Party of One: Unpopular TV Opinions

[Jaded]

3 hours ago, Misslindsey said:

I hate River Song as well. I found her so smug, but I also hate the whole River Song storyline. I do like Alex Kingston as an actress, just hate River Song. 

I liked all the companions except Amy Pond. I always felt that I should like Amy, but I never warmed up to her. I am the one person who liked Clara. 

I liked River Song and Amy at first. They both overstayed their welcome and the stories attached to the characters got so convoluted that it made me resent them both as a result. I quit watching regularly due to Amy and Rory because it seemed like it turned into a show about them instead of the Dr. I watched episodes after Clara became the companion and when Capaldi started still not regularly. I liked what I saw of Clara and saw the episode they killed her off in which was sad. I haven't seen any episodes with the newest companion. I might check a few out this weekend.

[Wiendish Fitch]

My opinion of Amy is well-trod ground, and River Song set my teeth on edge. 

I liked Clara. Not sure I loved, but I certainly liked her, and hated Twelfth's treatment of her so much ("I miss Amy!") that I stopped watching.

For the record, loved Donna, loved Martha, and I liked Rose a bunch, but I agree her "specialness" was a bit excessive, and she was the Doctor's One True Love? Look, nothing against the character, and Billie Piper definitely has her charms, but... no. No. NO. Of all the companions the Doctor's had through the years, out of the dozens upon dozens of strong, interesting women he's encountered, including hyper-intelligent alien women he would have way more in common with (Nyssa and Romana come to mind), why does ordinary Earth girl Rose set the Doctor's hearts aflutter?

[ganesh]

I think the problem was that every companion had to have THIS STORY. And every season had to be SOMETHING about SOMETHING. I think they just got away from what the Doctor was about, and these good actors got short shrift. 

[amaranta]

Of the traditional format late night talk shows, and since Letterman retired, I like Jimmy Kimmel  best.  I think he's a talented interviewer and when he gets a dud of a guest seems to be adept at handling that situation.  IMO, Fallon is the worst of the lot at interviews which is why he has to play so many games and have inserted bits. Though Fallon does seem to be a nice guy.

I don't really put Kimmel or the others in the same category as John Oliver since he's primarily commentary.

Edited September 17, 2017 by amaranta

[Ohwell]

5 minutes ago, amaranta said:

IMO, Fallon is the worst of the lot at interviews which is why he has to play so many games and have inserted bits. Though Fallon does seem to be a nice guy.

Yeah Fallon might be a nice guy, but I can't stand his show and him on it.  I wonder if some of his guests dread going on his show to promote their movie/tv show because they don't want to participate in the antics? 

[kiddo82]

It's a day ending "y" so SVU is on.  Not that I'm not a March/Cabot fan but I think Neal/Novak might be my favorite ADA.  

[MadyGirl1987]

My biggest UO is that while cable channels/streaming services get a lot of praise as where quality TV is now, they are not the be all, end all of quality TV and there are a lot of good shows on network TV that get overlooked simply just because they are on network TV.

Edited September 17, 2017 by MadyGirl1987

[SmithW6079]

That "Will and Grace" is coming back to TV annoys me unreasonably. I stopped watching the show the last few seasons because I got tired of Karen's screechy voice, Jack as gay stereotype, Will's dullness, and Grace's idiocy. There is no reason to revisit these people 10 years later, where, apparently, they've remained the same. I think I started hating the show when they killed a character development of Jack's -- he was studying to be a nurse, and was apparently good at it, but he decided to throw it all away and go back to being an unemployed actor whose only talent was being a gay stereotype. I guess the writers already had Will as a "normal" gay person, so they needed the camp factor of Jack.

Edited September 17, 2017 by SmithW6079

[Katy M]

33 minutes ago, SmithW6079 said:

That "Will and Grace" is coming back to TV annoys me unreasonably. I stopped watching the show the last few seasons because I got tired of Karen's screechy voice, Jack as gay stereotype, Will's dullness, and Grace's idiocy. There is no reason to revisit these people 10 years later, where, apparently, they've remained the same. I think I started hating the show when they killed a character development of Jack's -- he was studying to be a nurse, and was apparently good at it, but he decided to throw it all alway and go back to being an unemployed actor whose only talent was being a gay stereotype. I guess the writers already had Will as a "normal" gay person, so they needed the camp factor of Jack.

