I really agonized over whether to suck it up and watch the remaining Capaldi episodes or just pick up with this one. In the end, I wasn't interested enough to finish out Capaldi's season. I couldn't muster the enthusiasm, or even the basic sluggish energy, to pull it up on my DVR (where it has been sitting... and sitting... and sitting...) But people kept asking me what I thought of Whittaker as the Doctor, so I decided to fire this one up and dive in fresh.
Long story short, I don't have the Capaldi backstory, though based on this it hardly seems necessary?
In the interest of playing fairly, let me acknowledge that I'm one of the people who find Moffat to be a terrible show runner. And I really like Chris Chibnall's work. Well, I adored Broadchurch anyway. And Torchwood. So I was primed to really like this, too, because (a) sweet release from the Moffat era, and (b) Chibnall has shown to be competent and compelling in his work.
So, yeah, as expected, I really liked it.
Spoilers Ahead, Sweeties
Not just Whittaker's Doctor, but the entire supporting cast. And even though we'd only just met Grace, I felt the impact of losing her because she'd already left such an impression. This is what Chibnall does so well—characterization. And really good, tight stories.
What was this story about? Well, Ryan Sinclair is... I don't know how old he's supposed to be, actually, but seems like 20s? And he lives with his nan Grace and her second husband Graham. When Ryan discovers something strange, he phones in to the police, and they send Yasmin, who just happens to be someone Ryan went to school with way back when. Meanwhile, an alien attacks the train Grace and Graham are on, and the Doctor shows up, and things pretty much go from there at a fair clip.
Whittaker's Doctor is a tad manic, but many of them have been to some extent. And sometimes they start off that way after regeneration and then calm down a bit. We'll see what happens, but I don't mind this take on the character. It's fun. And she has a depth of compassion that we haven't seen in recent Doctors.
Mostly I'm just glad to be excited about Doctor Who again. To be enjoying it again because I honestly haven't liked it in years. It became more of a chore than something to look forward to, which is why I eventually quit watching at all.
Now I'm back, fresh, and it seems like I needn't worry too much about what I missed, which is good. It will allow new viewers to catch on, too, so that's a smart move. Looking forward to seeing more.
Showing posts with label UK TV. Show all posts
Showing posts with label UK TV. Show all posts
8.31.2018
Television: Can Sherlock Be Saved?
I'm going to pause here for a second and go back to something rather old at this point. It's no secret I really, really disliked the last couple series of Sherlock. And I came off the fourth series sort of assuming that was the end of it. Like, they seemed to have wrapped it up in a bow, right? But people keep talking about how to fix the show in the next series, and I just keep thinking, Is there going to be one? Is it even worth trying to fix and keep going?
The show's stars are busy with other things now, and Moffat and Gatiss have talked about doing Dracula or Frankenstein or something, haven't they? So I don't really know that there will be more Sherlock. But for the sake of argument, let's say there will be. Someday. And that the show needs to be course corrected. Because, Jesus, that last episode in particular was just so, so awful. But honestly, it's been going downhill for a while, yeah? Starting with the third series? With the making fun of the fans while simultaneously doing random fan service that felt pulled straight from bad fan fiction?
What made Sherlock good in the beginning was the very careful amalgam of plot + character. What made it slowly go bad—like takeaway left out to spoil—was the shifting imbalance of those things. 1. Plot became less important and often less concise, which is the kiss of death when telling mystery stories in particular. 2. Character also became less well defined as the characters began to behave in odd ways that seemed not to fit the way they'd been originally established. So: viewers who had come for the plots were disappointed. And people who'd come for the characters were equally unhappy. It just all went off the rails, really.
When we left the show, where were we? Sherlock had an even smarter sister who . . . was criminally insane? And was upset, I guess, that Sherlock had forgotten her? She's apparently orchestrated his entire life, or at least the last several years of it, by injecting Moriarty (now very definitely dead?) into it. I'm surprised we weren't told she was the one who introduced John to Sherlock in some backward way.
Okay, but the sister is all safe and sound now, and the Holmes family is somehow quite fine with . . . whatever the f*** happened there, and based on the coda to that last episode, John and Sherlock are happily raising a baby together and solving crimes and teaching a baby to solve crimes.
