General Open Thread – TV Shows (2)
This topic contains 1,048 replies, has 73 voices, and was last updated by 
Craig 4 years, 2 months ago.
-
AuthorPosts
-
23 June 2015 at 04:37 #40780
@purofilion I am now up through seven episodes and I must say that I am enjoying it quite a bit. I’m not sure if we are watching the episodes in the same order, though, as apparently there was the order in which they aired and the order in which they were filmed, or something, and they aren’t always packaged the same way. Netflix Canada has them according to air date, so my most recent ep (no. 7) is the one called I, ET. Is this the same for you?
I saw the premiere, then the episode where the characters were fighting their evil clones, and then the Back to the Future ep. I thought the first two were reasonably interesting, if kind of thin, but I thought the third was pretty lame. Then suddenly, came Ep. 4, where Rygel is kidnapped, and suddenly, it all got better for me. We started having actual ideas, rather than just a series of events. We started to get some interesting bits of character development.
I am liking Rygel better as we get further on; he felt a lot like a stock muppet in the earliest episodes, played entirely for laughs. He has improved. (And he peed flame!!! How epic is that? 🙂 ) Aeryn is also becoming more interesting. I like the way she and John turn gender stereotypes upside down, with John being more emotionally open and Aeryn burying her emotions under her warrior shell. I also really enjoyed her discovery that it could be satisfying using her intellect rather than her fighting skills! I am even starting to warm up to d’Argo, after the Thank God it’s Friday story where he didn’t spend the whole episode growling and shouting.
I agree with you about the whole Star Wars/Muppets in Space approach to scifi, it’s never about the weird aliens for me, either. I’m interested that you are bothered by the accents, because I confess that I barely notice them. PK Tech Girl was the first one that sounded really obviously “Oz” to me.
23 June 2015 at 05:03 #40781Anonymous @
I think it’s similar though ‘I ET’ was either ep 3 or 4 and I enjoyed that a lot.
PK tech Girl (yes, her accent: quite famous for various Oz shows) was interesting in the backstory to Rygel as well as the subverted stereotypes. Other than some bang on funnies added by Crichton, it just doesn’t have the incredible lines and layer of say, Firefly or Buffy. That’s just my opinion & I’m probably suffering from a lack of Nathan Fillion!
It may start happening & whilst I enjoy the pol. elements of a story like Thank God it’s Friday -if I keep having to justify the show according to its sociological implications then I’m finding it’s not standing on its own as a ‘damn fine story line’. The stereotypes in F’fly and Buffy are beautifully swapped about and so I feel no great ‘shock’ with Aeryn, as yet -& I should, because she’s great but ‘oh no’, she’s no Zoe from F’fly (sorry about the comparisons but it’s all I can manage & that’s coming across as lame & I apologise) .
I like her and she’s really amusing with her faint jealousy and her “I found you interesting, Crichton. For a moment,” but so far the stories are very ‘this happened’ now ‘this’.
Even Black Magic, whilst interesting never seemed to stop. On and on and on!! I did like the clones -that was terrific, actually, and possibly my fav, alongside the idea where John was seeing the future -almost Who-ish in its development. But I’m not roaring with laughter or feeling incredibly attached as I did with Firefly.
I know that our FatManInABox says he took awhile to warm to it and that happened when they return to earth -temporarily so I can’t wait and no way would I dismiss the show at this early stage. There’s a lot to love -D’argo has some wonderful depth -I actually know the actor. As in had a picnic with the guy ages ago (not a very exciting story) as he lived up the road from my bro in Randwick and Centennial Park is a marvellous place where everyone congregates in that region. I think the priestess is wonderful too and after Black Magic I can see some sparks emerging from within herself -& that was really needed to create momentum and to bring on the curiosity.
I think on a panel, Browder said puppets are funny but if you wack the puppet then it’s funnier and that was just starting to happen at the end of that section.
Onwards! Do keep me posted.
I must be on to ep 9 this evening -if we make it due to the endless soccer season & training!
23 June 2015 at 05:47 #40782@purofilion I’m interested in your comparisons to Firefly and Whedon. I felt initially that Farscape was simply “of its time”, and then of course did the math and realized that it was being made simultaneously with Buffy. And of course, being a millennial thing, it is actually more like something out of the eighties or early nineties. So backward looking, while Whedon was more cutting edge. (The West Wing was another one like that.) So Farscape will be lacking the snappy, clever dialogue, and the more contemporary portrayal of relationships. I’m not finding myself emotionally engaged, more just enjoying it. I agree that it isn’t laugh-out-loud funny, although I’m starting to be amused by Crichton’s references to Earth culture (“It looks like Louisiana. Or Dagobeh.” “The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.” And so on.)
It’s like that thing that they never taught us in music history class (or in mine, anyway): that while Monteverdi was writing the first operas and Caccini and others were basically inventing Baroque music, other composers were composing Renaissance polyphony and consort music at the same time. (And later, in fact.) Farscape has the eighties as its touchstone and it is pretty well rooted there; Whedon is part of the next wave, and that wave washed up Steven Moffat’s Doctor Who.
Oh yes, sport. We are blissfully on a break as it is now summer. So no more school sports for two months, and baseball has just wrapped up, so just regular trips down the hall to tell Arbutus Jr. to keep his voice down on his skype calls (and to deliver food). 🙂
23 June 2015 at 06:31 #40783indeed, a good way to define or to distinguish the individual programmes. Crichton’s character is a ‘nerdy, science geek’ with a fascination for Kirk and C3PO. At one point, he says “Kirk wouldn’t do that” and the antagonist replies: “that’s fictional, you know.”