I never liked Will and Grace, but if I did I think I would be annoyed, because from what I understand they chucked a lot of stuff that they did the last season, like marriages and babies, and just put them all back to single and living together.  I could be wrong about that, though.  In which case, I guess my UO would be I hate having people on the radio or TV or whatever (not on forums like this where I am looking at TV stuff on purpose) just randomly telling me what is going on on TV shows I don't watch.

[Chas411]

I think Viola Davis overacts in How to get away with murder.

 

There I said it.

 

The woman is a fantastic actress but her performance in the show, especially season 3 is just so overdone that I feel like every scene she's in is just baiting to her Emmy reel. 

Im also sick of having to look at the snot all over her face when she's doing one of her (many) crying, screaming, breakdown scenes. 

[GHScorpiosRule]

Just posting this here, because the show's not that old, and it doesn't fall into the category of it being "better than I remember," because I always loved it and watched it whenever any channel decided to air it. But since I now have the entire series on dvd, I'm rewatching it.  JAG. It still stands up well. I still hate the people I hate, and still LOVE Harmon Rabb, Junior, Admiral Chegwidden, Bud Roberts, Sarah "Mac" MacKenzie. But especially Harm.

Edited September 18, 2017 by GHScorpiosRule

[Chaos Theory]

Is it weird that San Junipero was the only episode of the new season of Black Mirror I didn't at least get through?  I guess this means I need to give it another go.  

[Shannon L.]

Wrong thread.  Sorry.

Edited September 22, 2017 by Shannon L.

[ribboninthesky1]

On 8/31/2017 at 1:48 PM, TattleTeeny said:

I like The Sinner. I don't care if it's ridiculous (not that I even necessarily think it is) and I wish that at least a few other people in the forum for it liked it too. I want to read opinions other than, "I hate this." 

It often feels like, with shows, it's either hate-watching or...love-watching (if there is such a thing). The latter as something akin to, "I enjoy the show, so I get defensive at any and all critiques."  Not much in-between.  

[TattleTeeny]

I am definitely guilty of watching things I don't really like, but they are always things that I am, in some dubious way, entertained by. I am even guilty of being mean to them in the comments. But having a good time picking them apart with "Did you guys notice this?" or "Who would ever do that?!" is different, I think, than the "This sucks; I'm out" ones...that continue to show up week after week.

[Wiendish Fitch]

4 minutes ago, TattleTeeny said:

I am definitely guilty of watching things I don't really like, but they are always things that I am, in some dubious way, entertained by. I am even guilty of being mean to them in the comments. But having a good time picking them apart with "Did you guys notice this?" or "Who would ever do that?!" is different, I think, than the "This sucks; I'm out" ones...that continue to show up week after week.

Bolded text is mine, for emphasis.

I was like that for Mad Men for waaaaaaaay too long, and I finally gave it up for my sanity and I've never regretted it. Life is too short and precious to waste over watching something you don't like.

[TattleTeeny]

Haha, I didn't post but I stuck around way too long with damn One Tree Hill! I tend to be a completist about shit and, to be fair, it takes a lot to get me to abandon something I actually once liked. But OTH was not that--I started watching it in reruns that happened to start after I had got home from work, and it became routine. Then I caught up and continued with it at its regular non-rerun time/channel. Then, one day, I thought, "I don't even like this! It is so boring!" and quit. Later, I went on to quit Once Upon a Time and Under the Dome!

[bilgistic]

This is probably wildly unpopular--I couldn't care less about the "Will & Grace" revival. I generally think cancelled shows should stay cancelled. There was a reason they were cancelled. Granted, there are exceptions to that; there are brilliant shows "cancelled before their time", but those are usually the exception.

