Tales Of The City - General Discussion

[JessePinkman]

2 minutes ago, txhorns79 said:

I think he was confrontational.  I think the one guy got upset because it's pretty obnoxious to tell someone who lived through a time period where his mere existence was illegal, followed by the anti-gay backlash of the late 70s (heck, Anita Bryant was a huge plot point of the second series) and AIDS crisis of the 80s and early 90s, how privileged they are.   

But Ben didn't bring up privileges if I recall correctly. He asked Ben if he felt that he (the guy) were privileged and Ben agreed. He made it into a much larger issue than "don't say t*****". He seemed to be itching for a fight.

[buckboard]

7 hours ago, JessePinkman said:

 I know nothing about these characters beyond what we learned in this series but it felt like a fitting ending to their stories? I don't know, I was satisfied.

You should read the books, if you liked this series, especially the first couple of books to get a sense of Mouse, Mary Ann Singleton, Brian and Mrs. Madrigal.  (As far as the last couple of books in the Tales series, however, there are some major differences between them and the story lines in the tv show you just watched.)

If you don't want to read the books, you might enjoy the original tv series.  (Available on Amazon Prime or online.)   

[Florinaldo]

On 6/7/2019 at 1:23 PM, starri said:

Did Mary Anne being reunited with Mrs. M make me cry?

That it the scene when I first got a little choked up. I hate this show; after all, I have my reputation of crusty cynicism to protect!

As most series with several sub-plots weaved together and a large cast of characters, it is uneven, but I found it satisfying on the whole. The good outweighs the bad. The old characters still work well, despite cast changes and the problems with chronology. Mary-Ann is still a bundle of earnest contradictions; it was amusing if a bit heavy-handed to have her lug her carry-on around as she did in the very first episode of the first series. I think she may have lost a wheel that time also. Mouse, Anna, DeeDee, Brian also still carry their own contradictions, which helps flesh them out as characters.

I am glad they at least mentioned Mona and what happened to her; useful for people like me who stopped reading the series before that event transpired.

The newer people are hit and miss for me. The twins are probably mostly meant as a satire of Web influencers and the people who follow these generally shallow creatures, but it makes them caricatures, not true characters. Of the young couple, the trans male is the most interesting, while the girl is rather bland; I can't understand what DeeDee sees in her. The doc director is thoroughly off-putting, while Samuel is intriguing and probably a red herring (I am up to the first half of episode 5). As for Shawna, I agree she is mostly the typical sullen affectless youngster, Ellen Page's specialty. At least she does laundry at one point which partly redeems her, especially if she threw in her smelly old cap.

13 hours ago, JessePinkman said:

But Ben didn't bring up privileges if I recall correctly.

I just watched it again and Ben is indeed the first one to bring up the notion of privilege. That was one of my favourite scenes so far. It nicely presented the issue and the divide, as well as the ironic fact that this notion of privilege, on top of being a quick and easy way to shut down the other person's right to speak, is usually wielded by people who are unaware of their own privilege, that of superior self-righteousness coupled with an arrogant conviction of their innate infallibility. Ben was a perfect incarnation of that very prevalent attitude.

That scene was also a call-back to a similar dinner party in the first series, during which a discussion over terminology also took place, regarding the word "twink". It was also cast with openly gay actors (like Ian McKellen and Paul Bartel) just as this new one was.

Why does everyone keep saying that AM is "selling Barbary Lane"? Does she own the whole street now? There are other houses on the lane; we got a glimpse into a few other courtyards as Mary-Ann first made her way towards the house when she responds to Anna's classified after first arriving in SF. On the real lane which inspired Maupin there are indeed several other doorways and it exits at both ends (although not with that particular staircase as I recall and the building itself does not exist I believe). Script-writing laziness or a dialogue shortcut to help put across how dramatic this plot point is supposed to be? They could easily have said that she is selling "the house" or "the building".

Edited June 17, 2019 by Florinaldo

[IrishPirate]

I found the first season of the 1993 series on the British Acorn app, via my Amazon Fire. No second or third season seems to be available anywhere. Now to the library.

[txhorns79]

2 minutes ago, IrishPirate said:

No second or third season seems to be available anywhere. Now to the library.