And I recall the Dagobah reference (good spot!) and did chirp quite loudly then. He has a great affinity with the people around him and a total “ah bugger, where am I?” face which is perfect -and that connection to his humanity is what defines my interest in the show and where he, in particular, is travelling: whether physically or emotionally. His intellectual ability is astounding -in PK Girl, you really saw that at work. Of course we had to have the romance angle for a tick -Boy Ilion going “eeuw, not in this show. Not here!”
The delights of Caccini -a real momentous composer, in my mind. Some of his chordal developments and cadences were extraordinary for his time and I really believe that just as Beethoven was an early Romantic, almost the father of the Sturm und Drang movement, Caccini was the uncle of early classicism.
But yes, Firefly is quite different and to compare this with Farscape is like the proverbial kiwi fruit vs papaya argument. Both very different: one forward looking and one perhaps retro? And yet, the issues of powerful women are coming to the fore with Farscape. This was shown during the time of Home and Away when The Brady Bunch were still on the 5pm time slot and 7th Heaven was getting enormously positive ratings.
Claudia Black’s character fascinates me too. I think her prowess in PK Girl was spot lit with the slight teary eyed farewell to the female officer (of said kiss) and her, at first, stilted handshake which turned to warmth and generosity. I like this a lot; there’s evident subtlety in the writing as well as some wonderful production values. Things that I learned from watching Whedon’s commentaries: the use of the camera; the one-two shot and the over-shoulder shot and how to mix things up to create the long, generous take. I see these in Farscape and I recognise the beginning of a serious programme with real intent, a crew which cares and directors who take time to know their cast and sets. That’s so important, isn’t it?
Ah, Skype: we’ve never done that. Have the equipment, no clue how to use it! It’s great not to be on the go all evening though and I’m sure the family are a bit relieved -till the next season.
23 June 2015 at 07:15 #40784@whisht GoT: I’m up to date on it, I think. (trying not to do spoiler stuff below, but if you’re very averse to any kind of foreknowledge in your story-viewing, please be warned and avoid the rest of this summary ramble)
I’ve watched from the start, tailed off a bit lately — I find the compulsory minor-character-nudity empty and annoying. There’s a problem with so many story lines going at once: something piques your interest, and then it’s gone, buried under more trundling across the (quite striking) landscape between skirmishes and battles. Some narrative lines are going to be more interesting than others, no way around it, so I’ve spent a lot of time waiting for something about Tyrion (and mostly not getting it; you’d think, for instance, that there’d be some mental blowback over a particularly egregious and unconvincingly motivated murder, but so far all he does is drink); or for something unusual building on the very brief but well-acted and intriguing early by-play between Tywin and Arya. No such luck; nipped in the bud.
Tons of stuff happens, lots heavy duty life-changing (or ending) events, and the pro tags a little older and maybe a bit wiser — but in such a culturally confined world, it’s pretty much the same things happening over and over (treachery, wheedling and finagling, attacking or being attacked, strategizing on a necessarily simple model, etc.). Worse, most of the characters react exactly as anyone would react (“You killed B, I want revenge!”), but the result is that they seem flat, and often interchangeable. Each protagonist starts out with one simple goal: to conquer this or that, acquire power (war, war, and more war), or win back the love of x, or escape a dire fate by running into another dire fate. And they stay with it. I’m bored with shallow, monomaniacal people-tokens running their appointed rounds.
A few characters show promise — of becoming more efficient, or maybe more soft-hearted, killers, traitors, dictators, thugs, etc. Most just plod their appointed tracks until they expectedly, or unexpectedly, get killed. Between occasionally flashy and effective set-pieces (the battle of this, the duel over that, the torture or humiliation of so-and-so, a fine CGI dragon-flight), I find myself wishing for a beaker of Tyrion’s wine. All of it. You know how DW varies in tone and feel from episode to episode? As Whisht wrote, this is dour and bloody; and then more of the same.
But I realize that I’m not the intended audience. I haven’t gone for reading pleasure to massive heroic (or anti-heroic) fantasy series in decades. I’ll take wit, character, and confusions that I’m left to figure out to my own satisfaction, over glum soldiers endlessly quarreling and hacking at people, and deviously scheming (or helplessly suffering) women, any time. Much of what many GoT fans love — lovingly detailed jewelry, weaponry, and armor, for example — doesn’t hold my interest. The one aspect that has a spark of life, I’d say, is an area rarely more than lightly touched upon in the show until recently: superstition, spiritual beliefs, and ritual. Come to think of it, that’s the most interesting part of “Vikings”, too.
I guess basically I want to know what’s going on in major characters’ heads, and in GoT that’s too often limited to and focused on right now, where something or somebody is likely waiting to chop off your head or poison your soup at any moment.
23 June 2015 at 12:11 #40785I stumbled across this book the other day and it was only ten dollhairs so I thought why not, it was actually a pretty good read for Whovian fans, not all of the rules were explicitly stated in the show, but they all made sense, anyway if any of you wanted to check it out, here : http://www.amazon.com/Unofficial-Whovian-Rule-Book-wibbly-wobbly/dp/1616991518
23 June 2015 at 12:11 #40786I stumbled across this book the other day and it was only ten dollhairs so I thought why not, it was actually a pretty good read for Whovian fans, not all of the rules were explicitly stated in the show, but they all made sense, anyway if any of you wanted to check it out, here : http://www.amazon.com/Unofficial-Whovian-Rule-Book-wibbly-wobbly/dp/1616991518
23 June 2015 at 23:10 #40787Hi @ichabod – completely agree with your GoT assessment.
I’m equally as annoyed by the minor character nudity (not sure if I mentioned but it made it even more obvious that it was for titilation as the main actors now don’t reveal (except for one memorable occasion which could be seen as useful to the episode and what it means for the character*).My main thought is that I just care less about all the characters. Especially those I was enjoyed in the first seasons (Tyrion and Arya) – perhaps due to their respective verbal sparring and relationships with others.
