradi 3,585]

17 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

That's not what you said

 

Yeah, what I said was, "I'm guessing you gave up on the show somewhere in season 2?" Note the clear "I'm guessing" I led with, and even the fact that I put a question mark at the end of the sentence. The assumption I made was that you didn't finish the show, which turned out to be correct. The uncertain guess (complete with question mark, inviting you to correct me) I made was that you gave up before season 3 (because so much of that season I find to be fantastic).

 

17 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

I was referring to your tendency (at least with me) to start replies along the lines of "I assume you..."

 

I won't debate you about my tendencies (because I don't feel like going through old arguments with you about the shitty prequel trilogy) but that's not what I said in my initial reply to your Babylon 5 trashing.

 

17 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

And your patented, passive-aggressive laughing emoji.

 

MY "patented" laughing emoji?  I certainly didn't patent it; that's a typical emoji response option on many forums as well as Facebook. And it was the most appropriate one to fit my reaction when I read your grandiloquent praises for some of the worst big budget Hollywood films I have ever seen in my entire life. I guess I could have gone with "shocked" or "confused" because those also fit to a degree, but laughter really was my dominant reaction to how seriously you hold the Star Wars trilogy in high regard.

 

17 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

I find Anakin about the most accurate and nuanced portrayal of a person who convinces themselves to do terrible things I have seen in popular fiction.

 

Like this! This is just hilarious! Hayden's Anakin Skywalker doesn't remotely bear resemblance in speech or action to anyone I've ever encountered in the real world (fortunately, I guess). He's written and acted especially strangely considering he's supposed to be a protagonist (maybe even THE protagonist) that we as the audience are supposed to care about and associate with, so that of course we are crushed when he ultimately has his tragic turn to the Dark Side! I've never been able to keep a straight face whenever he talks. Of course I haven't rewatched the prequel trilogy since my wife made me almost a decade ago (out of her sheer curiosity after enjoying the original trilogy), but whenever a Facebook short or something starts playing a scene with him, I can't help but watch in morbid fascination and wonder, "George Lucas really thought this was how a normal person would ever talk?" It truly blows my mind that you or anyone would regard Straczynski's writing as utter trash, but eat up George Lucas prequels dialogue as profound. I guess I'm a passive-aggressive meanie for it, but I honestly don't know what to do with that, except laugh.

 

17 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

Indeed, most of your last reply could be excised if you spent less time reviewing the reviewer instead of the things they wrote. Ad hominem arguments only hurt the point you're trying to make.

 

You don't seem to think that in regards to her own writing... she was rightly called out for her ad hominem attacks on JMS in the comments (I did read all of them on the main article, by the way... they didn't make the author look any better). So I guess you only care to cry "ad hominem!" when you disagree with someone, because you were perfectly fine with, "J. Michael Straczynski is not only a talentless hack, he's a talentless hack who truly believes himself to be God's gift to the writing profession (go read some of his comments on The Lurker's Guide to Babylon 5--just pick an episode at random. I dare you not to come away from them feeling that Straczynski has an ego the size of China). In almost every respect, Straczynski failed Babylon 5."

 

17 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

That she is still an active blogger and has not posted further on the subject in twenty years suggests to me that her opinion hasn’t changed, and since an appeal to maturity has been made, let me say, as someone who just had a 41st birthday, with two kids, a divorce, and two careers behind me, that I agree with everything she wrote.

 

So you're about my age. But age and divorces don't necessarily bring maturity either. To me her not posting further on the subject in twenty years suggests that she hasn't ever bothered to revisit the show again during that time because she had such a negative reaction to it during her first revisit. For someone with an ego like hers, if she had tried it again I'm sure she would have at least done a quick blog post to write, "Yeah, Babylon 5 is still a piece of shit."

 

 

17 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

The point of the review was that the show fails at both the micro and macro aspects of storytelling. I was not given enough information on the galaxy-wide politicking at play to have a clear sense of character motivation, and how those character actions would effect the galaxy-wide politicking.