Yeah, that feels like an end to me. I don't see a path forward there short of something really, really awful like: it was a novel John wrote that was so bad it never found a publisher. Or even a series of novels John wrote, and they did get published, but it was all fantasy. So let's reset to . . . when? How far back would we have to go to make Sherlock good again? I think we'd have to start back at series three. I think we'd have to explain how he survived the fall (and we all know that the writers don't know, which is why they didn't answer that question and instead chose to make fun of the fans for asking). I think we'd have to change Mary or remove her entirely. Because, honestly, the whole mercenary thread? It was pretty awful. I think, if we go with the idea John was writing novels, that was John writing a wish fulfillment/attempt at a James Bond thriller. I think if he's got a girlfriend or a wife, she's probably something fairly normal and not half the fun Sherlock is, which is why John wrote her as way more exciting.* Because he missed Sherlock while Sherlock was "dead."
This is a stretch, I realize. This is Dallas' "all a dream" or St. Elsewhere's snow globe to the maximum. But it's the only way back to good that I can see.
Still, it seems far more likely they'll just leave it and move on. Viewers keep hoping for "one more miracle"—that the show will come back from the dead and redeem itself—but I'm not sure it has any left.
* John's actual wife: "But, dear, why did you kill off the wife?"
John: "The readers didn't like her."
The show's stars are busy with other things now, and Moffat and Gatiss have talked about doing Dracula or Frankenstein or something, haven't they? So I don't really know that there will be more Sherlock. But for the sake of argument, let's say there will be. Someday. And that the show needs to be course corrected. Because, Jesus, that last episode in particular was just so, so awful. But honestly, it's been going downhill for a while, yeah? Starting with the third series? With the making fun of the fans while simultaneously doing random fan service that felt pulled straight from bad fan fiction?
What made Sherlock good in the beginning was the very careful amalgam of plot + character. What made it slowly go bad—like takeaway left out to spoil—was the shifting imbalance of those things. 1. Plot became less important and often less concise, which is the kiss of death when telling mystery stories in particular. 2. Character also became less well defined as the characters began to behave in odd ways that seemed not to fit the way they'd been originally established. So: viewers who had come for the plots were disappointed. And people who'd come for the characters were equally unhappy. It just all went off the rails, really.
When we left the show, where were we? Sherlock had an even smarter sister who . . . was criminally insane? And was upset, I guess, that Sherlock had forgotten her? She's apparently orchestrated his entire life, or at least the last several years of it, by injecting Moriarty (now very definitely dead?) into it. I'm surprised we weren't told she was the one who introduced John to Sherlock in some backward way.
Okay, but the sister is all safe and sound now, and the Holmes family is somehow quite fine with . . . whatever the f*** happened there, and based on the coda to that last episode, John and Sherlock are happily raising a baby together and solving crimes and teaching a baby to solve crimes.
Yeah, that feels like an end to me. I don't see a path forward there short of something really, really awful like: it was a novel John wrote that was so bad it never found a publisher. Or even a series of novels John wrote, and they did get published, but it was all fantasy. So let's reset to . . . when? How far back would we have to go to make Sherlock good again? I think we'd have to start back at series three. I think we'd have to explain how he survived the fall (and we all know that the writers don't know, which is why they didn't answer that question and instead chose to make fun of the fans for asking). I think we'd have to change Mary or remove her entirely. Because, honestly, the whole mercenary thread? It was pretty awful. I think, if we go with the idea John was writing novels, that was John writing a wish fulfillment/attempt at a James Bond thriller. I think if he's got a girlfriend or a wife, she's probably something fairly normal and not half the fun Sherlock is, which is why John wrote her as way more exciting.* Because he missed Sherlock while Sherlock was "dead."
This is a stretch, I realize. This is Dallas' "all a dream" or St. Elsewhere's snow globe to the maximum. But it's the only way back to good that I can see.
Still, it seems far more likely they'll just leave it and move on. Viewers keep hoping for "one more miracle"—that the show will come back from the dead and redeem itself—but I'm not sure it has any left.
* John's actual wife: "But, dear, why did you kill off the wife?"
John: "The readers didn't like her."
12.24.2017
Television: The Crown, "Paterfamilias" & "Mystery Man"
More Philip. Sigh. The more they show him, the less I like him, which I think is the opposite effect of what they intend. I'm supposed to sympathize, I think? But I don't.
