alexvillage
-
Posts
1.5k -
Joined
Content Type
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Discussion
Posts posted by alexvillage
-
-
1 hour ago, MadyGirl1987 said:
Definitely understood where Tess and her friend were coming from, but the video was the wrong way to do it. The issue became about their video, not what the teacher was doing wrong.
Mixed feelings. There is a lot happening in the world, in particular in this country that we know have always happened - police assassinating black people, for example. The reason there is a movement now, is in large part because of videos. Making it all about the video is a consequence of making the problem public but if more people don't know, things don't change.
For example, teachers abusing special education kids usually go back to work pretty soon after there is a complaint. It is not very public, so they can count on the issue being forgotten. It still happens with the murderous cops but there is an effort to keep track of where they are, if they were fired, if they are working somewhere else.
Activists make many mistakes before they find some balance on how and when to say things. I appreciate that Tess is being portrayed as a teenager who is learning, not an old soul becoming a hero
-
11
-
-
7 hours ago, txhorns79 said:
I think it goes both ways. The right solution is Tess speaking to Beth and Randall, and they forming a united front to speak to the school. Tess undermined herself with the video because then she becomes the issue instead of the teacher.
Maybe she undermined herself if you look from an authoritarian point of view, as in hierarchic power. But if you see Tess as someone that is slowly learning to be an activist, I think it is an excellent start. Dissent should be encouraged.
-
5
-
-
7 hours ago, VanillaBear85 said:
Adults need to be encouraged to be respectful and not touch teenagers. Easily on the side of Tess and her friend. The video was not disrespectful in the slightest to me. A teacher should not pet a child.
People should not touch other people without consent, period. Kids should not be forced to hug relatives of friends either. Also, people who use wheelchair will probably say that: don't ever touch the chair without consent.
-
19
-
-
4 minutes ago, MissLucas said:
I think it's unfortunate that the BLM storyline is getting conflated with the Randall is an insufferable asshat storyline. He, and all people of colour, has an absolute right to their feelings about racism and I don't think any white person can ever truly understand what it is like to watch the George Floyd video from their perspective. But we have four seasons of this character already, where it has been shown that Jack and Rebecca tried to address his different needs as a black child.
Even with that, if the BLM was the only story happening, I could sympathize more - but then they had to go and have St. Randall save the day with Rebecca.
4 minutes ago, MissLucas said:I thought about this too and would wish that we get the other members of his family more involved in the BML story line. St. Randall is a distraction and takes focus off from valid points the show wants to make about systemic racism.
Good points, in particular the "Randall saves the day" (too self-righteous), and making the white member of the family show true allyship. That would feel like real concern (from the part of the writers) and not just virtue signaling.
-
1
-
-
On 10/28/2020 at 12:01 AM, wonderwoman said:
so glad the show addressed this. the idea that discussions about racism shouldn’t upset white people underlies why race remains such a divisive issue in this country.
I was thinking about this. I skimmed through the comments here and some people are uncomfortable with the show bringing up police murdering but I think that, in the same way they made the virus part of the story, it is important to make those conflicts as well.
The conversation and the mood when Randall, Beth and the girls were watching the news, that's probably something very common in black families, and things only get worse. I appreciate the moment because it is not something I can feel, not being black, but it makes me feel like I want to have more solidarity toward racially oppressed people, learn how to be an ally. Feeling uncomfortable can also be a wake up call. We (white or white presenting or with white privileged) are affected by systemic racism and we should step for a minute and accept that - we are, in a way, racists. We have to unlearn what the system tells us. I know people who are uncomfortable when the issue or race is "thrown at the viewers" but not when the LGBTQ issues are equally "thrown at viewers". Use the uncomfortable to reflect on the why.
-
21
-
-
So they did it, they incorporated the masks in the story. Excellent! I was hoping they would.
-
3
-
-
4 hours ago, Umbelina said:
I don't think, nor have I seen, that Atwood is displeased.