[truthaboutluv]

Just now, bilgistic said:

This is probably wildly unpopular--I couldn't care less about the "Will & Grace" revival. I generally think cancelled shows should stay cancelled. There was a reason they were cancelled. Granted, there are exceptions to that; there are brilliant shows "cancelled before their time", but those are usually the exception.

I happily and loudly co-sign you on this. I've said this before but I am a strong proponent of shows having no more than six seasons. As far as I'm concerned at some point, you've told all the stories you need to tell with these characters and it's time to close the chapter on their lives and move on. All these revivals just reek of network laziness. Like they're not even trying anymore and instead just figure bringing back stuff that worked once will work again. I know the reviews for the first few episodes of Will & Grace have been really good but I just don't think there was a point to bringing the show back, same with Roseanne. Like you said, I am fine with reviving shows that didn't get a chance to really take off because they were cancelled too quickly. But Will & Grace, was a hit, had a long run and ended because like most shows, it had gotten stagnant and had run its course. 

[Katy M]

5 minutes ago, truthaboutluv said:

I happily and loudly co-sign you on this. I've said this before but I am a strong proponent of shows having no more than six seasons. As far as I'm concerned at some point, you've told all the stories you need to tell with these characters and it's time to close the chapter on their lives and move on. All these revivals just reek of network laziness. Like they're not even trying anymore and instead just figure bringing back stuff that worked once will work again. I know the reviews for the first few episodes of Will & Grace have been really good but I just don't think there was a point to bringing the show back, same with Roseanne. Like you said, I am fine with reviving shows that didn't get a chance to really take off because they were cancelled too quickly. But Will & Grace, was a hit, had a long run and ended because like most shows, it had gotten stagnant and had run its course. 

I agree that I'm against reboots and remakes, etc.  I can't say that I'm against all shows going past 6 seasons.  The way Law & Order cycled through cast, there were always different characters.  And there was always a different angle with the crime.  I don't think it got repetitive and dull.  I was never a huge fan of MASH and the actual Korean War, at least US involvement, only lasted 3 years, but again, they had cast change ups, and I think they did keep it fairly fresh. But, that's a bad example because due to the historical aspect, it really shouldn't have gone on that long.  Simon & Simon went for 8 seasons, and I enjoyed the last 2 as much as 2-5 (didn't care for 1 all that much for whatever reason).

The shows where I do hate it when they go long are family shows.  Mostly because you have to stunt the development of the "kids" as they grow up and should be leaving home. But, no, they have to stay because the show is still on.  Actually, I'd probably agree for most sitcoms. 

[Wiendish Fitch]

18 minutes ago, bilgistic said:

This is probably wildly unpopular--I couldn't care less about the "Will & Grace" revival. I generally think cancelled shows should stay cancelled. There was a reason they were cancelled. Granted, there are exceptions to that; there are brilliant shows "cancelled before their time", but those are usually the exception.

Hell to the fuck to the YES with this! I don't think any show should be revived, least of all Will and Grace! What has happened to the creative world? Is everyone so creatively bankrupt and fearful of finality that we need to drag aging actors back into roles they abandoned a decade or more ago and make them go through the motions of squeezing themselves back into relevance?!

For the love of God, Fuller House is on its third season. Third, folks! Why?!?!??! So we can see how the Tanner girls' lives have stagnated so completely that they're too lazy, unimaginative and cowardly to move out of their childhood home?! The idea of never leaving your childhood home used to considered depressing, and now we just eat it up?

 

While we're on the subject, both incarnations of Full House disgust me. I get that being a single parent is hard (though if they just sold that damn three story house, they could live comfortably in Virginia or Colorado, no sweat), but having people abandon their lives and pick up your slack 24/7 and taking it for granted that they'll just do it forever because you're too developmentally stunted and incapable is just unforgivable. 

Edited September 27, 2017 by Wiendish Fitch

[truthaboutluv]

Just now, Katy M said:

I agree that I'm against reboots and remakes, etc.  I can't say that I'm against all shows going past 6 seasons.  The way Law & Order cycled through cast, there were always different characters.  And there was always a different angle with the crime.  I don't think it got repetitive and dull.  I was never a huge fan of MASH and the actual Korean War, at least US involvement, only lasted 3 years, but again, they had cast change ups, and I think they did keep it fairly fresh. But, that's a bad example because due to the historical aspect, it really shouldn't have gone on that long.  Simon & Simon went for 8 seasons, and I enjoyed the last 2 as much as 2-5 (didn't care for 1 all that much for whatever reason).

