|
GreenNight posted:Bosch comes back Friday, which I'm excited about. I really liked the first season. Oooh yeah, this was a pleasant surprised, but I'm also a sucker for LA detective stuff.
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 00:19 |
|
|
Aphrodite posted:In 1995? "when I was a kid"
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
thrawn527 posted:Trying to figure out how to spend all of his Shrek money? Thankfully Sascha Baron Cohen seems to have taken up the mantle of making mediocre comedies in crazy costumes while doing annoying voices
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
I had no idea Bates Motel was coming back today until a few years ago. I know the Emmys are as conservative of an awards show as they come, but is it too much to ask to give nominations to Vera Farmiga and Freddie Highmore as Norma and Norman Bates, respectively? In the scattershot first two seasons, Vera going apeshit was always a highlight, and Freddie came to his own last season when they got rid of most of the vestigial teen romance plots.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 04:06
|
|
|
Y-Hat posted:I had no idea Bates Motel was coming back today until a few years ago. I know the Emmys are as conservative of an awards show as they come, but is it too much to ask to give nominations to Vera Farmiga and Freddie Highmore as Norma and Norman Bates, respectively? In the scattershot first two seasons, Vera going apeshit was always a highlight, and Freddie came to his own last season when they got rid of most of the vestigial teen romance plots.  WE REPEAT, Bates Motel S4 STARTS TONIGHTCame here to post just that. It's such a creepy good show.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 04:09
|
|
|
Correction, it started tonight. Who wants to make a thread?
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 04:11
|
|
|
Y-Hat posted:I had no idea Bates Motel was coming back today until a few years ago. I know the Emmys are as conservative of an awards show as they come, but is it too much to ask to give nominations to Vera Farmiga and Freddie Highmore as Norma and Norman Bates, respectively? In the scattershot first two seasons, Vera going apeshit was always a highlight, and Freddie came to his own last season when they got rid of most of the vestigial teen romance plots.  I DVRed it so I'll watch it later.Did anyone make a thread for this season? If not, I'll be happy to do it after I watch the episode.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 04:12
|
|
|
when I first heard of Bates Motel, I assumed it would be canceled by the sixth episode, and they'd be lucky if the network actually aired the rest of the season instead of just putting them on the DVD.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 04:35
|
|
|
Y-Hat posted:Correction, it started tonight. Who wants to make a thread? My DVR knows more than I do and recorded it, and that was a really loving good season premiere. As usual, Vera Farmiga and Freddie Highmore were next level cray.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 04:52
|
|
|
boom boom boom posted:when I first heard of Bates Motel, I assumed it would be canceled by the sixth episode, and they'd be lucky if the network actually aired the rest of the season instead of just putting them on the DVD. It's not like A&E has any other shows
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 04:54
|
|
|
Mu Zeta posted:It's not like A&E has any other shows
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 04:58
|
|
|
Welp, Norman's goes full tilt right out of the gate. Excellent.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 06:31
|
|
|
Was The West Wing ever as good as Netflix house of cards Edit: not trying to insult anyone's tastes, I've never seen TWW buy one been burning through house of cards and want more dirty political drama
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 06:46
|
|
|
Volume posted:Was The West Wing ever as good as Netflix house of cards? It was a great show when Sorkin was writing it, but its tone is much more hopeful then House of Cards. For a show about politics it has a very optimistic tone. You might want something like Yes Minister, original House of Cards, or Thick of it if you want a more cynical view. bobkatt013 fucked around with this message at 06:52 on Mar 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 06:49
|
|
|
This is the West Wing. Completely different show. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQsvcs9IB8A
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 06:53
|
|
|
Volume posted:Was The West Wing ever as good as Netflix house of cards they're totally different shows but yes TWW was genuinely all-time-great drama for roughly 2 1/2 seasons before completely making GBS threads the bed in season 5, smearing the poo poo all over the sheets in season 6, then buying a whole new set of sheets in season 7 that, although worked well enough, never quite was able to reproduce what it felt like before the whole bed-making GBS threads fiasco
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 08:01
|
|
|
West Wing is great and absolutely worth watching but heads-up it isn't "dirty", it's idealistic almost to a fault at times.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 08:19
|
|
|