She did write a sequel that "corrects" some of the many bad decisions the TV writers made.
She might be financially satisfied, but I don't believe she is pleased. Her writing is her legacy and unless she does't care about it, she might have some regrets. The show is so bad compared to her writing.
-
I am not reading al the posts because I just started watching this on Hulu. Love that it is Canadian because there is a completely different flavor. I am in the US and am so tired of the medical dramas here, can't even watch one whole episode, don't watch any of them anymore. I'd rather rewatch ER which is much better even in its worst parts.
I didn't recognize Laurence Leboeuf. I don't really follow her work but always liked her in other shows, even the annoying teenager in Durham County.
-
2
-
-
6 hours ago, Bulldog said:
Wouldn't that really only work in the current timeline story? I actually wouldn't have a problem with shows set in the present having the characters wear masks, but I don't see how it could be explained for period shows like this, Young Sheldon, The Goldbergs, etc.
Writers are supposed to be creative. In any case, today's reality can become a very long term reality. There is a possibility that masks will be the new norm, so even if the situation is a current event, characters wearing masks didn't have to be something to be highlighted. It would be part of everyday life, just like it is now. I don't really see a problem with that. Many shows have changed actors for the same characters, in the middle of production, for different reasons. I think it would actually help making safety a mainstream feature of our prone-to-denial society, especially our western culture.
4 hours ago, bros402 said:The network or the production company would pay for the testing.
I would not hold my breath that the multibillionaires that run the entertainment business would care about the "little guy" who run errands for the big producers, or the cleaning crew that sweeps the floor the "stars" walk in. Besides, a lot of the workers are not the network's employees. They work for contractors, and those contractors usually make a lot of money by hiring people for vey low wages and no benefits. In a time where unemployment is leading us to a depression, it is easy to hire people so they don't care if you don't show up. They know others will. That's how everyone wash their hands off any responsibility.
But some workers are unionized. Their unions should do their job of protecting them, at least demand whatever is necessary to keep them safe. I still think we need a big, huge general strike. We need solidarity if we really care like we like to say we do. The big actors should take the lead, imo
-
1
-
-
18 hours ago, Aloeonatable said:
I honestly do not think they would go into production unless they have very stringent safeguards in place. Daily testing of cast and crew is a must as well as maintaining some social distancing. Limited crew, only those that are absolutely needed.
I would expect we won't see crowd scenes or any extras used. It definitely is a challenge for these productions, but still they all have a job to do.
I didn't think they would wait, but I was hoping they would. The daily testing would be the ideal, but the "lower ranking" actors and the crew don't have the same type of insurance the "stars" have, and even "stars" need to be big for the concierge-type insurance so no, they will not test people every day. That is reserved for the people in the high towers because you know, we NEED them to tell us when to risk our lives.
To me, the ideal would be a general strike, it is long overdue. The crew, in particular, is more vulnerable. Just don't show up. Many actors have been unemployed for months, no help from the government, they should join. The writers should join in solidarity because mostly likely, they are working from the safety of their homes. We need solidarity in the world right now, and not only in the entertainment industry.
I do miss watching some shows, even if I am not too invested in any particular one. Meanwhile, I am watching ER (still the best show) and watching a lot of nature films on YouTube.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, chocolatine said:
On the one hand I'm happy the show is coming back this year, but on the other, I'm concerned about it going back to filming while California still has the highest COVID-19 infections in the country. It's a large ensemble and I'm sure a large crew, so it seems impossible to keep everyone safe.
But capitalists cannot stop making money, right? They will sit up in their towers, safe and protected, while the laborers put themselves in harm's way.
If that's what they will do, I wish the shows would just have everyone wearing masks, for example. This is the new normal, it is likely to last for months, even after the vaccines. There will be new pandemics, they will come more often and stronger. Let's get used to this. Shows are a mirror of real life, so the character should have their masks on. I am concerned about the staff. Many of them are low paid jobs, hard work, locked inside one place for hours, preparing the sets, dealing with lighting and sound, and a bunch of other things I am sure I don't even know about.