The shows where I do hate it when they go long are family shows.  Mostly because you have to stunt the development of the "kids" as they grow up and should be leaving home. But, no, they have to stay because the show is still on.  Actually, I'd probably agree for most sitcoms. 

To be clear, the six seasons comment is more like an average. Like you said, a show like Law & Order, with the whole procedural stuff can sustain for a number of seasons. I just think that on average, most shows reach their max by the sixth season. At that point, that's when the writing starts getting sloppy and repetitive and the quality dips. 

Edited September 27, 2017 by truthaboutluv

[bilgistic]

1 minute ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

Hell to the fuck to the YES with this! I don't think any show should be revived, least of all Will and Grace! What has happened to the creative world? Is everyone so creatively bankrupt and fearful of finality that we need to drag aging actors back into roles they abandoned a decade or more ago and make them go through the motions of squeezing themselves back into relevance?!

For the love of God, Fuller House is on its third season. Third, folks! Why?!?!??! So we can see how the Tanner girls' lives have stagnated so completely that they're too lazy, unimaginative and cowardly to move out of their childhood home?! The idea of never leaving your childhood home used to considered depressing, and now we just eat it up?

 

While we're on the subject, both incarnations of Full House disgust me. I get that being a single parent is hard (though if they just sold that damn three story house, they could live comfortably in Virginia or Colorado, no sweat), but having people abandon their lives and pick up your slack 24/7 and taking it for granted that they'll just do it forever because you're too developmentally stunted and incapable is just unforgivable. 

I have never watched "Fuller House" and I don't want to...ever. I have issues with the politics and religion of Candice Cameron Bure(?), and don't need to have them subtly (or not so subtly) forced on me while watching a show.

Furthermore, I have watched one (part of one) of Bob Saget's comedy specials post-"Full House", and it was disgusting. He talked about Kimmy Gibler in a sexual way, and I just can't separate that, to him, she was a child during the filming and a close friend of the family on the show. To look at her in a sexual light felt incestuous and just plain dirty old man-ish.

[Katy M]

5 minutes ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

For the love of God, Fuller House is on its third season. Third, folks! Why?!?!??! So we can see how the Tanner girls' lives have stagnated so completely that they're too lazy, unimaginative and cowardly to move out of their childhood home?! The idea of never leaving your childhood home used to considered depressing, and now we just eat it up?

 

While we're on the subject, both incarnations of Full House disgust me. I get that being a single parent is hard (though if they just sold that damn three story house, they could live comfortably in Virginia or Colorado, no sweat), but having people abandon their lives and pick up your slack 24/7 and taking it for granted that they'll just do it forever because you're too developmentally stunted and incapable is just unforgivable. 

I haven't seen Fuller House, partly because I don't get that channels, but mostly because I have no desire to.  But, to be fair, it's on either Disney or Nickeolodeon, so I don't think we're the target audience.  I could be wrong about that I guess.

And, see Full House is a good example of a show that should have had a shelf life.  I don't think it would have been unreasonable for Joey and Jesse to move in for a year, or even two.  And, I don't know about Fuller House, but I never got the impression that money was an issue for Danny, so not sure what good selling and moving would do. 

[Bastet]

Full House is my television equivalent of ambrosia salad.  I am well aware there are shows I hate that others love, just as there is food I hate that others love; it's the inherent nature of subjective tastes.  But ambrosia salad, I just can't wrap my mind around someone finding tasty, and I can't manage to fathom someone finding Full House appointment television, either.  So Fuller House was the revival that had me scratching my head -- I never understood why people watched the series in the first place (or, dear gods, why Michelle was so popular when the Olsen twins were seriously ugly at that age and couldn't act for shit), so I was really boggled by bringing it back.  I didn't realize it was still airing.  So, yeah, definitely in the "I don't get it" camp.