*I’ve seen all the eps now, but like you am conscious of inadvertent spoilers I might give away, so trying to be oblique.
23 June 2015 at 23:12 #40788I don’t know if you’re reading any of the info about Game of Thrones, but as you’re a professional historian, how would you define the Celts? I recall Russell T. Davies claiming there was “no such thing as they’re simply Welsh.” What do you think? (I have an MA in History but it’s in the area of Tsarist Russia! -hardly helpful).
Kindest,
puro.
23 June 2015 at 23:28 #40789@whisht @ichabod (sorry for butting in to your conversation but it was interesting -what can I say? In the words of Xander and Buffy: I have but-face).
ah yes, the sparring and interesting conversations which opened up -and promptly closed again-between Arya and Tyrion.
I also liked the emotional and physical strength of Arya and her relationship with the burned guy (yep: can’t remember these people’s names anymore) as well as young Stark, with his visions and connections with the wolf.
The tender moments were the ones hinting at deeper emotional wells and therefore intrigued me. I fear that with increased violence -torture and sex scenes mixed with a dearth of actual characters (having been beheaded, sent utterly mad, burned alive, drowned and stabbed through the neck) that there’s not much left to watch.
I also assumed that this current 5th season was the last and I fear that’s not correct either. Oh GoT, please just finish up by implosion!
Kindest,
purforfillion
23 June 2015 at 23:46 #40790Good lord, can a person *be* “simply Welsh”?! I mean, Wales is part of a large island, so they had to come from somewhere between there and east Africa, so — ? This stuff can get so political — I went on a dig in Ireland years ago with a young archaeology prof who was eagerly seeking evidence of some level of early culture *before* the Celts came (he didn’t like the Celts; maybe he didn’t even believe in them) from northern Europe (I think). He’d found some primitive copper mines that he dated as well before the Celts arrived, was trying to demonstrate that these mines were being worked by residents, not just by visitors based on the Continent.
23 June 2015 at 23:51 #40791Thank you for that -I read it already and didn’t find it that absorbing. It was quite short and possibly a lot of that information exists in other longer formats and is cheaper to boot. Although the price of $19 95 isn’t excessive I managed to get a hold of it via a publisher for 10 dollhairs, myself ^<>^
24 June 2015 at 00:04 #40792“Good lord, can a person *be* “simply Welsh”?! ” I don’t *know*. that’s precisely why *I’m* asking @Mudark. In a professional capacity she may well be able to test that hypothesis which Davies *humbly* subverted.
24 June 2015 at 00:31 #40793@purofilion Oh, no, there’s a ton more of GoT to go, most of it as yet unwritten by the author himself. “Winter is coming”, as if we could forget it. You know, I have to respect the effort being made in this series to show not just the standard degradation of women in comparatively primitive societies, but the ways in which specific, usually privileged women manage to find some leverage and status to protect themselves and their kids with. This is not a minor point, IMO. I just really resent having to pay for it with a background of deep and continuous brutality and bestial sexism that flattens character in everybody and renders the story in a glum and bloody monotone that almost never lets up. It’s not *history*, after all: it’s a fantastic para-history, over which the author has ultimate power. If he wanted to show more tenderness and feeling, he could, and so could the makers of the series. Their choices are obvious: when in doubt, go for spilled blood, torn flesh, and zombies. It’s the narrow range of a war RPG for adolescent boys (and some girls).
Compare “Penny Dreadful”, which is no less absurd and reductive, but benefits from brilliant visual style and cinematography, plus a relish for taking off in any damn direction they please if it promises some of the insights of looking at gothic events as real and with a slant that offers interesting insights — Okay, I HOPE this is too general to be a spoiler , but warnings anyway —
Sir Malcolm is Dr. Livingstone at his own hearthside after his “heroic explorations” in Africa, beginning to feel the implications and rewards of of his high-handed dealings with slavers and “subject” peoples — the faults enlarged to become the means by which evil can trap him here at home. AND it’s often funny, intentionally or just through being so over the top *and getting away with it* (Well, Eva Green is no slouch to carry it off so well). *And* it’s amazing to hear a harsh feminist diatribe from the mouth of — a very unusual source, damn it, at a time that was, after all, historically the precursor to the rise of feminist resistance to Victorian bondage. Scenery-chewing and (figurative) funereal fainting couches plus subtlety and cheek. For me, this is grown-up fare for people with some background in literature and art. GoT is for the hormonal extremes of raw adolescence, IMO. And it’s deeply stupid sometimes, at a mediocre comic book level. I long to give examples, but restrain myself to avoid spoilage.
I do hope for some development of the several strains of “religion” that have been activated in the GoT world by this past season. Otherwise, I’m gone. What the hell; it’s time I got to work on something of my own . . . maybe after I go and have this nap, now.
24 June 2015 at 01:07 #40795Yes, thanks for that. And I agree re GoT -a raw, hormone filled feast for the young ones but without true substance (“deeply stupid“: hilarious & true!). I haven’t seen Penny Dreadful and as it’s not on free-to-air telly, I may not view it for some time – so no fear of spoilers. I’d probably (with my memory) forget it anyway!
24 June 2015 at 01:41 #40797@purofilion I recall Russell T. Davies claiming there was “no such thing as they’re simply Welsh.”
It’s hard to know what he meant by this without knowing the context. I believe that modern-day French Bretons are descended from British Celts (hence the name), but I don’t think that the Scots or Irish were. But my studies were long ago and as my specialization eventually settled on a later epoch, I certainly haven’t kept up with whatever might have been learned in the meantime. Perhaps RTD is a bit of a Welsh nationalist (or tribalist)? 🙂
@ichabod GoT is for the hormonal extremes of raw adolescence, IMO.