 

It failed for you, and I guess it "failed" for Abigail half her life ago... though she bizarrely claimed at the end of her rant, "I'm touched, and I want more. I can't stand any of the parts, but I still love the whole." and "It was the best of shows, it was the worst of shows"! This is the person you held forth as almost entirely agreeing with!

 

So despite her cherry-picked examples of little infelicities in the show... you do realize that doesn't mean the show objectively fails for viewers, right? I was given enough information on the galaxy-wide politicking at play. I had a clear sense of character motivation throughout, every time (weeeeeell... minor asterisk -- first half of season 5 had some issues, to say the least). But apart from that I never had a lingering question of, "but why did _____ do _____ ?" (I had that more in Deep Space Nine, my favorite Trek show, to be honest.)

 

The series won two major back-to-back Hugo Awards and multiple Emmy Awards. It received wide critical acclaim as well as enough viewership to lead to five spinoff TV movies, two (albeit unsuccessful) spinoff shows, and some really excellent books. It was the only show to successfully stand up to the massive Star Trek franchise in the 90s when it was an unassailable juggernaut in the world of sci-fi TV, paving the way for Farscape and the (even more popular and critically-acclaimed, if more flawed) Battlestar Galactica reboot after it. Even today it's got an impressive 8.4/10 on IMDb (that's almost as high as the beloved Star Trek: The Next Generation, and solidly higher than any other Berman-era Trek spinoff), despite that half-terrible fifth season. That means that it didn't fail most people who tried it, despite its reach sometimes exceeding its grasp (or budget). And it maintained that rating even as popular shows like The Big Bang Theory took cheap potshots at it to drag down its reputation. Despite the reputation of your beloved Star Wars prequels somehow being rehabilitated in the wake of the mess that was the sequel trilogy, the first two of that trilogy still sit at 6.5/10 and 6.6/10 on IMDb, respectively (and even the supposedly-good third one is a 7.6). That tells me a smaller percentage of viewers (and of course I realize it's a lot more viewers) who watch those actually connect with that storytelling/worldbuilding/writing/acting, compared to Babylon 5 with its pathetic budget (that was about as third as much as Deep Space Nine got per episode).

 

17 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

Having a large-scale conflict play out with a handful of people, probably a budget issue, was a lot of telling and not showing.

 

I found the reverse to be true. So did one of the commenters engaging in detail with Abigail, who wrote,

Quote

I have personally been impressed with JMS because I felt he brought the most important idea I learned in English to the television: "show, don't tell."

 

Do I think it's perfect? No, some of it especially is clunky upon rewatch. But for me it's still better exposition and worldbuilding than most shows manage, including Star Trek oftentimes.

 

17 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

I felt the show was written speech-first, with the plot built around it. As long as it kind of acts important (as much as the actors were capable of), no one will notice it doesn't make sense. My God, "Comes the Inquisitor" anyone? Well sorry, if I want great speeches, delivered by A+ actors, I'll watch TNG.

 

If I want great speeches delivered by A+ actors, I guess I'll watch Shakespeare (and after that then Babylon 5, lol). TNG's certainly got a good handful of those speeches...almost all of which are delivered by one A+ actor, Patrick Stewart. I guess maybe Brent Spiner got a couple? Michael Dorn's Worf got mostly comic-relief lines until Deep Space Nine. Am I forgetting great speeches given by LeVar Burton (a talented but somewhat poorly used actor) in that show? Do you really think Gates McFadden or Marina Sirtis or Denise Crosby are "A+ actors"? (I'll grant you that Diana Muldaur's Dr. Pulaski had more to her during her sadly-truncated single season, but gosh, give me Claudia Christian's Ivanova on Babylon 5 *any* day over literally *any* female character as regularly performed on *any* Star Trek series.)

 

Anyhow, Babylon 5 was definitely not written "speech-first" and "the plot built around it", whatever your feelings. Almost as with Tolkien (a clear influence on the show), the worldbuilding came first for JMS, then the stories and the speeches. And for every awkward speech on the show there are at least five good ones, nicely spread out amongst quite a bit of the cast. I honestly can't say that "Comes the Inquisitor" is one of my favorite Babylon 5 episodes, but I don't feel inclined to guess about what your specific issues are with it. But let's say that Jack in that episode is nonsense, fine. I can give you five other examples of brilliantly written and performed speeches from other episodes to make up for it.