In "Paterfamilias," Philip insists that young Charles be sent away to the same school he attended. Never mind that Philip himself was unhappy there; he considers is "character building" to go someplace that is just shy of an abusive military school. So then we get Philip's story in flashbacks, and I think that's what is supposed to make us feel sorry for him or at least give us insight. But look, misery loving company is no reason to subject your child to said misery. And sure, maybe Philip thought the school would toughen Charles up, but not all children are the same, and they don't have the same reactions to external pressures. Some rise to the challenge. Others shrink. It doesn't mean the shrinkers are bad people; it simply means their strengths lie elsewhere, to be discovered in other ways.
The episode made me a bit frustrated with Elizabeth, too. She should have put her foot down. I understand the line she's walking in trying not to rule Philip in family situations, but in this case it would have been merited.
As for "Mystery Man," Jesus, what a mess of an episode. It was as though a bunch of plot bits were thrown into a pot and stirred.
So Philip gets a crick in his neck and goes to see an osteopath named Stephen Ward. He's invited by Ward to a house party, but instead of showing us whether Philip attends, we skip ahead a year to Ward being on trial for the Profumo scandal. You have to know a bit of British history to understand this bit because the episode doesn't make it very clear at all. Short version is that Ward's house parties introduced very young women to older government officials, including possibly a Russian agent or something? Anyway, Ward commits suicide, and in going through his personalty, drawings of Philip are found (Ward being an artist). There is also a newspaper photograph from one of Ward's parties, and a man with his back turned looks remarkably like Philip.
Meanwhile, Elizabeth is pregnant (as is Margaret). She goes off to Balmoral under doctor's orders to rest while Philip skips off here and there. Again, if they want me to like Philip . . . Well, but history is history, I suppose. When he does finally wander home, he and Elizabeth have it out. He swears he didn't go to Ward's house party, that he only even saw Ward the one time because the guy was weird. Elizabeth confronts Philip with the photograph of the ballerina, and he gives a really circumlocutory speech that, summed up, means he loves her and wants to stay with her. (The speech did nothing to warm my heart, and what choice does he have, really?)
We end with the birth of Prince Edward and a family photo.
In total, the season was a good one though not (in my opinion) as good as the first due to meandering interests that went away from Elizabeth much of the time. Things did always loop back to her eventually, but the episodes that heavily focused on Philip or Margaret only made me irritated with those characters. Also, a severe lack of corgi this season.
That said, it's still a fine show with remarkable production values and well worth watching. I look forward to more.
In "Paterfamilias," Philip insists that young Charles be sent away to the same school he attended. Never mind that Philip himself was unhappy there; he considers is "character building" to go someplace that is just shy of an abusive military school. So then we get Philip's story in flashbacks, and I think that's what is supposed to make us feel sorry for him or at least give us insight. But look, misery loving company is no reason to subject your child to said misery. And sure, maybe Philip thought the school would toughen Charles up, but not all children are the same, and they don't have the same reactions to external pressures. Some rise to the challenge. Others shrink. It doesn't mean the shrinkers are bad people; it simply means their strengths lie elsewhere, to be discovered in other ways.
The episode made me a bit frustrated with Elizabeth, too. She should have put her foot down. I understand the line she's walking in trying not to rule Philip in family situations, but in this case it would have been merited.
As for "Mystery Man," Jesus, what a mess of an episode. It was as though a bunch of plot bits were thrown into a pot and stirred.
So Philip gets a crick in his neck and goes to see an osteopath named Stephen Ward. He's invited by Ward to a house party, but instead of showing us whether Philip attends, we skip ahead a year to Ward being on trial for the Profumo scandal. You have to know a bit of British history to understand this bit because the episode doesn't make it very clear at all. Short version is that Ward's house parties introduced very young women to older government officials, including possibly a Russian agent or something? Anyway, Ward commits suicide, and in going through his personalty, drawings of Philip are found (Ward being an artist). There is also a newspaper photograph from one of Ward's parties, and a man with his back turned looks remarkably like Philip.
Meanwhile, Elizabeth is pregnant (as is Margaret). She goes off to Balmoral under doctor's orders to rest while Philip skips off here and there. Again, if they want me to like Philip . . . Well, but history is history, I suppose. When he does finally wander home, he and Elizabeth have it out. He swears he didn't go to Ward's house party, that he only even saw Ward the one time because the guy was weird. Elizabeth confronts Philip with the photograph of the ballerina, and he gives a really circumlocutory speech that, summed up, means he loves her and wants to stay with her. (The speech did nothing to warm my heart, and what choice does he have, really?)