I’ve never watched GoT myself, although I often enjoy the pseudo historical. But I got that same sense about it just from seeing the promotional materials, so I’ve never bothered with it. And this: Much of what many GoT fans love — lovingly detailed jewelry, weaponry, and armor, for example — doesn’t hold my interest. I couldn’t agree more.
24 June 2015 at 02:08 #40798I found the issues of jewellery and armour were also loved by audiences of The Hobbit etc and any of those like minded films. As for me, I’m not attracted to it either. It has to be the interactions between characters or else I switch off ompletely. For what it’s worth, I don’t think you’ve missed anything with GoT!
RTD commented on the Celts issue repeatedly in commentaries with other fellow commenters. I myself had absolutely no idea, so thank you for your input. This part of English/Scottish History simply didn’t exist even in the QLD univ. system and certainly not in Oz schools, that I can remember, anyway.
Maybe @janetteb, when she returns from OS, can give us her opinion on that.
24 June 2015 at 09:57 #40799@Purofilion
It is very hard to tell what he meant without knowing the context. He could easily mean that ‘Celt’ is generally used in a romantic way when people really mean ‘Welsh’. Or he could mean genetics, the Welsh do have a very high proportion of people descended from the most ancient Brits.
Probably because it’s bloody difficult to get over those sodding hills; which is why most of the very ancient Welsh towns are on the coast.
24 June 2015 at 10:26 #40800@bluesqueakpip I think that there wasn’t so much a context to explain!! Had there been, I might have understood. Celts were mentioned in the script, I think & so RTD in a commentary said “oh, barf, there’s no such thing, you know: they’re Welsh’.
Anyway….
24 June 2015 at 12:06 #40801@purofilion
Sounds like the first meaning, then. That is, there’s no such thing as ‘Celts’, really, because it’s just a romantic way of saying ‘Welsh’.
24 June 2015 at 22:14 #40807[replying to no one’s question about what I liked about Strange & Norrell]
…tell you what I am enjoying about JS&MrN and that is that the writer of the TV version is highlighting how bargains/ contracts/ promises are usually a bad thing.
Especially where Fairies are concerned.
But still, people keep making rash promises and then being held by them.
24 June 2015 at 23:22 #40810@bluesqueakpip, @purofilion and @arbutus–
Sounds like the first meaning, then. That is, there’s no such thing as ‘Celts’, really, because it’s just a romantic way of saying ‘Welsh’
There are at least two Irishmen of my acquaintance who would take major exception to that. (But that doesn’t mean that they’re in any way correct to do so.)
This stuff is all a bit hazy but I believe there’s strong genetic evidence to link the Irish and the Welsh (as well as linking the Irish to the Basques). Certainly lowland (i.e. non-Gaelic) Scots have a pretty strong link to the Welsh. Luigi Cavalli-Sforza wrote a rather good book on this a good few years ago now — Genes, Peoples and Languages — but as I say it’s all rather hazy.
24 June 2015 at 23:30 #40811@whisht – I particularly liked Jonathan Strange’s promises to [spoiler] which meant that, with the best motives in the world, he agreed to [spoiler].
[No idea what episode our US and Canadian contributors are up to, hence the spoiler tag]
Yeah, the writer seems to be emphasising the theme of ‘control’ as a kind of ownership/slavery. The Gentleman isn’t just the ‘collector of people’ that he is in the book, he’s much more blatantly controlling his toys. And Norrell, and the people surrounding Norrell, are all trying to manipulate and control people.
A promise, even a well meant one, is an attempt by the person who extracts the promise to control the one making the promise. Which is why they’re all turning out so badly. 😕
24 June 2015 at 23:47 #40812@jimthefish – well, to be honest, I can think of a couple of Gaelic speakers where I’d say that while running away rapidly. 😀
The latest research came out in March; there’s certainly a genetic link between the Welsh and the Irish, as well as between Lowland Scots and Northern Ireland. The North Walians and the South Walians, however, are genetically distinct. But I’m afraid the Scots are related more closely to the English. 😈
To be precise, Lowland Scots and Northern English are pretty intermingled. Both are quite distinct from that bunch in the South.
But what the research did seem to confirm is that there’s no such thing as a uniform ‘Celt’ population across the UK. The groups who tend to regard themselves as ‘Celt’ are definitely distinct from that bunch in Central/Southern England – but they’re also fairly distinct from each other.
25 June 2015 at 00:06 #40813thanking you both. It has been made clear. I even recall this happening in a commentary on The Fires of Pompeii where Donna adds some Latin and in the commentary RTD goes “arf, no such thing….” & then meanders. Possibly people were throwing things at the TV at that point.
I just went “oof?”
25 June 2015 at 00:22 #40815@purofilion @arbutus @bluesqueakpip
Celts : I seem to remember puro asking about this a while back, and I meant to respond but got distracted by something or other. The question requires quite a lengthy answer, so you are forewarned!
I think I know what Russell T Davies was getting at, but he was wrong to state that there is/was no such thing. The terms Celt and Celtic have two different usages so, for a start, the meaning depends on the context.
1. Writers of the ancient world used the term to denote a specific ethnic and culturally defined group (Greek Keltoi; Latin Celtae).
2. Since the early 18th century a group of languages have been defined as ‘Celtic’ and, by extension, applied to the people who speak these languages.
Some Greek and Roman writers used the term Celt in a general sense, meaning ‘western barbarian’, but where they are more specific it is clear that they were referring to people living in western Europe, roughly north of the Pyrenees and south of the river Seine. Herodotus rather muddied the waters, because he described the river Danube as rising in the land of the Celts – and thereby sent several general generations of archaeologists on a false trail, leading them to identify the distinctive material culture of central Europe in the Iron Age as ‘Celtic’ and assuming that the expansion westwards of stylistic elements of that culture represented an expansion of the Celtic peoples. If whoever started that hare had paid more attention to the text, he or she would have realised that Herodotus was under the impression the source of the Danube was in the Pyrenees!