it's dirty in the sense of being unintentionally ugly and indicative of sorkin's deep, deep-seated misogyny and marginalization of minorities also it's p lol as gently caress that Sorkin's vision of a future Utopia is where a bunch of powerful white men talk at each other to resolve everything. maybe sometimes the requisite white woman who's a big awkward doofus can interject on female issues but she's the (press) secretary so really, what power does she wield. oh, but it's okay because the black like the west wing is definitely colored by the newsroom, which specifically and repeatedly tarnishes TWW's legacy by doubling down on literally every troubling thing present in TWW, but aaron sorkin illustrates that same sort of weird tonedeaf "progressivism" that another showrunner of a different, horrible tv show i wont mention has where it's surface-level progressive but if you really think about the world as established it presents a mentality that the world would be a much better place if very powerful old white men all just sat down and decided everything for everyone else NieR Occomata fucked around with this message at 08:30 on Mar 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 08:24
|
|
|
ed: doublepost
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 08:29
|
|
|
Toxxupation posted:also it's p lol as gently caress I wish you could get banned for this crime against language. In other news I finally got around to starting on The Expanse and 4 episodes in I'm liking it so far. The three stories seem a bit disconnected this early on but are obviously slowly coming together, so I'm definitely intrigued enough to want to keep watching. I do keep laughing though because I'm pretty sure the plot is lifted from one of the Gundam shows except from the viewpoint of the Earth/colony/Mars governments that are being rebelled against/terrorized, so I keep expecting mechs to just pop out any time there's a battle. Mech deficiencies aside, there's some genuinely neat world building and surprisingly well-thought-out ~*~future science~*~ touches all over the place which is nice to see. Probably gonna finish it up this week 
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 09:36
|
|
|
Volume posted:Was The West Wing ever as good as Netflix house of cards The West Wing and ER were the crown jewels in NBC's drama offerings during their times. It is a fun show to watch, and actually helped me understand how American government works(or is supposed to work)
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 11:14
|
|
|
FetusSlapper posted:The West Wing and ER were the crown jewels in NBC's drama offerings during their times. It is a fun show to watch, and actually helped me understand how American government works(or is supposed to work) This is the saddest thing I have ever read on Couch Chat.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 12:41
|
|
|
whowhatwhere posted:This is the saddest thing I have ever read.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 12:58
|
|
|
whowhatwhere posted:This is the saddest thing I have ever read on Couch Chat. Whatever your thoughts on The West Wing, it did go into a lot of details on the American government.
But the show could practically be a civics lesson at times. For an outsider, it's not the worst way you could learn about at least the basic parts of the American government, or even some of it's finer more complicated parts. I mean, there's a reason teaching guides exist for the show. thrawn527 fucked around with this message at 14:28 on Mar 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 14:21
|
|
|
Newsroom is the first show I ever quit before the opening credits even finished which is something I guess.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 14:24
|
|
|
I'm calling it, Damien is the under the dome.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 14:36
|
|
|
whowhatwhere posted:This is the saddest thing I have ever read on Couch Chat. Maybe that person isn't american so they'd have no real reason to learn about that stuff from something other than a Sorkin TV show. I mean, I hope that's what it is, because otherwise... it's a bit like saying you learned about medicine from watching ER.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 15:19
|
|
|
I became a psychiatrist by watching Hannibal
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
less laughter posted:I became a psychiatrist by watching Hannibal   He has some good insights. He taught me how to be self-confident about my quirkiness. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 16:48
|
|
|
I'm not American and yeah West Wing taught me a lot about how the political system works over there. Not sure exactly why that would be such a stupid, sad thing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
thrawn527 posted:Whatever your thoughts on The West Wing, it did go into a lot of details on the American government. Alright, so if you're from outside the US or in High School it'll teach you basic elements of governance and a grab-bag of factoids. The problem is that it basically doesn't get at any of the deep reasons why Presidential politics/bureaucracy is such a shitshow because it's too in love with the idea of showing how politics "should" be, with Aaron Sorkin in various wigs solving all the problems with creative thinking , stirring speeches and force of will. It encourages a view of politics that ignores quite how deep the differences in policy that divide the parties are (Republican going to work for the White House because they're "good people", the entire Social Security Reform plotline), that largely handwaves foreign policy (Israel-Palestine solved by peacekeepers and splitting the baby on East Jerusalem? c'mon), gives no real understanding of how the parties actually work to constrain the options of the president, and condenses the bureaucracy into a staff the size of a mid-size startup (although this one's necessary as a matter of drama, it's still an important reason why the politics just doesn't work). Also the Supreme Court thing is just wankery of the highest order. Yes, I'm sure that politicians and operatives who have worked their entire lives to create moderately liberal change are going to nominate a conservative against pretty much everything they believe in. Think of the quality of argument! Isn't that what really matters? Escobarbarian posted:I'm not American and yeah West Wing taught me a lot about how the political system works over there. Not sure exactly why that would be such a stupid, sad thing. Because it's like watching Glee to learn how glee clubs work only even more annoying. whowhatwhere fucked around with this message at 17:28 on Mar 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 17:25
