seth

We've watched 4 episodes so far, gonna finish it. Pros: Acting and international settings are superb. Very intriguing story in the Mystery category. Being a wine-geek will help, but anyone who likes a good mystery will still enjoy. Cons: Plot devices and plot set-ups seem contrived in spots; several "that would never have happened" set-ups just to drive the story forward. You'll need to check your 'believability' meter at the door and just enjoy. Also, hard-to-watch in terms of the overt selfishness and manipulativeness of most of the parents. Much of the story centers around a wine-expert father who starts preening his childhood daughter to be a follow-in-my-footsteps clone of him. That alone is child-abuse, but he's also brutally shaming of her when she make mistakes. The child's mother and the Japanese 'competitor's parents are equally self-absorbed assholes who demean their kids every chance they get. So if unfit parents like that make you cringe, you may have trouble making it through the first 4 episodes.

My wife & I have been enjoying/hating this show through Episode 7. If you're a child of the 60s/70s even early 80s, you can't help but get pulled into the whole nascent-to-world-famous rock band narrative. Growing up with Beatles, Zeppelin, CSNY, Fleetwood Mac, et al, it's a shoe-in to want to follow these musicians unfolding evolution, and as a pro record producer for decades, I totally relate to all the drama inside & outside the recording studio. But, as others have also opined, it's difficult to root for Daisy or Billy when they both, each in their own way, are total narcissists. Daisy claimed her time on stage at their Hawaii outdoor concert and hearing her songs come to life in the recording studio were both magic and the most fulfilled she ever felt. Then in this episode she tells Simone it was the most miserable time of her life and she had to irresponsibly bail to Greece with no warning or contact with her bandmates. Doesn't follow, poor writing. Or she's just such damaged goods, her mind & desires no longer make sense, even to her. So we may finish out the series, but damn, is this self-absorbed 'free-spirit ever gonna apologize and get that her my-way-or-the-highway has a big impact on a lot of people. Prob not!😔 Sincerely hope Riley Keough isn't like this in real life...if she pulled that shit on me I'd kick her ass!

'Mechanical Rights' are the royalties paid for playing any song in any recorded format (over radio, TV, use in a film, etc.) They are paid directly to the owner of the 'copyright,' which is usually a publishing company that owns the song, who then keeps a percentage and distributes the rest to the songwriter(s,) or directly to the songwriter if they 'self-published.' So only Knopfler would get 'mechanical' royalties every time the song is played, and even then, only if a long enough portion of the song. Those 4 notes/lyrics when the MTV spaceman appears for 3 seconds may not be enough to warrant any royalties paid. Sting received a one time contributor's fee for his work on Money For Nothing, basically a flat fee. Knopfler gave him an 'honorary' songwriting credit, but no royalties. This addictively fun, scenic show was always full of bogus transparent 'plot devices.' We've always known Emily was going to end up with Gabriel, but the way the writers beat-around-the-bush to get there (Camille & Emily's 'pact,' Camille's female affair, her pregnancy, and the unceremonious exit of gorgeous, caring Alfie) all feels pasted-on and phony. The Parisian location shots and Lily's ebullience make it a hard-to-resist guilty pleasure, but the lazy writers could exercise a little effort and show some respect for the viewers' intelligence.

Sting gets nothing, but Mark Knopfler might. It's not from a Sting/Police song...it's from "Money For Nothing" by Knopfler's Dire Straits

Throwback question to the end of Season 2, please: Incredulity puts me off of shows. At the end of Season 2, Morse is arrested for suspicion of strangling someone to death with the scarf gifted from Monica. In S3E2, we learn he was in prison (prison, not simply jail or holding) for at least a month. I had to call bullshit, massive unbelievability. Yes, the scarf was his, so what? That is the weakest of circumstantial evidence. Was any investigation carried out? Did they locate him at the scene & time of the crime? Was there an inquest, court case, indictment? Holding jails are for 'suspicion,' prison is only for convicted criminals. What was he convicted of, when, by whom and how? Plus, he was a detective himself, with no criminal record. One assumes he would 'make bail,' be released on his own recognizance, and require a hell of lot more than, "the scarf was his" to ever land him back in jail let alone an actual conviction and any prison time. For my wife and I, it just didn't wash. Felt like a cheap plot device to tease & manipulate us, begging for the next season to answer. When, in S3E2, he tells Thursday what his 'month' in 'prison' was like, we turned to each other with WTF?? looks on our face. There are many aspects of this show I like, and a few that put me off (the overbearing opera and heavy classical selections are an unbearable, unnecessary addition.) But the story-line has got to be believable or I'm out.

Ahh, shows my ignorance of the court systems...guess that's cause I'm old and have never been charged with a criminal offense.:-) Thanks dleighg. Still feel like the show was 'meh.' Good, but not great or wild, like say, the The Good Wife, or another David Kelley joint, Boston Legal.