Diodorus Siculus makes a distinction between the Keltoi, inhabiting an area north of the Pyrenees and south of the Massif Centrale, and the Galatoi (Gauls), to the north of this. These people or peoples expanded eastwards, invading Italy, Greece and Asia Minor, and settling in North Italy (cisalpine Gaul) and in Asia Minor (the Galatians addressed in Paul’s Epistle). Strabo is more explicit in stating that the Celts who invaded Italy, Greece and Asia Minor came originally from France south of the Seine, the Venetii came from Armorica (Brittany), and the Volcae from the Pyrenees.
Caesar, in his well known tripartite division of Gaul, is more specific still. He wrote that the people who called themselves Celts lived south of the rivers Seine and Marne and were distinct in language and customs from the Belgae, who lived to the north of the Seine, and from the Aquitanae, south of the Garonne. There are indications that the Belgae had affinities with the Germanic tribes to the north and east of the Rhine, and the homeland of the Aquitanae equates roughly with the Basque region. Nowhere does Caesar refer to the inhabitants of Britain as Celts, although a linguistic study of place names, and personal and tribal names in contemporary documents and coins, as well as material culture, provides evidence of affinities between Britain and Gaul. Parts of southern and south eastern England were, in fact, settled by Belgic immigrants from northern Gaul, and this is reflected in the metalwork and pottery in those regions, as well as in the tribal names, but there is no evidence that the language spoken in those regions differed significantly from that spoken elsewhere in Britain.
Antiquarian scholars of the early 18th century were the first to use the term ‘Celtic to identify a group of non-Germanic languages spoken in the British Isles. These languages fall into two groups: the Brythonic, which includes Welsh, Cornish and Breton, and Goidelic, comprising Irish and Scots Gaelic. These two groups are more closely related to each other than either is to English, but they are quite distinct and it is thought that they probably diverged from a common origin at an early point in prehistory.
On the evidence of contemporary inscriptions and place names, the Brythonic languages are closely related to the language or languages spoken in the regions which Caesar described as inhabited by the Celts. Welsh and Breton survive as living languages, as does Cornish to a limited extent, although the last monolingual speaker died in the 17th century. Cornish is closely related to Breton, probably because of long standing contact between the two regions and as a result of migration from Cornwall to Brittany in the post-Roman period. The Brythonic group also included Cumbric, a now extinct dialect spoken in north west England and parts of southern Scotland.
In the Goidelic group Scots Gaelic and Irish are (I am told) mutually comprehensible, and the link is generally attributed to a migration of people from Ireland to western Scotland, although it was probably founded on a far longer established inter-relationship between the two regions. Judging by surviving inscriptions, the celtiberian language spoken by peoples in the west of the Iberian peninsula also belonged to this group.
In the 19th and early 20th centuries there was a movement to define the cultural identity of the Irish, Welsh, Cornish and Highland Scots as ‘Celtic’ in the face of Anglo-Saxon dominance, overriding their individual regional, historic and prehistoric identities, and this is what I think Russell Davies was protesting, because in this context the term has little specific meaning. In any case, DNA studies of the population of Britain are starting to demonstrate that the people of Britain (excluding recent immigrants), are all a mongrel mixture, and that even in England, most of us probably have more aboriginal British (or ‘Celtic’) in our ancestry than we do Anglo-Saxon, wherever we or our immediate ancestors live(d).
25 June 2015 at 00:39 #40817thank you so much for such a detailed appraisal. I will have to read this several times, highlight after printing and mull over it with a coffee.
I can see the connection with @arbutus original reply mixed with @jimthefish and later, @bluesqueakpip‘s
In visits to various places back in 2010, I recall ‘booklets’ one purchases taking a rather fruitless explanation and giving it an even more generalised overview. It’s from your paragraph beginning “Antiquarian scholars of the 18th century….” that a lot of these booklets take their cue -the rest was simply ignored to keep things ‘simple’ or received a type of analogous treatment that made further explanations more confusing. But things are rarely so simple.
I can also see why I stuck to Russian History!! Cripes it’s complicated.
Kindest and sincere thanks for going to the trouble,
Puro
25 June 2015 at 22:11 #40836Patrick Macnee has died aged 93. The man is such a legend that I feel a proper tribute blog must be in order.
26 June 2015 at 00:26 #40838Macnee — I think I saw him in Marat/Sade back in mumble-mumble . . . A wonderful evening of live theater in New York. Yes, blog please!
3 July 2015 at 00:06 #40925Not often you get to say this these days, but nice piece on the Guardian on the ridiculously overlooked The Sarah Connor Chronicles. The new Terminator movie by all accounts sounds like a load of old pish (despite having our esteemed Mr Smith in it). But there is talk of a new TV series and if there’s any justice it should be the a revival of TSCC.
3 July 2015 at 02:16 #40926I’ve seen a few tweets today regarding the proposed new Terminator spin-off. No-one has tweeted any links so I can’t verify anything but it seems that the TV show will focus on a character from Terminator 3.
I got all excited on Tuesday night when I noticed that Spike TV were showing re-runs TSCC (it was the one where Sarah Connor was in a study centre for sleep disorders) only to find they’re not showing the rest of the series. I think it’s time to invest in the DVDs, something I’d avoided in the past due to its ‘incompleteness’, as just that one episode reminded me of how much I loved that show.
Nice to see the positive comments regarding the ‘inspired’ casting of Shirley Mansun as Catherine Weaver. I never could decide whether her acting was excrutiatingly bad or incredibly good but she nailed the cold, ruthless killing machine – something which, imo, hasn’t been seen in the Terminator franchise since Robert Patrick’s T-1001. That said, ‘John Henry’ definitely gave me goose-bumps on more than one occasion.