[Katy M]

17 minutes ago, Bastet said:

Full House is my television equivalent of ambrosia salad.  I am well aware there are shows I hate that others love, just as there is food I hate that others love; it's the inherent nature of subjective tastes.  But ambrosia salad, I just can't wrap my mind around someone finding tasty, and I can't manage to fathom someone finding Full House appointment television, either.  So Fuller House was the revival that had me scratching my head -- I never understood why people watched the series in the first place (or, dear gods, why Michelle was so popular when the Olsen twins were seriously ugly at that age and couldn't act for shit), so I was really boggled by bringing it back.  I didn't realize it was still airing.  So, yeah, definitely in the "I don't get it" camp.

I watched Full House as a kid.  Then one day, as a an adult, I went home for lunch and it was on.  I watched it.  I was like were all the episodes this bad?  Yes, for the most part they were, apparently.  Although, I find the first season infinitely more palatable.  1. Michelle isn't talking yet. 2. There were some really sweet moments about the girls losing their mom and being sad over it and the guys making them feel better.   3. Little Stephanie is adorable. Actually, now that I think of it, I think the first, and possibly second seasons are the only ones I watched regularly as a kid.  After that I often wasn't home or doing something else.  So, I guess that may explain my better feelings for it.  But, I never ever ever ever was able to stand Joey.  That whole "cut it out" thing is stupid and I refuse to apologize for thinking so.

[cpcathy]

So agree with you all. Full House was dreck, it gave a bad name to TV, So color me flabberghasted when they decided to reboot it. Ugh, I have Netflix and won't even look at the icon for it when I go to search for a show to watch.

[ganesh]

I think the problem with the reboots is that they're cashing in on a known property and expecting nostalgia will sustain ratings rather than delivering quality content. Certainly with many of them, the shows ended with closure, so bringing it back now seems odd. For some reason, rebooting the sitcoms just seem dumb to me. Then again, they're probably cheaper. 

In olden times, they used to just do a bunch of reunion specials, and that didn't seem too bad because again they were closed stories, but I can't recall how the quality was. 

[Bastet]

1 minute ago, ganesh said:

In olden times, they used to just do a bunch of reunion specials, and that didn't seem too bad because again they were closed stories, but I can't recall how the quality was. 

Awful.  I liked the Cagney & Lacey reunion movies, but otherwise pretty much every time there was a reunion TV movie for a show I'd liked, it was bad.  Astoundingly bad in the case of the sitcoms, especially when it was a two-hour deal.

[Katy M]

2 minutes ago, ganesh said:

In olden times, they used to just do a bunch of reunion specials, and that didn't seem too bad because again they were closed stories, but I can't recall how the quality was. 

Every time there is a reunion movie of a show I watched, I watch it.  They're never anything spectacular but some are better than others.

Worst one ever (that I saw) was The FActs of Life reunion.  Ugh.

The Get Smart reunion kept pretty close to the old show and it was fun.  The first Growing Pains movie was fine, second one not so much.  Same with Eight is Enough.  I actually really enjoyed the first Eight Is Enough movie, because I think they did a good job with having a current plot, plus briefly catching up with what the individual members of the family wer eup to, without making it to clunky.  Just my opinion obviously.

[Jaded]

 I'm going to give the Will and Grace revival a chance before I blow it off completely. 

Edited September 27, 2017 by Jaded

[janie jones]

5 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

For the love of God, Fuller House is on its third season. Third, folks! Why?!?!??! So we can see how the Tanner girls' lives have stagnated so completely that they're too lazy, unimaginative and cowardly to move out of their childhood home?! The idea of never leaving your childhood home used to considered depressing, and now we just eat it up?

In the Tanner girls' defense, I'm fairly certain that they were long gone and moved out.  I think DJ moved back after a divorce, and the middle one had been gallivanting around the world.  I don't remember about the youngest one (I only watched the first episode, possibly the first two), but as far as I know, she's not around at all.  So they aren't stagnating as much as reverting.  (Also, to whoever said it's on Nickelodeon, it's actually on Netflix.)