We end with the birth of Prince Edward and a family photo.
In total, the season was a good one though not (in my opinion) as good as the first due to meandering interests that went away from Elizabeth much of the time. Things did always loop back to her eventually, but the episodes that heavily focused on Philip or Margaret only made me irritated with those characters. Also, a severe lack of corgi this season.
That said, it's still a fine show with remarkable production values and well worth watching. I look forward to more.
12.20.2017
Television: The Crown, "Matrimonium" & "Dear Mrs. Kennedy"
Ah, God, another Margaret episode. So many people love them, but I don't. I find the episodes that focus on her to be pretty boring. And this one focused even more on Tony, and it tried to be all arty—I mean, even more arty than the show normally is—and *yawn*.
Okay, so the whole thing begins with Margaret getting word that love-of-her-life Peter, the man she was forbidden to marry and for whom she's pledged undying spinsterhood, is marrying someone else. ::record scratch:: So now it's very important to Margaret that she get married, too, and more than that—she needs to announce it before Peter does. She cannot bear to be the jilted one, at least not in the eyes of the world.
So she goes to Tony, and he turns her down, which miffs her. But then Tony has dinner with his mother and she suh-suhs* him, and so he thinks maybe he needs to marry Margaret in order to please Mummy. Or, more than please, but beat Mummy at her own game of snobbery.
Bad reasons on both sides to get hitched, but there you have it. There's a bunch of Tony having sex with other people, all presented as, "Well, you know, artists are like that." Barf. And there's the revelation that Tony had a sort of poly relationship with a Mr. and Mrs. Fry, and that Mrs. Fry is carrying a baby that she's pretty sure is Tony's, but I don't care enough about Tony to care about that. I don't even care enough about Margaret to care about that because Margaret isn't very likable. (At least, I don't find her likable in these past couple episodes, or even sympathetic. I did last season, so I don't know what happened.) Far more interesting to watch men try to break the news of Tony's reputation to Elizabeth.
Oh, and Elizabeth gives birth to Andrew.
Then we toss all that aside because, as I've mentioned in previous posts, the concept of flow has been completely lost this season, and we get the Kennedys. You know, John and Jackie. Elizabeth is feeling old and frumpy, and she's faced with this beautiful young American first lady that even her husband is keen to make time with. One really feels for Elizabeth in this episode. We're supposed to feel for Jackie, too, but her litany of excuses for her bad behavior feels like just that—excuses. I know it had to suck for her, the philandering husband and all the exposure. But (and maybe I'm feeling my British roots here; the DNA test says I'm pretty massively British along with the French) her outpouring bordered on distasteful to me. Get thee to a therapist, woman! Don't spill it all over tea!
I recently heard that Olivia Colman will be taking over as Elizabeth in future seasons, and I can see how they're styling Claire Foy in that direction. Ms. Foy has done a lovely job, and we'll miss her, but of course Elizabeth can't stay young forever. That was kind of the point of the Kennedy episode. I have faith in Ms. Colman's talents; she's done so well over a broad variety of work. So I'm looking forward to seeing her in this.
But! Before that happens, there are still two final episodes to watch. I'll bring them to you once I've had the opportunity to indulge.
Okay, so the whole thing begins with Margaret getting word that love-of-her-life Peter, the man she was forbidden to marry and for whom she's pledged undying spinsterhood, is marrying someone else. ::record scratch:: So now it's very important to Margaret that she get married, too, and more than that—she needs to announce it before Peter does. She cannot bear to be the jilted one, at least not in the eyes of the world.
So she goes to Tony, and he turns her down, which miffs her. But then Tony has dinner with his mother and she suh-suhs* him, and so he thinks maybe he needs to marry Margaret in order to please Mummy. Or, more than please, but beat Mummy at her own game of snobbery.
Bad reasons on both sides to get hitched, but there you have it. There's a bunch of Tony having sex with other people, all presented as, "Well, you know, artists are like that." Barf. And there's the revelation that Tony had a sort of poly relationship with a Mr. and Mrs. Fry, and that Mrs. Fry is carrying a baby that she's pretty sure is Tony's, but I don't care enough about Tony to care about that. I don't even care enough about Margaret to care about that because Margaret isn't very likable. (At least, I don't find her likable in these past couple episodes, or even sympathetic. I did last season, so I don't know what happened.) Far more interesting to watch men try to break the news of Tony's reputation to Elizabeth.