I think they are both on YouTube.  You should look for them under the titles More Tales of the City (season 2) and Further Tales of the City (season 3).

[IrishPirate]

Txhorns79: Thank you. I'm claiming a bout of oculitis for the duration because I can't see any good reason to go to work now that I have more Tales to feast on.

[gesundheit]

On 6/16/2019 at 9:06 PM, JessePinkman said:

But Ben didn't bring up privileges if I recall correctly. He asked Ben if he felt that he (the guy) were privileged and Ben agreed. He made it into a much larger issue than "don't say t*****". He seemed to be itching for a fight.

TEAM BEN! How disgusting to use a bigoted slur and think he's in the right.

[Florinaldo]

I am now into the 6th episode and it has become a pattern that just about all of the scenes that really work are those involving the already established characters, even with a major recast in the case of Mouse and a re-re-cast to the beginning for Brian. It is perhaps because it was easier to write for characters that the writers an the viewers already knew, instead of having to create new interesting people and come up with worthy material?

I understand that the plot material for this series is culled from the last 2 or 3 books in the series, none of which I have read. Are there major differences from the books and are the departures generally an improvement or a mistake?

2 hours ago, gesundheit said:

TEAM BEN! How disgusting to use a bigoted slur and think he's in the right.

As I pointed out previously, Ben was the first one to use the word "privilege". More importantly, he is supposed to be 28. At that age, even a precious snowflake like him should know that when you challenge people from an Olympian position of condescending moral superiority, you will get pushback to a presumptuous challenge. There are ways to go about it that are would be more effective and less offensive than what Ben chose to say.

Which is one reason I think that scene was so well designed and written.

So to employ a term the characters used to describe themselves, I am "Team Old Queens" all the way in this scripted divide.

[txhorns79]

1 hour ago, Florinaldo said:

I understand that the plot material for this series is culled from the last 2 or 3 books in the series, none of which I have read. Are there major differences from the books and are the departures generally an improvement or a mistake?

There are major differences.  I personally never bought the idea that Mary Ann would have walked out on Shawna in service of her own ambitions (this is something that happened in both the books and the movie).  I can believe she would have divorced Brian, but not that she just walked away from her daughter and never looked back.  It was too cold and heartless, and did not seem to mesh with the character from the first few books.  

Edited June 18, 2019 by txhorns79

[peachmangosteen]

I had no idea this was a book series/tv miniseries before this so maybe that helped but I really loved this. 

I have the seemingly super UO of thinking the flashback ep was the worst ep. The acting was so bad imo. I usually like the guy who played Tommy but he was terrible. And maybe I'm just carrying over how bad the actress who played Anna was in Blindspot but I thought she was bad here. The actress playing Ysela was fantastic though.

I kinda hated Ben, which upset me because I loved that actor in Chicago Fire and Russian Doll, but I was Team Ben at the dinner. The other guys came off a bit unhinged to me.

[JessePinkman]

11 hours ago, Florinaldo said:

As I pointed out previously, Ben was the first one to use the word "privilege". More importantly, he is supposed to be 28. At that age, even a precious snowflake like him should know that when you challenge people from an Olympian position of condescending moral superiority, you will get pushback to a presumptuous challenge. There are ways to go about it that are would be more effective and less offensive than what Ben chose to say.

You're right that Ben brought up privilege first, my bad. I do think it's interesting that his pointing out their offensive language (I just rewatched the scene to confirm what you said and he said with a smile on his face "I don't think that we use that word" and then awkwardly explained what he meant by that, he didn't seem to be coming from a confrontational place) seems to be more offensive to you than what they said. I think this might be, like the dinner party argument, a generational thing.

[Florinaldo]

18 hours ago, txhorns79 said:

I personally never bought the idea that Mary Ann would have walked out on Shawna in service of her own ambitions (this is something that happened in both the books and the movie).

As I recall that happened in the last book I read in the series, Sure of You. It was a radical move on her part, but I was not shocked by it. She had a great professional opportunity and she took it. Her marriage was not going well, and Brian certainly is a character self-centered enough to not envision moving across the continent to support his spouse in her career move. Mary-Ann was not Shawna's biological mother and she still had ambivalent feelings towards the birth mother, but she was the only mother the child had known since birth. So It was a complex situation.