 

17 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

Londo's motivation is bitterness, with an excuse of revenge, which isn't uncompelling, but too ramshackle in execution for me to care.

 

I think there's more to him that that, but "ramshackle" how exactly?

 

Yavar

 

[Schilkeman 1,457]

.

[Schilkeman 1,457]

12 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

Yeah, what I said was, "I'm guessing you gave up on the show somewhere in season 2?" Note the clear "I'm guessing" I led with, and even the fact that I put a question mark at the end of the sentence. The assumption I made was that you didn't finish the show, which turned out to be correct. The uncertain guess (complete with question mark, inviting you to correct me) I made was that you gave up before season 3 (because so much of that season I find to be fantastic).

A guess is an assumption, so you assumed. I stated that you begin a lot of arguments with a presumed position of ignorance on the part of the person opposite to you. I've yet to see how that is contradicted by what you wrote.

 

12 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

I won't debate you about my tendencies (because I don't feel like going through old arguments with you about the shitty prequel trilogy) but that's not what I said in my initial reply to your Babylon 5 trashing.

Your tendency is to get a little caustic about any of your favorites getting criticized, or anyone disagreeing with you. You consistently resort to ad hominem arguments based on, again, the perceived, "laughable," ignorance of people who disagree with you. It doesn't help your case.

 

12 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

MY "patented" laughing emoji?  I certainly didn't patent it; that's a typical emoji response option on many forums as well as Facebook.

Playing dumb is also passive-aggressive. You're better than this (I hope).

 

12 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

"George Lucas really thought this was how a normal person would ever talk?"

There's more to writing than dialog, and there's a difference between dialog and delivery. I get that Haydn's acting is a bit much for some people. A lot of younger folks seem to read him as a socially awkward, and dare I say it, neurodivergent, goofball (not unlike his creator ((or this viewer)) with fixations that eventually get the better of him.

 

Sure nobody talks like Star Wars characters in real life, but no-one talks like Babylon 5 characters, either, or as they do in Cameron and Nolan films. I've yet to meet a real person as consistently thoughtful and eloquent as Captain Picard, or President Bartlet. If I want "realistic," I'll watch Woody Allen or Robert Altman.

 

12 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

You don't seem to think that in regards to her own writing... she was rightly called out for her ad hominem attacks on JMS in the comments

This is a tu quoque fallacy, but more to the point, her argument seems to be that if JMS was less of the things she criticized he would be a better writer. That his own inflated sense of self, and inability to delegate held the show back from being better. In art, where so much of the craftsperson is in the craft, personality flaws can and do affect the work. Sometimes for the better, and sometimes not. I don't know JMS personally, but I've seen three seasons of this show, and had the misfortune to read his Superman run many years ago, and I can't say I disagree with her.

 

12 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

he series won two major back-to-back Hugo Awards and multiple Emmy Awards.

This as an appeal to authority fallacy.

 

But since you brought it up, Abigail Nussbaum is also a Hugo award winner, and current nominee for criticism.

 

Do I think hers is the most careful and erudite piece of media criticism I've ever read? No. Do I think it brings up some valid points? Yes.

 

12 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

you do realize that doesn't mean the show objectively fails for viewers, right?

I don't recall using the word "objectively" anywhere, and I wouldn't. That's a sure-fire sign that someone isn't worth listening to.

 

12 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

Do you really think Gates McFadden or Marina Sirtis or Denise Crosby are "A+ actors"?

Yes, on the first two. No, on Denise Crosby. The show was better without her, and the character was more interesting in her absence, and commentary on the people around her, than she was herself. Sirtis was given some very poor scripts, but in instances where she could really be counselor Troi, I though she was fantastic. I would easily put those two, and Nana Visitor above anyone, man or woman, on B5. 

 

12 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

I honestly can't say that "Comes the Inquisitor" is one of my favorite Babylon 5 episodes, but I don't feel inclined to guess about what your specific issues are with it.