3 July 2015 at 08:17 #40927Apologies if this is not posted in the correct place.
Olaf Pooley (Professor Stahlman, Inferno) is 101 and in desperate need of a new set of dentures. It sounds like the basis for a god awful sitcom, but the situation is actually true. A friend of the family has launched a fundraiser at http://www.gofundme.com/s4rgth9. I’m sure that if just a fraction of those stirred by Olaf’s performance in Doctor Who gave just a few dollars, this man with a fantastically long career and still enjoying life in relatively good health and sound mind, would be able to spend the twilight of his days in the comfort he richly deserves. Please spend a moment to visit the above link and give what you can. I am not connected or affiliated in any way whatsoever with the fundraiser, and just thought this forum would be an appropriate medium to let fans know.
3 July 2015 at 10:51 #40930@fatmaninabox — yes, I’m pretty sure that any new series will almost certainly not be a continuation of TSCC — it’s unlikely they’d get Lena Headey these days if nothing else. At least not until she’s finished her Cersei duties.
I felt the same way about Manson at first — I thought she was pretty bad at first and was cutting her some slack because, well, because she’s Shirley Manson goddammit, but then felt it was inspired. Like Summer Glau, she nailed the whole weirdness of how a Terminator would struggle to interact with humans.
Same with Garret Dillahunt too. OK, he’s not as imposing as Arnie but he’s definitely got something really rather sinister about him. Especially as John Henry. Which kind of gets to the nub of what a Terminator is — essentially a huge metal toddler with lots and lots of guns. He also deserves kudos for infusing singing ‘Donald, Where’s Yer Troosers?’ with genuine and unsettling menace. I’m not sure Arnie could have pulled that off.
4 July 2015 at 15:36 #40942I had been intending to write a blog commemorating the late, great Patrick Macnee and his contribution to popular culture and pretty much the lives of anyone interested in SF or fantasy TV. But then I realised that we’ve already done so with @phaseshift‘s Rewind TV blog on Too Many Christmas Trees a couple of years back and what with the blog itself and the comments below, there was really nothing that I could possibly add to it. I’d recommend that newer members check it out and leave any further thoughts on The Avengers, Macnee etc there, should you be so inclined.
I’m afraid the actual video link no longer works, but below is the full Honey For the Prince episode, a true Avengers classic, and also featuring the recently departed Ron Moody (an almost-Third Doctor at one point).
4 July 2015 at 16:34 #40943@purofilion
I hope you haven’t given up on Farscape. On the “torture” issue, I think I’m correct in thinking it was @ichabod who raised it as a concern, but I didn’t get any sense of where they stopped watching. It is a feature, but I will point out that we are talking about a show which went out at the same time uncut as Buffy (6pm) on BBC2, which I’d say features similar elements of mild physical and mental torture. It starts at the end of the first series, which introduces us to a new character (Scorpius) and his “comfy chair”.
There is nothing as strong as the confrontation between Faith and Wesley in Angel, and it certainly not Jack Bauer conducting DIY Guantanamo in 24.
Browder is great at conventions. Just very enthusiastic about his projects and he is a geek. He spent a period in London for his acting studies, and married Francesca Buller (largely an English theater actor, but she appears in some great roles in the show). He has some great anecdotes about going out on the lash with a fellow student – Gary Oldman.
Yes – he appeared in Who in the series 7 episode “A Town Called Mercy” as the Sheriff, Isaac. The pictorial evidence below:
4 July 2015 at 16:57 #40944I’m up to Episode 9 of Penny Dreadful, and with a couple of concerns this has been a stellar run for the series.
It is a great turn by Danny Sapani as Sembene, and it must be nice for him to have a role that doesn’t involve the hero of the story exhort children everywhere to shout “Colonel Runaway” at him. 🙂 Poor Colonel Manton.
I haven’t really come across the “Magic Negro” thing you discuss, although the “mystical noble savage” is a hangover from Victorian literature I certainly recognize. I think the next episode of PD will shape a response to whether Sembene is one or not, as the show plays some character cards close to its chest until it is fitting to reveal them.
I’m mightily confused by the chef Halloran in The Shining being considered that way though. Astonished. I could see it in the film, perhaps (it was a point of contention between King and Kubrick), but the book?
Halloran questions himself why he is drawn to help Danny, and his race is an issue in that deliberation (the Outlook’s last mental assault tries to reawaken his natural resentment in a book set in the decade after the civil rights battles). In reflecting on his life though, we see that the “shiners” are all drawn to one another sensing kinship of a kind. One example is the maid in the hotel who sought him out to tell him of the “thing” she saw in one of the rooms. She didn’t really know him, but he’s the one person she tells everything to.
On Halloran’s dashto Danny he meets an unusual amount of Shiners who help him in some way to achieve his goal. A coincidence, or are the outsiders (of whatever race) with the “shining” ability drawn when Danny lets go with his psychic scream? Halloran is a great character, whose life story and conflict with race was explored in IT where his first restaurant was burned down by an offshoot of “The Klan”. If he’s a magic Negro, we need to accommodate the magic Jew and the magic Redkneck who help him aid the magic white kid. The point of the story surely is that certain similarities and connections show genetic differences to be redundant? A great novel, to my mind, and that criticism of it should be treated with deep suspicion.
4 July 2015 at 17:31 #40945That’s very kind Jim. When I heard the news about Macnee I thought I may have tempted fate by highlighting Christopher Lee in The Avengers. 🙁
With the loss of Macnee, Moody, Lee, Nimoy (surely the absolute redeeming feature of Trek) and Pratchett I’m willing, halfway through 2015 to declare it “annus horribilis” for genre. If Tom Baker goes, I’m going on a rampage.