In Florida, schools reopened and a lot of people have already been put in quarantine - not to mention their families - while the counties' officials take their meetings online. It is a similar situation with shows. It is risky and as much as I want the show to come back, I would rather lose a whole season to safety.
-
5
-
-
On 6/30/2020 at 7:39 AM, Scarlett45 said:
My grandfather used to tell me “common sense isn’t common”. I didn’t understand that until I was much older, but it’s so true.
Slightly off topic- Spain is in Europe, Spanish people are Caucasian/white........did you mean you were a quarter Latino?
Depends on where in Spain, there is a lot of Spanish people who are not white, due to all the history, wars, divisions. Culturally, maybe, but that's all. I am also from Spanish descent
-
2
-
-
I started watching this again and then I saw a pretty big goof I hadn't noticed before: In the episode Callie meets her father (Donald) he says that she is just like her mother but then she meets her actual biological father and he has a daughter that looks just like Callie. So how can Callie be just like her mother and a girl from a different mother just like her?
-
So, let's break this down a little.
They are in GA, which can often be on a direct hurricane path. The hurricane is Aiden, meaning the first named storm of the season. The season starts in June, the first named storm would be in June, but let's expand that to August (even though each year named storms form earlier, some even in May). Why are all of them wearing sweaters in June - August, in Georgia? It is high summer.
Also, they live in an Island, by the water, and have a basement? I don't think this is even possible.
The writers don't even try, do they?
-
1
-
2
-
-
13 hours ago, saoirse said:
give me ROBIN AND SAM (I really like David Walton, you guys)
No. please, no. And did they have to make him a cop? Ugh!
The writing is terrible, OMG! Luly and Evan act like they are teenagers, the shower scene had no chemistry and was poorly rehearsed, it was awkward.
But what drives me bananas is how anything hospital on TV is so far removed from reality, it is not even possible to suspend disbelief. A random pregnant woman goes for an ultrasound and they run tests for ALL genetic disorders, including one that I have never heard of - I don't know everything but I have so many friends and acquaintances who have chronic illnesses and disorders, I never heard of that one - and immediately the doctor calls the patient - interrupting her sex encounter? Even if she is "related" to her best friends, that is completely absurd.
Robin has no idea of who her children are, does she? and where is the baby? Couldn't they have added a sound effect of a cooing baby with the kids in the kitchen, just to pretend she exists?
-
2
-
-
5 hours ago, sark1624 said:
Well, i also come from a country who gain independence and became inmediatily a republic; it is not my intention to start a fight, but i think that every country builds myth about its past, also the fact that in america there is no a monarchy it doesnt mean that there is no a aristocracy, even that i am not american there is people in the US who felt proud that their family is old money, they go to harvard, they are billionaires, they have servants, they also mix with the smart set, they do only fashionable charities and so on; perhaps the brits are more honest about and they do it up front. My country is small, but there is also some sort of aristocracy, they are businessmen who their ancestors worked in the upper echelons of the spanish rule where, and they go only to certain unviersities, they even keep their old estates only for the prestige rather than the money, they have certain names, and they dont mix with the rest.
In the particular case of Downton, the writter Fellowes is unashamely conservative, he can only see the aristocracy in rose tintes glases. The truth in those times is that the aristocracy in britain was in the margins, they no longer had economic, policial or social power; young working class people no longer wanted to be servant, they wanted normal jobs with free time and improve themselves, women no longer looked up women of the aristocracy for fashion, they looked actresses and so on because they were icons of meritocracy, industrialists or other new money no longer yearned to be aristocrats, if they wanted a castle they simply bought one from a broke aristocrat, policitians, even conservatives ones no longer mixed with the aristocrats. For Carson, the butler, it is very important to be the butler because he is old, in his days be a servant in a big house was the top job for a working class person because he could have clothes, a bed, a roof, 3 square meals; but working conditions for working class people were better in the 1920s so being a servant was no longer the top job that somebody from poor origins would dream.