No need to guess. My issue is that the inquisitor spends the episode chastising Delenn for being conformist and doing what is expected of her, and then lets her pass... for being conformist and doing what is expected of her...by him. But, I mean, there's lots of impassioned yelling, and it's got that twist ending, so it must be great. "How can I pass the test if I don't understand the rules?" It's ok Delenn, neither does the dude who wrote it.

 

12 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

I think there's more to him that that, but "ramshackle" how exactly?

"Or take Londo Molari, one of the most important characters on the show. According to Straczynski, Londo is a tragic figure--motivated by the desire to see his people regain their place as a major galactic power, Londo gives the Shadows a foothold on his planet and in its government, and soon finds himself in over his head as they begin setting up his species for a massive fall. And I'm sorry, but that's not what's showing up on screen. The Londo we see is a horrible person, who knowingly does horrible things for reasons which are, OK, vaguely honorable** but still not a sufficient excuse, and his exploitation by the Shadows can only be explained by his having the political instincts of a stunned wombat, which is plainly not the case. Londo is a mass of contradictions--one moment he's cringing at the bombardment of the Narn homeworld, and the next he's congratulating Vir for personally orchestrating the deaths of thousands of Narns (in reality, Vir has smuggled the Narns to safety, a grave disappointment to Londo)--which in the real world would suggest not a complicated personality but a sociopathic one, but in Londo's case is yet more evidence of a lack of attention to detail on the writer's part."

 

For what it’s worth, I think DS9 is a miles better show (pun intended), and my issues with it are mostly in its relationship to Star Trek itself. It is entirely possible to appreciate something and dislike it at the same time. If one must watch a titularly numerical space station/space opera, I guess watch that one.

 

 

 

[Quintus 5,702]

I've watched the first two episodes of Andor S2 and in pretty much all the various scenarios happening thus far I practically have no idea what is happening or what the characters are talking about. Is this normal?

[Lady Dimitrescu 9,854]

It's a show for people who think they're smart and like pretending they know what's happening.

[Schilkeman 1,457]

6 hours ago, Lady Dimitrescu said:

It's a show for people who think they're smart and like pretending they know what's happening.

While I don't think the show is that hard to follow, I do find it amusing folks praising its mature, political, tone when people were so brutally hard on the (one!) senate scene in The Phantom Menace. What was that about overuse of shot-reverse-shot? C-Span in space? Where you all at now? Suck all the color and pulp out of it—the Sony Interactive Entertainment version of Star Wars. This didn’t happen a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, but last week, in Trenton.

[Quintus 5,702]

Why do incomprehensible Andor episodes get a pass (on the usual crappy social media channels) where other marquee shows don't? Most recently I saw House of the Dragon being shredded online for being shoddy compared to the first series? Seems fair enough. Reddit suspiciously fawns all over Andor though, when it's just alright at best? It looks quite good, sure, but the writing and the dramatic structure are absolutely mid, I mean come the fuck on let's be real. So why do "people" fall over themselves to celebrate its supposed greatness?

 

Here's what I actually think: Disney uses an army of bots to install fake positivity all over the internet. The vast majority of comments found on Reddit and Twitter are fake, they're phony.

 

Soon they'll all be doing it. Why wouldn't they? I mean, governments already do this, so why wouldn't private companies.

[Director of Poltergeist 8,097]

10 hours ago, Lady Dimitrescu said:

It's a show for people who think they're smart and like pretending they know what's happening.

Like Nolan movies

[Jay 42,388]

Black Mirror 7x01 Common People

 

Nice start to a new season!  Rashida Jones and Chris O'Dowd were really great leads, and Tracee Ellis Ross was an excellent bad guy.  The tech in this episode - subscription-based and ad-supported life-saving healthcare - is a little too realistc than some of the stuff they do on this show!  That and where this story goes makes it one of the bleaker episodes, but still a good one.  I liked it.