Oh, and Elizabeth gives birth to Andrew.
Then we toss all that aside because, as I've mentioned in previous posts, the concept of flow has been completely lost this season, and we get the Kennedys. You know, John and Jackie. Elizabeth is feeling old and frumpy, and she's faced with this beautiful young American first lady that even her husband is keen to make time with. One really feels for Elizabeth in this episode. We're supposed to feel for Jackie, too, but her litany of excuses for her bad behavior feels like just that—excuses. I know it had to suck for her, the philandering husband and all the exposure. But (and maybe I'm feeling my British roots here; the DNA test says I'm pretty massively British along with the French) her outpouring bordered on distasteful to me. Get thee to a therapist, woman! Don't spill it all over tea!
I recently heard that Olivia Colman will be taking over as Elizabeth in future seasons, and I can see how they're styling Claire Foy in that direction. Ms. Foy has done a lovely job, and we'll miss her, but of course Elizabeth can't stay young forever. That was kind of the point of the Kennedy episode. I have faith in Ms. Colman's talents; she's done so well over a broad variety of work. So I'm looking forward to seeing her in this.
But! Before that happens, there are still two final episodes to watch. I'll bring them to you once I've had the opportunity to indulge.
12.18.2017
Television: The Crown, "Marionettes" & "Vergangenheit"
This season thus far seems to have less flow than the first. For example, in the episode "Marionettes," Elizabeth must deal with Lord Altrincham, who points out that she's not very good at things like speaking to the common people. He antagonizes Elizabeth, and rather than get the usual bucking up from the press, the papers eat up the feud with a spoon—it's good for business, after all.
In the end, Altrincham's "constructive" criticism proves correct in many ways, and he offers a number of opportunities to improve/modernize the monarchy.
And then the episode ends and we all move on apparently. That's where the flow thing comes in. There's the Altrincham episode and then he's gone. (On the plus side: corgis!)
Look, maybe that's how it really happened, too. He was a flare that burned out. But it feels really random that he introduced an entirely new normal to the monarchy and then is never heard from again or even mentioned.
"Vergangenheit" instead moves on to a bit of a PR crisis when historians find old Nazi files that tie the Duke of Windsor to Hitler's regime. At about the same time, said Duke of Windsor returns to England via his niece's sufferance to poke about in hopes of landing a diplomatic position. Life in France has begun to bore him, and he says he wants to serve his country, but it's intimated that perhaps he just misses hanging out with the high and mighty. There's a lifestyle he wishes to lead, and to do so he must have the means, namely connections and a bit of money and freedom to move around. He comes very close to getting it, too, with three possibilities on the table, when Elizabeth is forced to tell him no. The historians are given permission to publish their findings, and any hope the Duke of Windsor might have had are irreparably dashed.
There's a subplot in this episode involving the reverend Billy Graham. Elizabeth invites him to Buckingham Palace and, after discovering the truth about her uncle, asks the reverend about the nature of forgiveness. Not having been alive back then, it's difficult for me to wrap my brain around the idea that Graham was such a draw and influence, but those were different times, and hey, I grew up in the American South—I remember when Jimmy Swaggart and Robert Tilton were big deals. So I guess this was kind of the same thing?
Both these episodes were some of the best thus far in the season. Though very contained (again, that issue with flow), they were interesting. I didn't feel the need to play games on my phone like during the Margaret episode. That has to be worth something in this day and age.
In the end, Altrincham's "constructive" criticism proves correct in many ways, and he offers a number of opportunities to improve/modernize the monarchy.
And then the episode ends and we all move on apparently. That's where the flow thing comes in. There's the Altrincham episode and then he's gone. (On the plus side: corgis!)
Look, maybe that's how it really happened, too. He was a flare that burned out. But it feels really random that he introduced an entirely new normal to the monarchy and then is never heard from again or even mentioned.