Are there other major inventions on the part of the screenwriters in this series? For example AM selling the house because of blackmail (a repeat of her being pressured over her past in the first series). I think she had some health problems in the book I mentioned, but not quite as extensive as in this series. Are most of the subplots more or less transposed from the last books in the series? I am assuming (perhaps wrongly) that most of the new characters (the twins, the young couple, the documentary maker) were created for this series.

7 hours ago, JessePinkman said:

I do think it's interesting that his pointing out their offensive language (I just rewatched the scene to confirm what you said and he said with a smile on his face "I don't think that we use that word" and then awkwardly explained what he meant by that, he didn't seem to be coming from a confrontational place) seems to be more offensive to you than what they said. I think this might be, like the dinner party argument, a generational thing.

I pointed out what really was portrayed on screen only because someone had said Ben did not bring up privilege to argue he had the high ground. As I apparently did not make clear enough, my main issue was with Ben's approach. He may have smiled as he spoke, but being condescending with a smile is still condescension.

Since I am a decade older than the character Ben, that wide generational gap might be a factor. However I rather think it's a question of manners. It is possible to raise a contentious issue without acting like a judgmental prick.

There are strong indications that the series is setting up the marriage of Ben and Michael. Potential disaster: that little snowflake is so insecure he resents the time Michael spends with Mary-Ann, a very close friend he has not seen in years, and feels threatened by a former boyfriend. This bodes for a marriage rife with daily crises. Subject matter for a further series perhaps?

[peachmangosteen]

2 minutes ago, Florinaldo said:

Subject matter for a further series perhaps?

They're billing it as a limited series so I assume that this it is. However, who knows lol. If it's doing well (which I suspect it probably isn't tbh) then they might just go ahead and give it another season.

[JessePinkman]

2 minutes ago, Florinaldo said:

I pointed out what really was portrayed on screen only because someone had said Ben did not bring up privilege to argue he had the high ground. As I apparently did not make clear enough, my main issue was with Ben's approach. He may have smiled as he spoke, but being condescending with a smile is still condescension.

 Since I am a decade older than the character Ben, that wide generational gap might be a factor. However I rather think it's a question of manners. It is possible to raise a contentious issue without acting like a judgmental prick.

Then it comes down to perception. I don't think he was being a prick at all but c'est la vie.

[txhorns79]

41 minutes ago, peachmangosteen said:

They're billing it as a limited series so I assume that this it is. However, who knows lol. If it's doing well (which I suspect it probably isn't tbh) then they might just go ahead and give it another season.

I have no particular insight into how Netflix makes its choices, but it did feel as though this series was written with the idea that this would be it.  There is a definite conclusion for the person who has been a constant in bringing others together throughout all the various seasons.   

[Eureka]

Very disappointed in this series. I didn’t care about any of the new characters. I appreciated that they tried to use some of the storylines from the books, even though many of them were in a different context, but overall it was just not what I wanted or expected. I was trying to explain this to my DH and DS and it just boggles my mind how much source material they could have used from the later three books and chose not to.

[atlantaloves]

Yeah, I agree with you, plus there was some really bad acting going on in this series as well. I did not care for it, but of course binge watched it because I am a loyal fan of the ORIGINAL writer.   

[Eureka]

On 6/22/2019 at 3:36 PM, atlantaloves said:

Yeah, I agree with you, plus there was some really bad acting going on in this series as well. I did not care for it, but of course binge watched it because I am a loyal fan of the ORIGINAL writer.   

Exactly why I watched it.

[car54]

I binge watched this yesterday and enjoyed it.    I liked the Jake and Marlo storyline and if they ever do more I'd enjoy seeing what happens to them.

I especially got a kick out of how good Laura Linney looks---she was the thread that kept the story together since there were a lot of casting changes.

Like others have posted I liked the flash back to how Anna Madrigal came to SF and bought Barbary Lane---the actress who played here was really good but she is tall and for some reason I always think of Olympia as kind of small--so that distracted me a little.

I ended up not really caring much for Shawna's story--except the part where they showed that she had saved/watched the video tapes of Mary Ann on TV.    

I've read most of the books, and this made me think I might go back and re-watch the earlier seasons/versions of them.