[Jay 42,388]

Black Mirror 7x02 Bête Noire

 

This was another fun one, with a nice amping up of the "tech" (more like magic IMO) as the episode neared its end.  I like that the episode hides its cards for most of its runtime, so you can play along and attempt to guess what's going on if you want to.  Meanwhile, the story of someone who doesn't want someone from their past back in their lives, mixed with a story of being sure you're right about something in the face of opposing evidence, is relatable and keeps you engaged with the episode.  The ending is over the top but eh, I thought it worked for what it was, it was a good kind of over the top.

[Edmilson 10,473]

I saw the Fallout pilot last night. Eh, it was okay.

 

After a decent (if a bit rushed) prologue, I enjoyed the Lucy storyline, but the other Full Metal Jacket-style about that esquire to a knight on the Brotherhood of Steel was pretty boring. Not sure about Walton Goggins' character though, too similar to Ed Harris in Westworld.

 

Speaking of WW, I wish WB and HBO authorized Jonah Nolan to finish the series, even if just with a 2 hour movie or whatever.

[tomsmoviemadness 4,249]

Yes please!!!

[Quintus 5,702]

Yeah I agree with Edmilson. I didn't even finish Fallout.

[Jay 42,388]

Black Mirror 7x03 Hotel Reverie

 

Well this is the first bad episode of the season.  I actually loved the setup, that a modern A list actor replaces an actor in an old film via a new version generated with AI.  But man, there are so many plotholes, every single thing falls apart if you think about it too long.  They have to bend over backwards to explain why they have to film the whole movie straight through with no retakes, why the actresses' real life life is in danger if the plot in the film doesn't go the right way, etc.  Things get back on track for a cool moment where the old actress in the movie steps outside the film and has a life-changing epiphany, but then things went right back into plothole  and nonsense land.  It's a pity too because Emma Corrin was VERY VERY good in this!  This it he third thing I've seen her in after A Murder At The End of the World and Deadpool and Wolverine, and I think she has a great career ahead of her!  Issa Rae was miscast here, not just in the movie itself (which I think was the point), but her scenes outside didn't work well either.  I did like Awkwafina and Harriet Walker as the studio reps though.

[Pieter Boelen 1,019]

Just discovered Farscape is on Amazon. 

Does anyone know/care about this one? 

First two episodes seem not bad. 

Music is absolutely atrocious though.

[Yavar Moradi 3,585]

@Pieter Boelen Farscape is right up there with Babylon 5 as one of my very favorite science fiction series (cue someone shitting all over it here soon, lol). If you liked the first two episodes, I suggest you stick with it because it gets a LOT better IMO. And sometime in early season 2, composer Guy Gross takes over from the band SubVision and the music gets a lot better too. It's like a night and day improvement, and as a film music fan I found myself able to enjoy the show quite a bit more when I didn't have to deal with the bizarre and dramatically-inept SubVision music any longer.

 

Yavar

[Marian Schedenig 10,139]

2 hours ago, Jay said:

Black Mirror 7x03 Hotel Reverie

 

Well this is the first bad episode of the season.

 

I liked it. I didn't so much notice plot holes as a very vague and shaky premise that never really seemed to make sense to begin with, but it was well made, well acted, and I liked the concept of turning Casablanca in a Moriarty holodeck meets The Inner Light story.

[Holko 11,382]

I loved how they knew how shaky it was and leaned into the sillyness with the screens showing how much the plot is on course or in danger of going off the rails and all that stuff.

[Pieter Boelen 1,019]

56 minutes ago, Yavar Moradi said:

@Pieter Boelen Farscape is right up there with Babylon 5 as one of my very favorite science fiction series (cue someone shitting all over it here soon, lol). If you liked the first two episodes, I suggest you stick with it because it gets a LOT better IMO. And sometime in early season 2, composer Guy Gross takes over from the band SubVision and the music gets a lot better too. It's like a night and day improvement, and as a film music fan I found myself able to enjoy the show quite a bit more when I didn't have to deal with the bizarre and dramatically-inept SubVision music any longer.

 

Yavar

I barely know a thing about Babylon 5 either. 

Other than... It exists...