Certain attitudes of the Crawley family was totally innacurate, for example accepting a gay footman, or being too friendly with the servants, or living in luxury (the aristocrats were downsizing everything), selling their art works, jewels and so on; also accepting that one of their daughters had a child out of wedlock. But still the show is interesting about how people behave themselves about 100 years ago.
Thanks for the detailed response. I should have been more specific, I 100% see the "new aristocracy" around the world, in the form of billionaires ( and the newly minted trillionaire, Bezos) and even in smaller scales as in white people employing and exploiting mostly black people as "maids". I am firmly in the "eat the rich" group. I am still curious about how the British see that in relation to their support (or lack of support) for the queen. Do they compartmentalize the current monarchy and their perks, while the rest of the current aristocracy (even if in title only, I really have no idea of how they live their lives) deserves to just cease to be a thing?
Interesting perspective on the writer. I didn't know but it makes sense now why he whitewashed Tom's socialism. I had noticed some of the extrapolations in the show, like children out of wedlock being largely accepted into their circles, and a gay servant since homosexuality was outlawed in Britain until relatively recent, I believe. The way the "upstairs" and "downstairs" were so friendly also raised my eyebrows - the analogy in the US reviewed history is how many slaves were happy to be slaves and how so many white slaveowners were compassionate and gentle. Bah!
But thanks for the information. I knew a little about the downsizing happening at that period, the new middle class emerging. I am still curious though, about the population's current feelings about the monarchic ways.
-
1
-
-
I broke my own rules to never do Amazon anything and signed up for a free trial of Prime to watch hit show, after watching Call the Midwife and needing some more British flavor.
I am in the US, and I have a question for the Brits:
When you watch period shows like this one, about aristocracy and titles, and hunting dogs, and - imo - empty values, do you watch with a "at least we got better", or "I wish it was still a little like this", or you are completely dispassionate about it?
I ask because while I find it interesting from a "learning some 'history' via TV", I completely reject anything Monarchy, anything aristocracy, and I can't understand how it was even a thing that adults needed someone to help them get to bed. It is straight from feudalism, when you are born in a lower "cast" you better learn skills that keep you there. Butlers proud of being servants is completely foreign to me and even though there are similar situations everywhere, the pride on being servant, as far as I know, seems to be (or was) part of the British culture.
I don't mean to start a discussion and I realize that some might have a very different opinion. I am honestly curious. I believe the show brings some "modernisms" in the script, maybe things that would not be so acceptable back then but that they write into the show anyway. But my impression is that the writers, willingly or not, seem to lean towards "aristocrats are not so bad" (I would never write Tom caving into living with the family and basically forgetting about his socialist passion)
-
On 12/9/2019 at 12:27 PM, Dowel Jones said:
By the way, the whistle stop tour, although cute, would have been mostly useless. People don't vote to ratify amendments; legislatures do. And, if experience holds, most people don't write their state legislators in support (or opposition) of any issue. I hardly think that the President would have the time to take an extended train trip to states that opposed the Amendment.
I watched this on Netflix so I am late to the discussion but this show has always been aspirational, based on things that can happen in real life but with outcomes that are very unlikely, and the portrayal of what we (as a country) do, and how, very rosy and far from reality. So it was a Hollywood way of telling people that we can make things happen by getting involved. I enjoyed some (most?) of the show although it made me extremely mad to see how the politics were one-sided "we are always good". The ending was consistent with that vision.
On 12/9/2019 at 1:08 PM, Calvada said:How can Daisy afford to take months off? I must have missed the explanation of her being Independently wealthy.
That was probably a glorification of public service. People who work in the White House, any government position, even the senior staff, don't make a lot of money, not enough to living on savings. That's one reason why we see them writing books, going on TV to be a talking head after they leave, or becoming lobbyists, which is forbidden in some cases but still happens, when they are hired as "consultants". That's when they make money.