Also if they ever do write/film any more, my bet is that Ben and Michael don't last.     It was nice to see them together for the ending but I just think they are too different to last.  

[txhorns79]

4 hours ago, car54 said:

the actress who played here was really good but she is tall and for some reason I always think of Olympia as kind of small--so that distracted me a little.

I looked it up.  Olympia Dukakis is 5'3, Jen Richards is 5'8. 

[car54]

3 hours ago, txhorns79 said:

I looked it up.  Olympia Dukakis is 5'3, Jen Richards is 5'8. 

Yes,  that sounds about right---and she wore high heels almost the whole episode--which probably were 3-4 inches.     She was the same height in heels as the cop and I kept thinking a young Olympia would probably be  shorter.    She had some distinctive features that made it believable to me that she could be Anna but when she was with him, I kept noticing they were the same height. 

On the other side, being smaller probably made it easier for Olympia's Anna to pass in days before people knew much about transitioning.

[starri]

The original miniseries is now available on Netflix, for anyone who hasn't seen it.

[txhorns79]

On 6/29/2019 at 2:34 PM, starri said:

The original miniseries is now available on Netflix, for anyone who hasn't seen it.

I'll add my two cents and say if you haven't seen it, it's well worth a viewing.

[snarktini]

I had a hard time getting through the series, but stuck with it out of loyalty. I've seen all the mini-series but have not read the books. (ETA: I did read the 1st one. But IMO Maupin's story was a lot better than his writing so I stopped there.)

Likes: Dee Dee living her best life. Also her assistant/butler, if that's what he is, and when she chose him over the party people. The gay burlesque co-op. Margo & Jake's story, especially Jake. (I live here and know trans/non-binary folk, and that felt like the most real story to me.) The bathtub rental! Maryann being invited to live at the Flamingo Arms. The lady who pretends to not hear Victor Garber. 

Dislikes: Shawna. Shawna's hat. Everything with Claire, from the start. Maryann thinking that being an adoptive mother means she didn't actually run out on "her" kid. The vapid twins & how absurdly easy it was for them to get a gigantic following. Mouse being recast, again.

Most unearned moment: Claire telling Shawna that the world of Barbary Lane centers around her (or something like that). Huh? I did not see that. If anyone, it's Anna. I think we're supposed to see Shawna as the next-generation heart of the story, like Maryann in the originals, but I just don't.

Biggest WTF: Seriously, all the blackmail and destruction mystery boiled down to a bratty, grasping, self-aggrandizing filmmaker who wanted a better ending to her documentary?

2nd biggest WTF: I'm ok in principle with Anna giving Ysela the building, to give back to the friends she left behind. But what else would she do with that property except sell it and use the proceeds to help her community? Otherwise it's a place to live (which, in SF, is a pretty awesome thing) that comes with huge landlord obligations that are not worth it to a 80 y.o. woman. Where does that leave Anna's "family", and the promise to Maryann that she could live there? ("These things tend to work out.") If she kept it, Ysela would surely want her own people to live there. There's also a whole rent-control thing that should have prevented or delayed eviction in the first place, but I'll set that aside.

Edited August 14, 2019 by snarktini

[giovannif7]

The latest Tales Of The City miniseries takes the GLAAD Media Award for Outstanding Limited Series, winning over Mrs. Fletcher, The Red Line, When They See Us and Years & Years

[Constantinople]

I think in the first episode Shawna asks Mary Ann how 28 Barbary Lane has changed. Mary Ann says "Not at all". It's true, certainly the kindness of Mrs. Madrigal hasn't changed. But it has changed. It's more queer, though I can't be more specific than that. I thought DeDe summed it up nicely when she compared the meaning of the word to the price of oil.

And I agree the chronology is inconsistent with the original series. As noted, Anna Madrigal was 56 in 1976, which means her 90th birthday would be in 2009 or 2010. Yet the twins want to be Instagram influencers even though Instagram was first released in 2010.

To put it another way, I'm 2 years younger than Michael is in the 2019 Tales, which appears to be set in the present day.. Like Michael, I also lived in the Bay Area in 1976 during the first Tales. But I was in the 3rd grade in Marin, not a twentysomething in the City. Michael is a Boomer, not Gen X