[Jay 42,388]

I really loved everything about Emma Corrin's performance, her chemistry with Issa Rae, and yes the whole look and feel of the retro movie and how that was all realized. Just wish the story was better. Shaky premise is a good way to describe it, but also the ending wasn't that good.

 

Maybe it could have been more interesting if the actress was murdered, and somehow Issa Rae solves the murder thanks to all the data the AI extrapolated into her performance that comes out when the plot goes off the rails, or something.

[A24 4,809]

[Jay 42,388]

Black Mirror 7x04 Plaything

 

This episode was really good! Peter Capaldi was compelling in the framing scenes, and the core of the story kept getting more and more interesting as it went. When everything comes together at the end, it was very satisfying, and I loved the ambiguous ending.

[Director of Poltergeist 8,097]

On 11/6/2025 at 3:36 PM, Quintus said:

Yeah I agree with Edmilson. I didn't even finish Fallout.

A bit of a falling out I’m afraid.

 

I’ve been rewatching episodes of Step by Step when I doze off. I feel like this show had a cultish following in the 90s and was basically accused of being a Brady Bunch ripoff, but it’s clearly more realistic. The girls on this one were very attractive to me since I was a little squirt, particularly Dana (middle) who is now 50 and a lawyer and still hot.

 

[Naïve Old Fart 11,625]

FRASIER, S1.

I've finished the first season.

It's funny (very funny, in places), and it's extremely clever and well-written, but I can't help but think that it's all a bit white.

It's white, middle-class comedy for white, middle-class people.

This was thirty years ago. How times have changed... and not necessarily for the better...

I look forward to watching the remaining ten seasons, and seeing how it progresses.

I don't have a favourite character, but Hyde-Pierce's 'Niles' is played to perfection, and Mahoney's 'Martin' grounds it with an often healthy, and necessary, dose of reality.

'Eddie' is a riot.

 

It contained the most terrifying piece of television that I have seen, in a very long time.

[Quintus 5,702]

Finished all of The White Lotus. Do people not like the most recent third season then? I enjoyed it, I thought it was a good one. I get that it was much less light and amusing than the other two, but the producers obviously like to play around with the theming from season to season, and now they can say they've done the dark one. Cool, it's valid. I love this show, the whole thing.

[Lady Dimitrescu 9,854]

Yeah It was entertaining. The Jason Isaacs thread was the thread I followed most closely.

[Quintus 5,702]

Ya reckon Uncle Baby Billy was reincarnated at the end?

[Lady Dimitrescu 9,854]

I dunno, I'm a catho, that sort of thing is nehh

[Quintus 5,702]

Yeah, I think the symbolism was there with the boy who lived, but I didn't conclude that's what happened to him.

[Edmilson 10,473]

5 hours ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

It contained the most terrifying piece of television that I have seen, in a very long time.

What scene is this? I've never seen Frasier so I'm curious about why an old sitcom would have such a terrifying scene.

[Naïve Old Fart 11,625]

3 hours ago, Edmilson said:

What scene is this? I've never seen Frasier so I'm curious about why an old sitcom would have such a terrifying scene.

It's not about the episode, per se. 

Followers of the show (and CHEERS) will be familiar with a block of ice called Lilith Sternin. She happens to be Frasier's ex.

The reason it terrified me is because of the striking similarity of Lilith, and of her and Fraiser's relationship. It reminded me (very painfully, I might add) of my relationship with my ex. It was so painful that I have vowed never to watch another episode of FRASIER (or CHEERS, for that matter), with her in it.

Silly, I know, but it scared the living daylights out of me, and brought back a lot of extremely hurtful memories.

Other than that, the season was just fine.

[Lady Dimitrescu 9,854]

Lilith was hot.

[Naïve Old Fart 11,625]

No. She wasn't.

Roz is hot.

[Sweeping Strings 2,858]

If what happened to the revival is anything to go by original Frasier was very much a case of the stars aligning, catching lightning in a bottle, getting all your ducks in a row etc. 

 

Just wondering ... would it be the most successful spin-off show ever? I think it actually had more seasons than Cheers. 