Great choice with Honey for the Prince. He was in another, The Bird who knew too much, but I think Honey is the better. And Macnee on top form.
Everyone Watch it.
“By Your Command”.
4 July 2015 at 19:19 #40948@phaseshift — It is indeed shaping up to be a bad year for losing some much-loved faces. And I think we should probably add Brian Clemens himself to that roll-call of mortality….
5 July 2015 at 01:43 #40952@phaseshift — Farscape: yep, that was me, on the torture issue. It’s very much a personal limit thing, of course, since an awful lot of stories, great and small, are *about* the protagonist being wrung out and driven by terrible events up to and including actual torture, and where you start feeling heavily manipulated by extended scenes of characters being deliberately subjected to intense pain by someone demanding something from them varies from person to person. And you’re right, the Scorpius stories were where this pattern really took off; at some point I really *did* stop watching because of it, then came back and found that Farscape had been cancelled, which I was sorry to hear. It never bothered me in “Buffie”, so I guess that’s where my tolerance level was comfortable. Strokes and folks, as always . . .
@jimthefish We need a way to set up a group rampage, don’t you think? We’re still only halfway through 2015, and whole beautiful continents of wonderful entertainment are falling away around us . . .
5 July 2015 at 02:16 #40953@phaseshift re “The Magical Negro”, a trope that does hark back, IMO, to “The Noble Savage” (see Tonto, the Lone Ranger’s sidekick, as a sort–of transitional figure between these two categories: a “savage” who is noble enough to pretty much ignore his own people and their ongoing oppression and go off to help a White hero out of scrapes with gunslingers and cattle rustlers and the like). If you look down the page linked below, there are some lists of literary MN’s, with several Steve King titles included. I don’t agree with all of the selections shown, but I’ve heard some pretty convincing presentations by young POC at SF conventions on this subject. It’s the inclusion in “magical” of the idea of plain old wisdom/insight in a Black character (who is only there to give a White protagonist the benefit of that wisdom/insight) that’s perhaps a reach too far. I was thinking of the movie of The Shining, myself, rather than the book — which I think I’d better go back and read again; it’s been too long . . .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Magical_Negro_occurrences_in_fiction
I’m hoping that Sembene (pretty enigmatic so far) proves complex enough not to be seen this way, but it’s difficult when a POC character is in a story without any ethnic context — others of his (or her) ethnicity with whom there are significant ties and interactions. Sembene is set up as a character who is attached to Sir Malcolm and has no purpose other than (judging by what Sembene has said so far) being some sort of watchman and support to Sir Malcolm, and bringing — not yet, but I expect it — some concept of African-based supernatural power to the party, as it were. On the other hand, an African in that Victorian London setting + wildly gothic events is traditionally quite at home in exactly that character outline, so . . . Well, I love the character just as he is, but I know lots of people whose opinions I don’t feel qualified to dismiss who (probably) won’t.
The whole tangle of arguments over color tokenism, cultural appropriation, ethnic stereotyping, etc. is alive and kicking in the SF/F world, now that numbers of non-White writers have staked their claims in what at one time was *almost* 100% White Guy territory (SF, in particular). All to the good, since when women made that move in the sixties and seventies, it was a real shot in the arm to the genre. So’s this change, but (as usual) not without lots of friction, disagreement, and charges of “over-reaction” flying about.
5 July 2015 at 04:09 #40956@phaseshift (I just posted a reply to your post on Farscape and somehow I was logged out as I pressed ‘submit’ so I’ll keep this brief: possibly a cosmological reaction to my lengthy comments causing Craig to disable the right column Activity feature!)
Found that Buffy and Angel had some torture scenes but didn’t think they were gratuitous; ie “must ff this NOW” and even beyond Train Heist in F’fly, the scenes with Niska, Wash and Mal were quite well done -but I’m no film critic. I just happen to know what I like.
In Farscape, nope. Haven’t seen anything remotely worrying. Colleagues (who love to mouth off) assure me there’s nothing to be concerned about and as the hospital has recently re-purchased certain channels which aim for the widest viewing market, it’s not surprising they’ve gone for Neighbours, Home ‘n’ Way, A Country Practise, Star Trek, John Wayne Westerns, BSG and…..(da dun da dun….) Farscape.
Bonus! It’s on at 1 am but hey, not picky as I have sleep time during the day in a shared room with a young lady also with Crohns. We’ve taken to munching sugarless lollies at night (when we can’t be found out. It’s like school camp!) and watching old Star Trek, the Brady Bunch, Gilligan’s Island and Farscape together. I’ve found a fellow admirer of the show.
So, no ‘torture issues’ -although the Brady Bunch and Marcia’s arguments with her mum about dating an African American are torturous to listen to in this day & age….leads me to the next point.
Kindest, puro
5 July 2015 at 05:09 #40957I don’t think that the Magical Negro trope is well advanced in The Shining -neither the book nor the famous film.
I was at the vituperative, self-congratulatory, haughty and prosaic diatribe at Yale (also read in The Yale’s Calendar) where Spike Lee slated the Mystical Negro catch-all (& which is referred to in every Wikipedia article on the concept, bar one).
His tactics were roundly criticised by some Australian panel members and also some notable South American ladies and gents who spoke of the need to incorporate South American, Mexican, Spanish and particular religious groups associated with Zen Buddhism and Islam into these discussions. Can we transmute substantive racial issues into spiritual ones? Possibly?
Should we? Not always. The MNType is usually less educated, prayerful but one dimensional and I don’t find this the case in The Shining -a film which, despite other concerns, still makes my Top 10 list.
Lee is known for his ‘negging’; it’s oddly irritating as it was once funny. But it lacks purpose ‘these days’ -as in the last 10 years. But that’s my own opinion accompanied by morose habits which reassert themselves at various times. At least this manifests succinctly which cannot be said about Spike Lee.