|
|
|
The average American knows jackshit about how their own government works unless something contorversial happened in the news in the past 3 months and very little is done to really fix that, it's not that absurd that someone would genuinely learn from a political drama
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
The government doesn't work.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
It also pretends that politicians have principled dissent and that the backrooms of power are filled with huge philosophical discussions about the differences in belief between the GOP and dems when it's literally a bunch of pragmatists going "ok look my constituents/party/whip/leader will never allow me to vote for this bill as written, you need to soften the language here here here and here and include $Texas in local funding for me to go for this" And/or one party has the numbers and just totally stonewalls the other out of negotiations and drafting because why would you, you don't need them The whole "grand debate about the merits of the bill" just doesn't loving happen during the realities of the legislative process, most of these people are friends or at least acquaintances irl. The grandstanding is done strictly for the voters
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 17:48
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:The government doesn't work.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 17:49
|
|
|
whowhatwhere posted:Alright, so if you're from outside the US or in High School it'll teach you basic elements of governance and a grab-bag of factoids. The problem is that it basically doesn't get at any of the deep reasons why Presidential politics/bureaucracy is such a shitshow because it's too in love with the idea of showing how politics "should" be, with Aaron Sorkin in various wigs solving all the problems with creative thinking , stirring speeches and force of will. It encourages a view of politics that ignores quite how deep the differences in policy that divide the parties are (Republican going to work for the White House because they're "good people", the entire Social Security Reform plotline), that largely handwaves foreign policy (Israel-Palestine solved by peacekeepers and splitting the baby on East Jerusalem? c'mon), gives no real understanding of how the parties actually work to constrain the options of the president, and condenses the bureaucracy into a staff the size of a mid-size startup (although this one's necessary as a matter of drama, it's still an important reason why the politics just doesn't work). The entire tone is showing how politics would work in a perfect world. The idea of people of different parties comes from Lincoln as he did do that. The supreme court thing is sometimes that is the only way that they can get someone in due to the climate of the senate, and you never know how they are going to end up voting ex. a former member of the KKK being a huge supporter of Civil Rights.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
FactsAreUseless posted:Hey everybody, it's P. J. O'Rourke! P. J. O'Rourke posts in TVIV! Everyone! Everyone, come look! It's him! It's respected political writer and cutting satirist P.J. O'Rourke! No that was a Bernie Sanders quote.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
guys I just meant the actual specific rules and political processes, jesus h poo poo
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:The entire tone is showing how politics would work in a perfect world. The idea of people of different parties comes from Lincoln as he did do that. The supreme court thing is sometimes that is the only way that they can get someone in due to the climate of the senate, and you never know how they are going to end up voting ex. a former member of the KKK being a huge supporter of Civil Rights. But that's the problem. Sorkin's idea of a "perfect world" is one where Smart Men (and occasionally Smart Women) solve the problems of the world by being Smart and Charismatic. It's ideal in a pernicious way that encourages unjustified and inaccurate dissatisfaction with the political process. There's more than enough of the perfectly correct kind to go around. Escobarbarian posted:guys I just meant the actual specific rules and political processes, jesus h poo poo Sorry for dragging your modest point into this. The problem in the States (alright, this is mostly a DC/political science majors/law students complaint here) is that you run (ran; it was much more pronounced in 2008-2010) into a bunch of wannabe Lymans whose view of how politics works has been influenced by seven seasons of "Bartlet'll sort it out with CHARISMA AND GOOD SENSE". Again, it's like the Glee fans who tried out for the clubs; it leads to a bunch of frustration for everyone involved.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 00:19 |
|
|
You gotta be the change you wanna see. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2016 18:28
|
|