OK series...basic procedural with some nice quirks...Garcia-Rulfo is good but just doesn't have the snap & pop of his namesake played in the original LL movie, Matthew McConaughey. Big WTF question: SO much fuss around original defense attorney, Jerry, bribing juror #7, with $100K. Even if that's true, why would any lawyer spend $100,000 to bribe one juror. That guarantees nothing. Trevor new it was critical to be innocent, and new about the bribery, and even fixed it so Juror #7 remained on the jury during selection, in spite of Haller's strong desire to dismiss him. Why??? Making sure 1 juror votes your way doesn't mean shit. You've got 11 other jurors who could easily outvote you. If Trevor's innocence was that critical, he and Jerry would need to do a lot more than bribe one juror to guarantee his freedom and clean name. And both Trevor and Jerry were (supposedly) very smart, so they would know that. This is the part that just threw me right out of the shows narrative and made me forget about it.

Hehe:) Well, actually it was Joe Mantell (as Mr. Walsh) who delivers that classic line. Bob Hoskins was not in this film. But you're prob right about "Forget it," don't try to suss it out. Of course, if we don't 'sound off' about these show's inconsistencies, what's this forum for?

Just finished Season 4 (yep, a bit late to the binging party:-) I'm sorry, but as addictive as this show is in terms of action, scenery, editing and fine acting, it has become so full of shit - in terms of incredulity, important untied loose ends, dysfunctional 1-gear characters who never evolve, year after year, and obvious plot devices, to make us want to gallup towards S5. I can list all the nonsense we've noted, but I doubt anyone here cares or wants to discuss it (Since Taylor Sheridan isn't onboard and wouldn't take advice from forum posters,:-) and I don't need to shout into my own echo chamber. So many ridiculous liberties taken: - Was John & Rip's slinking into the diner with guns blazing really the right move? Isn't there at least a chance the scumbag robbers would have taken their booty from the patrons and left, no one shot? Procedurally, isn't that the first approach in any hostage situation? Which perhaps might have saved a dead sheriff? Why did no one investigate John & Rip's questionable vigilante choice? - Why no time, not even a moment, to mourn for the collateral casualties of the militia murders? Where's the women and child running away from her flat-tire vehicle as the gunmen gunned down both John and the mother? What happened to Beth's 'secretary' who opened the bomb box? We know Beth got badly burned, did the secretary just get vaporized? Wouldn't it have been more dramatically gripping to connect the backstories of those poor souls caught in the crossfire of John's f'ed-up Vito Corleone stubbornness (yes, friends, it's true - Yellowstone is just "The Godfather" on saddles,) than another 10-15 minutes each episode wasted on horsies doing fancy cut moves in the corral? - Beth to John, end of S4: "Yes Jamie's alive, but now you own him." Really?? John sent him to Harvard, then used the honor's law graduate to literally run expert defense on every snafu Dutton Ranch found itself in, then forced him to run for one political office, took another office away from him, all for John's sake. Painfully obvious John has owned Jamie since he was a pup, but some a'hole writer thinks this is a great revelation on which to end S4?? Obviously, I could go on & on with the glaring inconsistencies...but only if you're interested :-)

This was the episode that made me seriously consider dropping Yellowstone. With crazy Beth, timid Jamie and dead bodies everywhere, this show has always been way over-the-top. But Jamie's Dad Garrett Randle ordering a massive, def-con level 5 , bombs and AK-47's blazing, middle-east terror strike on everyone associated with the Dutton Ranch to 'prove his love' for Jamie just doesn't wash. Sure, he wanted to prove Daddy John never loved him, just used him, while Daddy Garret (MIA for decades??) is his 'real family.' but bombs exploding on a major downtown street, taking non-Dutton-family collateral casualties (what happened to Beth's secretary who opened the box??) and staging enough machine-gunnings to force an immediate Federal level swoop-down and investigation (which, somehow, never materialized??) And all this after John Dutton only did a good deed taking Jamie and never did any real harm to Garrett?? The firepower and all -inclusive death to anything named Dutton just doesn't wash. WTF??? Comes off feeling like Sheridan just can't lay off upping the violence/insanity/dysfunctionality ratio with each episode. Sorry Taylor, this better start seeming real real fast or I'm outta here.

IS it just me (and my wife) or, exciting as this show is, do you find you keep needing to check both its credibility and your expectations at the door to enjoy it? - Credibility: AS much as there is a huge financial 'greedhead' corporation (Market Equities) that really wants to build their airport & Park City-like ski resort adjacent to Dutton Ranch, the full-out terrorist-level attack, with mass AK-47 killings and bombs that destroy half a street, just doesn't wash. No corp. wants it that bad. That big of an attack would bring in law enforcement and deep investigations from city to Federal level, and they know that. So they couldn't chance it. They're good at lawyering private owners to death and throwing ton of money at the politicians, but they don't authorize full-tilt terrorism attacks to build cash-cow towns. - Credibility: AS above, where are those investigators. As we watch Beth & John heal from their massive burns & injuries, how come the only law enforcement deployed seems to be the local sheriff and the Livestock Commission? How come there isn't even a footnote about Beth's secretary who opened the bomb-package? Are we to assume she was simply vaporized? Looking at the mess out on the street after the bombing, wouldn't their be Federal-level FBI/DOJ/NSA-level investigations immediately commenced? - Expectations: Given Roarke's apparent hand in the destruction, his demise was pretty meh. Why did Rip kill him? Was he certain Roarke was behind it? If so, why didn't he discuss what to do w/John? Wouldn't John have wanted to grill Roarke to get more who-dunnit before his demise? Wouldn't John have wouldn't to kill Roarke, slowly, himself? Why don't we see a scene where Rip tells John, "I know Roarke's behind this, do you want me to kill him? And where is Willa Hayes? She was the one who told Roarke if he wanted to win he needed to move to Middle-East Def-con 5 level terrorism. Why is no one taking her for a long-train-ride?