[Jaded]

41 minutes ago, janie jones said:

 I think DJ moved back after a divorce, and the middle one had been gallivanting around the world. 

What I gathered from CCB and co. when they were describing the show on The View DJ became a widow.

Edited September 27, 2017 by Jaded

[Katy M]

2 minutes ago, Jaded said:

What I gathered from CCB and co. when they were describing the show on The View DJ became a widow.

Yeah, I think it's the same situation in reverse.  DJ is widowed like Danny.  I think she has 3 kids, I'm not sure if they're all boys.  Her sister moves in like Danny's bro-in-law move din, and her best friend, Kimmy, moved in like Danny's best friend Joey moved in.  I wonder if her husband was killed by a drunk driver, too.  If this were real life, I'd be worried about the eeriness of all the coincidences.

[Enigma X]

6 hours ago, bilgistic said:

This is probably wildly unpopular--I couldn't care less about the "Will & Grace" revival. I generally think cancelled shows should stay cancelled. There was a reason they were cancelled. Granted, there are exceptions to that; there are brilliant shows "cancelled before their time", but those are usually the exception.

I have nothing against Will and Grace but do wonder of all the shows that NBC could have brought back, why this one?

Co-sign on Full/Fuller House being awful.

Edited September 28, 2017 by Enigma X

[Kel Varnsen]

36 minutes ago, Enigma X said:

I have nothing against Will and Grace but do wonder of all the shows that NBC could have brought back, why this one?

I imagine that is a tricky one as far as picking a show to bring back. You need a show that was kind of popular, so it had a following, but not to popular where the stars are to fanous to want to come back. I mean you are not going to get Steve Carell or Jennifer Aniston or Chris Pratt or Julia Louis-Dryfus to come back and rehash old characters. On top of that you need a show that is old enough to have nostalgia factor but not so old that the only fans are aged out of the key advertising demo.

[Enigma X]

8 minutes ago, Kel Varnsen said:

I imagine that is a tricky one as far as picking a show to bring back. You need a show that was kind of popular, so it had a following, but not to popular where the stars are to fanous to want to come back. I mean you are not going to get Steve Carell or Jennifer Aniston or Chris Pratt or Julia Louis-Dryfus to come back and rehash old characters. On top of that you need a show that is old enough to have nostalgia factor but not so old that the only fans are aged out of the key advertising demo.

My follow-up then is why not use all of that research resources on just doing something new? It just seems like a lot effort for a canceled show that I don't feel was canceled that long ago. Honestly, I do understand bringing back a show as old as the original Hawaii 5-0 or even Full House, although I have no interest in watching either; this includes old and new versions. Will and Grace does not seemed to have earned its nostalgia, since it seems to have only been on a long hiatus in my mind.

[biakbiak]

6 minutes ago, nosleepforme said:

The show has to be popular, the actors have to be available and enjoy each other and doing the show

And most importantly the show is owned/produced by the same conglomerate that owns NBC.

[Katy M]

11 hours ago, Enigma X said:

I have nothing against Will and Grace but do wonder of all the shows that NBC could have brought back, why this one?

It might also have something to do with the current LGBTQ push.

[Shannon L.]

I'm somewhat interested in the Will and Grace reunion, but I'm not real excited about it simply because after the first couple of seasons, they turned Jack and Karen into ridiculous caricatures (which most shows tend to do, sadly) that got so bad that I had to eventually stop watching because I couldn't stand them anymore.  I'm not sure if I care enough to see if they wrote them more like they were in the 1st two seasons. 

[truthaboutluv]

Quote

I haven't seen Fuller House, partly because I don't get that channels, but mostly because I have no desire to.  But, to be fair, it's on either Disney or Nickeolodeon, so I don't think we're the target audience.  I could be wrong about that I guess.

It's actually on Netflix. 

13 hours ago, Enigma X said:

Honestly, I do understand bringing back a show as old as the original Hawaii 5-0 or even Full House, although I have no interest in watching either; this includes old and new versions. Will and Grace does not seemed to have earned its nostalgia, since it seems to have only been on a long hiatus in my mind.