-
54 minutes ago, TOWTooMuchTV said:
As an adult heir of Scott's I would think Luly should have gotten her own portion to do with and manage as she chooses, but then again it's probably good that she didn't based on her and Evan's decision making.
Unless Scott had a will, the money goes to Robin. Spouses are the primary beneficiaries
-
On 5/16/2020 at 5:00 AM, Misssyj said:
When did Sumi move into the coterie?
It is strange and I don't think it was explained in the show. Maybe it got lost in the editing room.
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, MissLucas said:
The plot in one of the earlier seasons with a girl wit Down Syndrome getting pregnant by her boyfriend who had Cerebral Palsy was much more realistic. It was heatbreaking but realistic. Jacob who could have led a pretty independent life was sent away being institutionalized in a male-only facility. It's one of the show's toughest plots (and most realistic for the time). Reggie's story is sweet but there's a lot of sugar-coating involved.
Yes, that one was a better portrayal but in the US it would be still far from real because the place was shown as full of caring and loving people. Not sure how it was in the UK. At that time, things were more like where Sister Mary Cynthia was locked up, with people just wandering, many of them undressed and filthy, and some of those places were run by religious organizations. That's why I have mixed feelings. In one hand, they show disabled people and send a message of acceptance. OTOH they don't really show how terrible it was.
-
4 hours ago, OnceSane said:
I think it absolutely would have been realistic for Lucille particularly to be concerned that a minority child wasn't being placed with someone with their ethnicity. Lucille has spoken many times about feeling like she doesn't belong and missing some of the traditions and people back home (as has Cyril), so I can completely see this being something she brought up.
Cultures vary but my impression is that while one could be concerned about the ethnicity, it wouldn't be something so openly discussed. As I am not in the UK and don't know much about the interactions concerning race over there, it is totally possible that I am wrong. For what I know in the US it is something fairly new (as definitely not happening in the 60's) - concerns regarding making sure the child in included in their culture. So maybe in the UK a black woman coming from a colony would have been empowered enough to openly raise the issue. That's why I thought it would be a little unrealistic, not the observation itself, but the fact that there was no push back, or that it was dismissed as a silly concept.
-
16 minutes ago, NUguy514 said:
Apparently, you just scream about your "pops" for a hundred years until everyone goes fucking crazy and stabs themselves through the ears and there's no one left to prosecute you.
I was going to mention Pops but after this perfect answer I cannot come up with anything better
-
6
-
-
On 1/1/2019 at 7:06 PM, caitmcg said:
The difference is between a medicalized birth in a very clinical setting, presumably, and a more personal midwife-attended birth with someone who's been seeing them through the prenatal process. The Nonnatan midwives still attend the births in the maternity home, with Dr. Turner available as needed, as with the Poplar home births so it's still community based. There have definitely been past episodes where the midwives encouraged a patient with multiple kids at home to stay in the maternity home for a birth just to have a break from the chaos of home life for a for a bit.
I may be wrong because I am not in the UK but in earlier seasons it was mentioned that the government would have a nationalized health care system - something that we still don't have in the US, smh - so isn't it possible that the midwifes were a community, free service, therefore attached to the church, and the clinic something that started after the NHS was established?
S05.E03: Changes
in This Is Us
I was reading the thread for this reason. I posted comments yesterday before I watched the episode and I now feel like it wan't such a big deal after all. The video created a conflict with the parent's but we didn't hear anything about the school's reaction, did we? I still think it was an accurate depiction of today's teenagers. Sometimes over the top, learning and asserting themselves. And for a black teen, things are much more intense. Much better than the old formula of rebellious teen that throws parties and drinks.
I also didn't think that the "fight" between Toby and Kate in front of the mother of the possible adopted kid was a big deal. I think it showed that they are just regular people that fight sometimes, and they apologized to each other. I saw this as a positive sign, even if not very well written.