IS it just me (and my wife) or, exciting as this show is, do you find you keep needing to check both its credibility and your expectations at the door to enjoy it? - Credibility: AS much as there is a huge financial 'greedhead' corporation (Market Equities) that really wants to build their airport & Park City-like ski resort adjacent to Dutton Ranch, the full-out terrorist-level attack, with mass AK-47 killings and bombs that destroy half a street, just doesn't wash. No corp. wants it that bad. That big of an attack would bring in law enforcement and deep investigations from city to Federal level, and they know that. So they couldn't chance it. They're good at lawyering private owners to death and throwing ton of money at the politicians, but they don't authorize full-tilt terrorism attacks to build cash-cow towns. - Credibility: AS above, where are those investigators. As we watch Beth & John heal from their massive burns & injuries, how come the only law enforcement deployed seems to be the local sheriff and the Livestock Commission? How come there isn't even a footnote about Beth's secretary who opened the bomb-package? Are we to assume she was simply vaporized? Looking at the mess out on the street after the bombing, wouldn't their be Federal-level FBI/DOJ/NSA-level investigations immediately commenced? - Expectations: Given Roarke's apparent hand in the destruction, his demise was pretty meh. Why did Rip kill him? Was he certain Roarke was behind it? If so, why didn't he discuss what to do w/John? Wouldn't John have wanted to grill Roarke to get more who-dunnit before his demise? Wouldn't John have wouldn't to kill Roarke, slowly, himself? Why don't we see a scene where Rip tells John, "I know Roarke's behind this, do you want me to kill him? And where is Willa Hayes? She was the one who told Roarke if he wanted to win he needed to move to Middle-East Def-con 5 level terrorism. Why is no one taking her for a long-train-ride?

We're just now binging the whole series, and just saw Season 2 finale, with the recovery of Tate and the end of the Beck brothers. I wonder if anyone here, like us, found this to be the worst written of all episodes. Full of stupid choices and obvious plot-devices just to 'get on' with the story. After all that build-up of the big bad Becks and their immense power over the region, all that fear of their reach and retribution, one simply gets killed on the toilet and the other just gets shotgunned (in the dark...at first you can't even tell it's Malcolm who John shot) in a place where he would never have been, hanging out with losers at the very place where Tate was being held. Oh, c'mon! The real, smart-scary Malcolm would never go to the one place most likely for the Duttons to find out and find him. He'd control the whole thing from a safe distance, and let his skinhead lackies control the actual abduction site. Yet, there he is, with nothing but two white-supremacist assholes, no beefed-up hired guns or militia to keep the house well surrounded and guarded, and him running across the grounds with nothing but a handgun, just waiting to be dispatched by the Duttons. The real Malcolm would be a million miles away, controlling things by phone orders. What reason would he have to hang around right at the Tate site?? And why the other house full of white-supremacists, where Casey is first mis-directed? Tate was never there, and for sure none of those jerks were gonna divulge the correct location. We all knew Casey would only get the real location from one of the two Becks, while dying. Just a distraction, a plot device to fill up more time and allow for more heads exploding in gratuitous blood spurts. It just didn't wash, and we felt disappointed that Taylor Sheridan dropped the ball in good writing for this pivotal episode. Shoulda stuck with the planned exploding-Cessna, with the Becks dying much-more magnificently in a ball of fire dropping from the sky, and kept Tate's recovery from the white trash as totally separate.

We've been binging 1883 and loving it - I actually remarked (to wife & friends) that the only series that comes close in intensity and pure 'wallop' of each episode was Game of Thrones. One nagging incredulity since Episode 1: The obstacles for any 2,000 mile journey across the plains - weather, bandits, Native tribes, too much water (wide, deep rivers,) too little water, etc. - virtually guarantee futility ending in death, long before you reach the destination. I can understand why Shea is willing to do it - he's already half-dead due to the War and his family deaths. I can understand why the Europeans want to try anyway - any possibility is better than the repression they fled from. But was it ever clearly explained what the Duttons were running away from in Tennessee? That was so awful, risking near-certain death on the trail was worth it? James Dutton presents as a savvy, seasoned land journeyer (he was a War captain, too.) Clearly, he would know the terrible odds of completing the journey alive. Originally, he was going to just collect his family and go alone, minus all that extra manpower and gun-power that came with signing on with the wagon train...which would have made his chances of actually making it even more remote. He knew that. He was smart. We find ourselves asking over & over, what was so terrible about their lives in Tennessee that he would choose near-certain death for most/all family members on the trail, over a family where everyone was still alive, even if having a crummy life in Tennessee? Was this ever made clear. If so, I missed it.