LucidDreamer

I don't care how nice the little girl is, she butchered Nessun Dorma. Thin and reedy and screechy. It's a male singer's song, in the first place, and takes a powerful voice. Very poor song choice in my opinion. Honestly, with these little kid opera singers it's like a dog dancing on its hind legs -- only interesting because it rarely happens. As an opera fan, I am never impressed. This is how it should be sung: Jussi Bjorling sings Nessun Dorma

It was actually Piers Morgan who disliked Lindsey and said that. In fact, at one of her shows, where she had a cemetery-themed set for a song, with fake gravestones, his name was inscribed on one of the stones.

"Here's my va-jay-jay" -- coined because a lot of contemporary female dancers do leg lifts and spreads all the time. I'm not a dancer, but know something about it, and the little girl dancer was not "all that." Decent, but nothing special, esp. since dancers can turn professional at 16 or 17, so being 13, she should be more advanced in her technique. The little girl opera singer -- I always hate seeing young kids singing opera (or other music too advanced for them, emotionally as well as technically). I don't think she really understood what she was singing -- it sounded like mimicking to me. And it is the worst possible thing you can do with a child with a good voice -- have them sing stuff that is really too hard on their growing vocal chords, etc. It always makes me cringe when I see (and hear) young singers basically destroying their voices before they are even in their teens. (I studied voice and wasn't allowed to sing certain arias even in my early twenties, because my vocal teachers felt my voice wasn't mature enough. A nine year old had no business singing like that).

I love this show! It has already had one season on Netflix, so the new episodes are for the second season. Definitely worth a watch from the beginning.

Do the writers really think we are buying this load of garbage from Lizzie about how her actions should be justified, just because Red's been given a pass on almost everything? I mean, okay, he has, but a.) Spader's a much better actor who can pull off the ambiguity, and b.) the Red character never pretends he is standing on some moral high ground. Unlike Liz, who always seems convinced she's still a good person, despite all the murder and mayhem she's caused. I can take a morally bankrupt character like Red who doesn't pretend to be a saint, but I can't stand Liz's hypocrisy. Her status as one of the "good guys" expired some time ago.

I just wonder why this show is classified as a "Drama" when it is clearly a "Genre" show. (i know it started out as more of a drama, but that shark has been jumped). Are we supposed to empathize with the "Girl on Fire"? Because I'm not. But it almost seems that way, with the writers having Cal all upset about her leaving.

Noah's Ark, because that's a real thing... Really, show?

Yeah, and it said -- "Drink your Ovaltine"

So Liz basically caused Anne's death. No redemption for Liz, then, in my mind. (Not that she hadn't already done horrible things, but that was the last straw). Everyone on this show is a criminal of some type or another. Red doesn't even seem like the worst of them anymore . At least he's honest about it, while the task force and Liz pretend they still have some moral high ground to stand on. There was so much stupid in this episode, if it was water you could fill the tank for the shark it's been jumping for the last few years.

New trailer dropped! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1WHQTbJ7vE

This is obviously an alternative-world take on the story, which is fine. Probably better than trying for historical accuracy and getting it wrong. But as a former costumer, the clothes and hair are making me twitch. Hair would NOT be worn down except at home, and only then if it was a very casual or intimate situation. The silhouette of the clothes is generally okay, but the colors and some of the fabrics.. no. Again, I have decided to label this a fantasy rather than a historical drama. Only way I can watch, LOL. I haven't read the books, which might be for the best.

Desz should win, but sadly, she probably won't. Carter did well with the cover, but that original did him no favors. Ian is good in his lane, but he does not have "the voice." (Not how I would interpret that term, anyway). Again, I thought the originals didn't really work for Jim and John. I've heard much better original songs on Songland. Not really a fan of John, despite his range and technique; not sure why. His voice gets very thin and tinny sounding sometimes. I did think the high notes at the end of Halo were beautiful, though. Jim's cover was good, although it sounded a little too much like a karaoke cover of Joe Cocker's version.

Never has so little been done with so little.

I think I've pinpointed why I don't much care for this show (husband is a horror book fan, so it's something we watch, but I'm not really that invested): The tone of it is so "one-note." I understand that it's horror, but it really isn't that scary and it is so unrelentingly GRIM. There's little to no humor, even of the dark kind, and no lighter moments to throw the horror in relief. No contrasts in tone, which is boring to me. And I don't like many of the characters, either, except for Maggie. They are just flat -- too much angst without any layers.