@phaseshift I should add that I adore Browder in F’cape; his smile is absolutely sincere and he lacks that chiselled jaw/look which bespeaks a little biddy steroid use on the side (see Australian cyclists!). He’s naturally ‘normal’ and so it’s easier to feel connected to him. The easy relationship that develops with him an Officer Sun is terrific. Even Zhan and Rygel seem to be getting along and I like Chianna a lot.
5 July 2015 at 14:25 #40961@purofilion
Hey, you’ve made it to ‘Pip'(chiana)! I apologise for the delay in a season 1 blog, but work has been a little crazy. I’m out from tonight but will aim to post some thoughts later this week.
+ @ichabod
I think The Shining is one of my passions. I’m ambivalent about some of Kings work, but he was on fire during that period. For our English Lit O Level at 16 we had an oral exam in which we had to advocate a book we’d recommend as essential reading. The Shining was mine and I hotheadedly proclained that it should transcend the pigeon hole of ‘Horror’ and grace the syllabus alongside To Kill a Mockingbird and Catch 22 as a modern classic. It’s such a meaty book for discussion and analysis.
I think the film is ok as far as it goes. Kubrik basically said his interest was in the disintegration of Torrence, and you can marvel at that central performance and the pure class of the film techniques, but that focus on one character is to the detriment of the others who all seem short changed. The book really is rich in detail and the perspectives of Halloran, Danny and his mum are sadly lost.
Plus Topiary animals! The precursors of the Weeping Angels! The book wins hands down.
5 July 2015 at 23:12 #40976So…
A couple of months ago I saw Fringe boxset (first 3 seasons) in the local charity shop.
Obviously I bought it on the recommendation of people here (and ‘cos, well, its for charity so can’t lose really).Anyway I’ve just seen the first episode.
I was expecting a drama about an experimental theatre company, probably based in Edinburgh (what with the Scottish contingent on this forum).
So I was a little surprised to find a ‘new’ X Files, with a character channelling the great Vincent Price.However, a couple of good lines, curiosity and the fact that I have a bunch of discs sitting under my TV means I’ll probably dip into episode 2 in a few days time….
6 July 2015 at 02:20 #40977@Wisht Ah, the great Vincent Price . . . How well I remember cowering in my seat with my eyes covered while that same sister jeered at me for not understanding that it was ALL MAKE-UP — we were seeing “House of Wax”, which would have scarred me for life had I been so foolish as to believe her and continue watching. And to think that, decades later, he had a conversation with my sister in an L.A. supermarket about how to choose good grapefruit . . . His son Barrett lives in my city, and is a teacher, author, passionate environmentalist, and one of the most cheerful and delightful people you could ever hope to meet.
6 July 2015 at 04:50 #40978I haven’t seen Fringe yet (now, no spoilers!) and want to watch it as the ads are intriguing, and, like you, have been following the positive comments of the Who-groupers.
So, let me know if it’s worth it?…..
If you do the Blog for Farscape then that would be much appreciated, thank you. Can’t wait for a good Blog and may I say (without grovelling) that you write very well, with lovely arguments and with tremendous wit often lost in Oz Bloggers (maybe I just read the wrong ones) so I’ll look forward to it.
The Shining was a book I read at 14 years of age and some years later, saw the film which, on first viewing, entranced me. I noticed Sissy Spacek’s character was quite lost by comparison with ‘Jack’s character’ and that annoyed me no end. Halloran, too, was marginalised but I was in a JN phase and anything and everything he starred in I loved -I still put that film in my top 10 but that list also includes oddities like The Manchurian Candidate and no-one thinks my choice is correct/smart/appropriate.
But hot damn, when I make lists, I try not to change them forevermore which is totally silly and for this I blame the ever present, Bill, my dad, who always said, “it doesn’t matter: just make the decision and stick to it.”
Goofball advice by any modern standard.
On Farscape, Browder did very well as a Peace Keeper (the first two parter so far)-accent almost ‘sport orrn.’ In fact, eerm, rather hot, would be the word….
(@Ichabod I can see what you mean by the torture scenes in that chair -I can say that we managed to not fast forward those scenes (but it was jolly hairy & we very nearly did) and perhaps these scenes was what caused the season to be granted an ‘MA’ rating? I think it was @fatmaninabox who mentioned this initially?)
Purrr-ofilion
6 July 2015 at 07:15 #40979@purofilion We had no kids in the house at that time, so I never noticed the ratings for Farscape. I’d have judged it as fine and dandy until The Chair, not just because it was extended sadism, but because as I recall there was a fairly clear erotic charge to those scenes as well — which would probably fly right over the heads of kid-viewers, but, urk . . . Not my kind of thing, and maybe that’s all there is to it.
6 July 2015 at 07:37 #409826 July 2015 at 07:49 #40983@purofilion Um, don’t want to do spoilers, but the, ah, black leather and — want to go over to Spoilers?
8 July 2015 at 18:50 #41070Was rummaging around in the basement last night for something to watch, and there was “The Persuaders” with Tony Curtis and Roger Moore. Seen originally when I was an impressionable youth, purchased when I was an ageing romantic who had forgotten that 45 years can make a difference and seen again last night. And…well, it was rubbish, I admit. Or was it just the fashions and the hairstyles that were rubbish?…Nahh, it was rubbish!
But…and this is the point…I still think of it fondly when I think of how I watched when I was 17. There…the ability to hold two contradictory opinions simultaneously and believe both of them.
And while the quality of the show might depend on when you saw it, I submit that the opening title sequence and music by John Barry still remains brilliant.
-
AuthorPosts
The topic ‘General Open Thread – TV Shows (2)’ is closed to new replies.