Well and in the case of Hawaii 5-O and Fuller House, they're reboots, not just a retread of the same show. I think that's the thing that makes even less sense about Will & Grace. It's literally the same show with the same characters and general background, just years later. It's like they took a break and NBC decided viewers wanted to see what Will, Grace, Jack and Karen were up to years later. And maybe it'll work for a few episodes and one season but how long will they really keep this going again?

[ganesh]

16 hours ago, Enigma X said:

My follow-up then is why not use all of that research resources on just doing something new? It just seems like a lot effort for a canceled show that I don't feel was canceled that long ago.

I would say that they're rebooting these shows precisely because they don't need to spend all of those resources. They've got a known property and are banking on nostalgia to carry the show. 

 

9 hours ago, nosleepforme said:

Gillian Anderson decided to do The X-Files again, even though she's been quite busy.

To be fair, they did a couple of movies post-XF when the end of the show was still fairly recent, and both GA and DD have said they love revisiting Mulder and Scully and as long as they both are game for it. That's kind of predated this reboot trend. And XF is a continuation of the show. 

Edited September 28, 2017 by ganesh

[TattleTeeny]

On 9/14/2017 at 5:51 PM, bilgistic said:

This seems to be wildly unpopular: I couldn't get through 20 minutes of "The Deuce" on HBO this week. I definitely have a low tolerance level for James Franco, so I went in with reservations. There were what felt like a million characters introduced in the short time I watched, and it was just all over the place.

I want to watch this, if for nothing else but the aesthetic of '70s New York. I'm a sucker for certain aesthetics--for example, Gotham. While I do like the show a lot regardless, that awesome art direction (is that the right term?) really gets me!

Edited September 29, 2017 by TattleTeeny
Reworded because what I typed made it seem like I thought Gotham was set in the '70s...though when the hell IS it actually set?

[Danny Franks]

13 minutes ago, TattleTeeny said:

I want to watch this, if for nothing else but the aesthetic of '70s New York.

Me too. I find the subject of New York in the 1970s to be incredibly fascinating. Having visited three of the five boroughs (because who needs to go to the Bronx or Staten Island?) and seen how gentrified so much of it is, how prosperous, it almost defies belief that the place I've seen in movies from the 70s, and period photographs, actually existed so recently.

When I saw that they were making a TV show specifically about New York in that period, I knew I was going to watch it. That it's about the porn industry is less interesting than if it was about the near dystopia that New York seems to have been, in places, but I'll make do.

[TattleTeeny]

The clothing too is of major interest to me...though considering the subject matter, I assume I will not be getting a visual display of what "regular people" were wearing at the time. 

[ganesh]

They certainly went all in on the look of the show, but I have to agree, it's fairly thin on narrative direction. I don't think the premiere warranted 85 minutes of just meandering around. 

[kathyk24]

I don't think shorter seasons are better than longer ones. I watched the British version of Life on Mars and while I enjoyed each episode I had no idea how they all fit together. I also liked the American remake of that show as well.

[FormerMod-a1]

Laugh tracks don't bother me.

[Annber03]

They don't bother me, either. I don't get the idea some have that a show that uses them is automatically likely to be unfunny-that's ruling out an awful lot of good classic shows that included audience laughter, I'd think. 

I also don't get the "I don't need to be told when to laugh" thing. For the shows that do use actual audiences, I just see it as people all sharing a laugh together, on the show and at home, the way you would if you went to a play at a theater or something. I think, for the most part, it's easy to tell when people are laughing naturally and when it feels forced and canned. 

(That said, I will agree with those who say that the overly vocal audiences who cheer and hoot and holler every time a character comes on screen and whatnot can get really obnoxious, though.)

[Katy M]

7 hours ago, Annber03 said:

(That said, I will agree with those who say that the overly vocal audiences who cheer and hoot and holler every time a character comes on screen and whatnot can get really obnoxious, though.)

I agree.  I don't mind audience laughter or even a laugh track.  But, I could do  without the "oh we're so exicted Fonzie is here" hollering.