It was sooooo obvious that Savannah was going to win her duel before she even danced... or did her gymnastics floor routine, I should say. Not to pick on a child, but that is not real dancing, just tricks. I am so over the obsession with kids doing stuff (not so well) but being slathered with praise just because of their age. This happens on all these competitive performing arts shows.

Exactly. Even a leather jacket would've dragged her down, much less one with metal plates in it. This episode made me think they didn't have enough material so decided to show the same scenes over again from other points of view just as filler. Varying POV can be used successfully -- it was NOT used that way here.

Well, after two episodes, I'm out. The world is just too messed up right now to make me want to watch a grim, dystopian show that makes little to no sense when you really look at it. (Some posters upthread have pointed out all the scientific and other issues). I get that it may be trying to be a metaphor for a classist society, which is a fine premise -- for a film. I don't think that kind of abstract notion works as well in a weekly series.

I guess everyone else is becoming as bored with this show as I am....

This show has absolutely nothing to do with the books, other than the main character's name, and yes, she did have strawberry blonde hair in the books so the red hair is ok. Everything else is totally different. Honestly, this is a trend I hate -- taking something "known," if only in general public knowledge, and using it to create a TOTALLY different show, book, etc. If you want to tell this story, tell it. Just don't hang it on a beloved or culturally significant other book, show, etc. (Still angry that Frozen used any references or allusions to H.C. Andersen's The Snow Queen in its early advertising because... Again, NO RESEMBLANCE WHATSOEVER).

Couldn't even make it 15 minutes with this. I was afraid they would "Riverdale" the source material, and they did. I have no problem with updating the Nancy Drew books to today, my complaint is making Nancy such a angsty "loser." The Nancy in the books, whatever time period, was smart and capable and very driven to succeed. And a bit more logical than emotional. I always saw her as very progressive, even in the books written in the 1930s and 40s -- sure, those adhered to different social mores, but Nancy was always a go-getter and not one to let anyone (including the men in her life) control her. This Nancy feels like some kind of slacker. I know she's supposed to be broken up by her mother's death, but it just didn't work for me. Not continuing with this one.

Apparently very unpopular opinion -- I liked Leigh Bardugo's first Grisha trilogy but I have never been able to get into SIX OF CROWS (or subsequently, CROOKED KINGDOM). Looking on Goodreads, it's obvious that these books are sooooo beloved by so many, but... I just don't like it when all the main characters are cruel, murderous, mean, etc. Honestly, I do not get the love for Kaz Brekker AT ALL. He's a jerk who's mean to his supposed friends, kills without remorse, and is all angsty all the time over HIS problems, (while other people in the book have equally bad or worse pasts). I just want to kick him in the teeth, but apparently he is the new "ideal" book boyfriend. Gah!

Yes, they are definitely referencing Shakespeare. Midsummer Night's Dream in particular. Makes me wonder if the creature in the tunnel will turn out to be 2.) The horned god version of Oberon (The great stag as the male leader of the fae -- a nasty piece of work in some tales) or b.) A Caliban-like creature.

What annoys me the most is that, except for Ryan Niemiller and Voices of Services, all of the finalists are children or young adults. No one older than 30 anyway. Simon is always touting how different this show is because there aren't age limits (esp. in terms of older contestants) yet we basically end up with Kids Got Talent.

I notice quite a bit of Shakespeare's Midsummer Night's Dream referencing, from a mention of Titania, the "Puck" designation for some of the immigrants, and -- most amusing of all -- Orlando Bloom's character's name. "Philostrate" -- really? Makes me wonder if the being in the tunnel is going to turn out to be either a monstrous form of Oberon or a Caliban-like character. And although not from the same play, an "Imogen" and "Portia" showed up too.

Please, for the love of music, NO MORE BABY OPERA SINGERS. Now, I actually LIKE opera (and I am NOT 100, thank you very much), but it should NEVER be sung by a 10 yo child. Mainly because doing so is the fastest way to destroy a voice that might be actually fit for the opera world. IN THE FUTURE. Children's voices, bodies, vocal mechanism, etc. are not developed enough to take that kind of punishment (and it is very rough on singers who don't have excellent training). She'll have nodes on her chords by 18 at this rate. Shame. Also, where is the market? A 20-something, well-trained, singer could possibly jump into playing opera roles (or even musical roles as in PHANTOM) but what can a 10 yo do? Sing inappropriate arias that have no connection to their youth, experience, etc., that's what. Sorry, but I judge child singing acts by closing my eyes and picturing them as an adult. Do I still think they are great? Usually, no. Which means it is more about the "OMG, isn't it amazing that this young kid is singing this," rather than their actual vocal production, interpretation, and talent.