seth

I got a recommendation to watch "the best science fiction series,' The Expanse. So I jumped into S1. It's well acted, richly designed and with convincing flashing lights, space & spaceship exteriors, and other cool CGI stuff. BUT, it is not a science-fiction series. It is a political, territorial, resource-conflict thriller that could have played out between any countries on Earth...that just so happens to be set in space. When did it become the norm to refer to something as true sci-fi, just because it has spaceships traveling between various planets, when the entire plot is not about science, futuristic technology and interaction with advanced alien lifeforms - like the best Heinlein or Varley - but simply a resource war that has very little to do with futuristic science and everything to do with human greed and political gamesmanship, that could have been one of our World Wars or America's Civil War, right here in the 19th, 20th or 21st century? So, I'll continue to watch it, cause it's entertaining and politically intriguing like, say, "The Diplomat." But if I recommend it to friends, I will not say it's science-fiction. I'll just say it's a gripping turf-war for essential resources like water and sovereignty...with the turf in question just so happening to be Earth, Mars and the asteroid belt.

Finished Season 2 (what a dark slog!) Mindthinkr... Sorry, but all the most glaring inconsistencies still go unanswered: - if everyone except Solo and 3 young'uns died in Silo 17, from where is the Silo getting power, lights, electricity and breathable air throughout? Obviously, there's no one left running the generator. Remember, judging by the rotting corpses at the door, it's been decades since things were up-&-running at 17. - with none of the above, how are Silo/3/baby producing food to survive? The take away is that the authors/showrunners are saying, "Lighten up, dude, it's just a TV show. As long as we make it flashy and entertaining, we've done our job." "I know it's only crock & bull, but I like it!"

We had just finished watching "Silo" before getting into TTBP. Like so much modern-day sci-fi, the storylines are captivating while being simultaneously frustrating because of all the obvious implausibilities. "Silo" never answers the most basic questions like, if everyone except Solo and 3 young'uns died in Silo 17, from where is the Siio getting power, lights, electrcity and breathable air throughout? Obviously, there's no one left running the generator. TTBP leaves just as many glaring absurdities. A psychotic Chinese tiger-mom who trusts aliens 4 light-years away, to 'come be our guests' on Earth, with no clarity of how many there are, how much space they need or air they breathe, and whether, instead of helping us be better humans, will need to annihilate the entire human race to make way for themselves. (And she is supposed to be one of the smartest minds in centuries.:-) I've been reading great sci-fi for 60 years, and I'll never understand why these entries don't take the time to clarify these important omissions, to dot the 'i's" and cross the "t's." It's almost like the show-runners think, "Oh it's just entertainment, it doesn't all have to be credible or makes sense, just go with it, dude!" Or perhaps they just think were not smart enough to spot/be bothered by, the blatant inconsistencies.

Latecomer here, didn't see S2 E1 till last night (Jan 13,2025.) Appreciate the above comments, but I have to ask the most OBVIOUS question that I don't see posted here yet. If all "Silo 2" inhabitants rushed outside (except for Steve Zahn) and died, leaving an abandoned silo with no one inside running the generators, fans, etc. how could there still be breathable air for Juliette after removing her sealed air suit, and where is the electricity coming from to power the scattered lighting we see? Judging by the skeletal remains at the door, virtually the entire population of Silo 2 has been dead a loooong time. Even if the "inner door" stayed well-sealed, preventing the so-called 'poisonous air' from contaminating the inner silo, without a running generator and air source, the inside would have no fresh air to breathe, nor the electricity for the few visible lights and Mr. Moon River's music loop. Come to think of it, even in the first season in Silo 1, what is the air source?? If all outside air is poisonous, and you can only regenerate the same air in an enclosed space for a few weeks at best, how was there decades worth of fresh, breathable air for the 10K in Silo 1? And if you can't go outside and find liquid fuel or some other combustible agent to power the generator, what powered all the lighting and other electrical needs in Silo 1.