[Jay 42,388]

41 minutes ago, Sweeping Strings said:

would it be the most successful spin-off show ever?

 

I thought it was Happy Days, but it looks like both are tied at 11 seasons (and Frasier made slightly more episodes)

[Yavar Moradi 3,585]

32 minutes ago, Sweeping Strings said:

Just wondering ... would it be the most successful spin-off show ever? I think it actually had more seasons than Cheers. 

 

So the criteria for "most successful" is "longest running"? (If not, I've got some ideas...)

 

Yavar

[Jay 42,388]

I forgot about the Law and Order franchise - SVU is in its 27th season

 

OH!  DUH!!  The Simpsons is in its 37th!

[Sweeping Strings 2,858]

1 hour ago, Yavar Moradi said:

 

So the criteria for "most successful" is "longest running"? (If not, I've got some ideas...)

 

 

 

I guess you could count continuing to draw a substantial audience as a show's success marker, which in turn usually ensures that more of it is made. 

 

@Jay, point taken about Law And Order ... perhaps I should've said 'spin-off sitcom'. 

[Yavar Moradi 3,585]

45 minutes ago, Sweeping Strings said:

I guess you could count continuing to draw a substantial audience as a show's success marker, which in turn usually ensures that more of it is made. 

 

Ah, in that case Star Trek: The Next Generation!

 

Hell, The Andy Griffith Show (eight seasons, not counting its own Mayberry RFD and Gomer Pyle spinoffs) was originally a spinoff... most people don't even know the show it originally spun off from (I'm not sure it's even been released on home video).

 

Yavar

[Sweeping Strings 2,858]

As I said to Jay, possibly I should've specified spin-off SITCOM (and maybe to narrow it down even more, 'from another sitcom'. I wasn't expecting my original musing-out-loud post to undergo this amount of analysis, to be honest) ... that must at least make Frasier a strong contender on both the longevity and audience fronts. 

They're no guarantee of success, of course ... I'm sure the makers of Joey thought it would be a surefire hit, and we all know how that went. 

[Naïve Old Fart 11,625]

18 minutes ago, Sweeping Strings said:

(... I wasn't expecting my original musing-out-loud post to undergo this amount of analysis, to be honest) 

"We have Sweep on line 2. He's worried about being over-analyzed".

"Go ahead, Sweep... I'm listening." 

[Jay 42,388]

Black Mirror 7x05 Eulogy

 

Wow, this episode was really good!  The visual look of going "into" the photographs was done really well, and a little different each time to keep it fresh.  And the story of Giamatti discovering everything he discovers was compelling and touching the whole time.  Really good!

[Yavar Moradi 3,585]

4 hours ago, Sweeping Strings said:

As I said to Jay, possibly I should've specified spin-off SITCOM (and maybe to narrow it down even more, 'from another sitcom'. I wasn't expecting my original musing-out-loud post to undergo this amount of analysis, to be honest) ... that must at least make Frasier a strong contender on both the longevity and audience fronts. 

Pretty sure The Andy Griffith show fits the bill as a sitcom spin off of another sitcom (which had multiple sitcom spinoffs of its own). It’s an amazing show that often transcended being a mere sitcom I suppose, but it was still always a sitcom at heart.

 

Yavar

[Schilkeman 1,457]

Black and White Andy Griffith was the best. Color Andy Griffith was like a completely different show.

[Sweeping Strings 2,858]

All I know of it really are some Simpsons gags about it. Don't think it was ever really a 'thing' on UK television.

[Yavar Moradi 3,585]

1 hour ago, Schilkeman said:

Black and White Andy Griffith was the best. Color Andy Griffith was like a completely different show.

 

On this we largely agree, but I don't think the series going to color was the big problem; I think it was the simultaneous departure of Barney Fife (Don Knotts) which most profoundly affected things. For the few episodes where he returns, lots of the old magic comes back. And there are still a handful of other good episodes of the series sans Barney. But basically Color Andy Griffith was more like the first three seasons of Mayberry RFD (only Andy Griffith was still there), the far less timeless follow-up show set in the same town.

 

Yavar