Starting this thread, surprised there isn't already one going for this incredible series. Eager for anyone's thoughts. PARTIAL SPOILER ALERT: This series is hard to watch, in spite of fantastic settings, fine acting by all, and glorious cinematography. A beautiful and rebellious couple leave their home town because their family cursed their marriage. They go on to found and build a remarkable town, Macondo, filled with free, loving, generous people, so kind and thoughtful of each other that they don't even need a church, religion or governing authority to treat each other well and flourish. Decades of growth, marriages, children and grandchildren later, shit gets weird - very weird. The Colombian Federal government sends in a despot governor, an unneeded church gets built, and people start going insane. Incestuous children are born, and the tension between the gentle townsfolk and the intruding ruling federales gets reduced to a two overly-simplistic, warring factions, the federales (Conservative Party) and the townsfolk (Liberal Party.) Except, the townsfolk never thought of themselves as members of the Liberal party or any other party. They were just quietly living simple lives in the town they built. The series unfortunately descends into graphic conflict, war and bloodshed from that point on. I suppose both the original author of the revered book - Gabriel Garcia Marquez - and the series writers concluded there wouldn't be much of a gripping story to watch without some violent arc and everybody starting to act very stupid. For me, it's made the series almost impossible to stick with, because, in spite of the incredible cast and scenery, I keep finding myself saying, "Why is everyone in this near-perfect town turning into such idiots? Why are they ruining such a perfect setting?" I guess it's supposed to demonstrate that 'nothing good lasts forever' or 'human minds just can't sustain peace, they have to go looking for trouble,' or some such crap like that. Your thoughts?

double posted, sorry

A very stupidly-placed pure plot device placed into the end of a very intelligent show/season.👎🏻 It's hard to believe the very well-researched and intricate show writers wouldn't realize everyone would go WTF! upon viewing this obvious absurdity. If they just wanted to make sure AJ's conniving VP started next season as the Pres, with all the rife implications for Kate, they could have just as easily had the current Pres die suddenly of any number of ailments - heart attack, stroke, etc, and just had Hal report that after his phone call. But to connect it to the impact of his call is just hilarious and completely non-believable.

The whole sidebar where Andrea feels responsible for the death of her female client because she forgot to call her to tell her that her ex is getting out of jail for a one-day family funeral, who then stalks and kills her, is total bullshit and an absurd plot device by lazy writers. Any criminal lawyer will confirm that: - Yes, violent prisoners can sometimes be let out for a family funeral. Very rare, bur legal in some states. - HOWEVER: They would remain under heavy police or law enforcement custody the entire time of their leave. At least one officer would literally be attached to the guy, even at the funeral. The criminal would have zero opportunity to roam free in LosAngeles, hunt down his ex, and do harm to her. He would be under constant surveillance, maybe even in handcuffs, until he was back behind bars the next day. The guy was a known high-violence wife-beater and an obvious flight risk. Do the Lincoln Lawyer writers actually expect us to believe, on his leave day for the funeral, he was actually allowed to cruise around L.A. on his own. Please! Give your viewers some credit for basic intelligence.

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.

We only just discovered The Nevers here in 2022 and binged all 6 eps of Part 1. Not seeing many recent (past Summer 2021) posts here, so don't know if anyone will reply. It's tremendously entertaining and well-done, but soooo convoluted and with more than a few serious holes in the plot. For us, the most absurd hole is this: Massen hates the Touched and wants them gone. Amalia gets him to confess (sort of) that he was behind hiring the gunman that killed Mary while she sang. But he has known all along where the 'orphanage' full of Touched are. If he really wanted them all gone, why pay a mad gunman to kill just one newly-aware Touched in a park in broad daylight, instead of paying some desperate-for-cash woman to fake being touched (to gain entry into the orphanage,) and have her carry in a lethal poison to slip into their food, thus killing off all or most of them in one fell swoop? He's got the money. He's got the connections and the spies to infiltrate. No problem distancing himself from the act so he appears uninvolved. It makes no sense - a huge gaffe, IMHO. One friend said he engineered it especially to frame Maladie as the killer. But she's already proven guilty of tons of other killings in town, so why would he need one more? If he really beleives all that crap about the Touched being a pestilence on the Empire, with his money, power and influence, why not just shut them all down with one mass killing that he makes sure doesn't implicate him?

With a producer like David Kelly and a crack cast - Nicole Kidman, Bobby Canavale, Melissa McCarthy, Mike Shannon - you'd think this show couldn't possibly be the cliche-ridden, trope-laden turd that it is. Virtually every character seems like a cartoon, and the totally unimaginative retreat-guru-substance-addicted-generation storyline feels about as original as a Tony Robbins firewalk or a dog-eared old copy of Be Here Now. Seriously? With all that star-power, I really wanted to like this. Maybe I could've tolerated it a bit better with a couple micro-doses of psilocybin.:-)