"Vergangenheit" instead moves on to a bit of a PR crisis when historians find old Nazi files that tie the Duke of Windsor to Hitler's regime. At about the same time, said Duke of Windsor returns to England via his niece's sufferance to poke about in hopes of landing a diplomatic position. Life in France has begun to bore him, and he says he wants to serve his country, but it's intimated that perhaps he just misses hanging out with the high and mighty. There's a lifestyle he wishes to lead, and to do so he must have the means, namely connections and a bit of money and freedom to move around. He comes very close to getting it, too, with three possibilities on the table, when Elizabeth is forced to tell him no. The historians are given permission to publish their findings, and any hope the Duke of Windsor might have had are irreparably dashed.
There's a subplot in this episode involving the reverend Billy Graham. Elizabeth invites him to Buckingham Palace and, after discovering the truth about her uncle, asks the reverend about the nature of forgiveness. Not having been alive back then, it's difficult for me to wrap my brain around the idea that Graham was such a draw and influence, but those were different times, and hey, I grew up in the American South—I remember when Jimmy Swaggart and Robert Tilton were big deals. So I guess this was kind of the same thing?
Both these episodes were some of the best thus far in the season. Though very contained (again, that issue with flow), they were interesting. I didn't feel the need to play games on my phone like during the Margaret episode. That has to be worth something in this day and age.
12.14.2017
Television: The Crown, "Lisbon" & "Beryl"
I feel like the corgi meter is way low this season. I mean, we see them in one of these episodes, albeit briefly. I'm seriously bummed about the lack of them.
That aside, "Lisbon" is a solid episode that continues practically linearly from the previous two. Philip's secretary Mike is being sued for divorce, and there is a fear this will reflect badly on Philip and/or his marriage to Elizabeth. So Philip must distance himself and demands that Mike resign. Again, I think I'm supposed to feel sorry for Philip, but I don't really. Despite Matt Smith's valiant efforts at looking hangdog and conflicted, I can't find a lot of sympathy for Philip's bad decisions.
Once we loop back around to the first episode of the season—the moment in which Elizabeth asks Philip what it will take to keep him "in"—we see him being invested as a prince. (Sorry if I've previously referred to him as "Prince Philip" in other posts; I'd forgotten he wasn't for a while. I have to admit, that makes me feel a bit sorry for him because what a yo-yo: you are a prince, then you aren't, and then the life you signed up for gets shunted down another path entirely. "Can I just have a bit of dignity?" Uh, here, be a prince again. Um . . . We all know that dignity and titles are not equivalent, right? But we'll get to that in a couple more episodes.)
Meanwhile, in "Beryl" we look more closely at Princess Margaret's continued struggle to be a modern woman in an antiquated monarchy. ("Modern" being relative to the 1950s.) I know a lot of people found this episode really interesting, but I didn't. I'm just not as into Margaret's counterculture thing as some others are, I guess. For me, she works better as punctuation throughout the story rather than a whole block of prose in and of herself.
Long story not all that short, Margaret is sad at a friend's wedding because she still can't marry that one divorced guy. So she makes a kind of verbal engagement with Billy Wallace who then can't even come to the event where they're supposed to announce their engagement because he's hungover and all bloodied up from a fight. Margaret disavows him and can hardly stomach Elizabeth's and Philip's tenth anniversary love fest, so she runs off to hang out with a photographer named Tony. Instead of going with Cecil Beaton's official birthday photos, Margaret uses one of Tony's "rawer" photographs, which appears in the newspapers and leaves everyone aghast.
Meh. This episode felt so incredibly slow, and I just didn't buy any tension between Margaret and Tony. I don't know if that's the actors or what, but I yawned my way through it. I would have preferred this woven together with some other story line rather than being the focus of an entire episode. But I know I'm in the minority here, so . . . ::shrug::
That aside, "Lisbon" is a solid episode that continues practically linearly from the previous two. Philip's secretary Mike is being sued for divorce, and there is a fear this will reflect badly on Philip and/or his marriage to Elizabeth. So Philip must distance himself and demands that Mike resign. Again, I think I'm supposed to feel sorry for Philip, but I don't really. Despite Matt Smith's valiant efforts at looking hangdog and conflicted, I can't find a lot of sympathy for Philip's bad decisions.
Once we loop back around to the first episode of the season—the moment in which Elizabeth asks Philip what it will take to keep him "in"—we see him being invested as a prince. (Sorry if I've previously referred to him as "Prince Philip" in other posts; I'd forgotten he wasn't for a while. I have to admit, that makes me feel a bit sorry for him because what a yo-yo: you are a prince, then you aren't, and then the life you signed up for gets shunted down another path entirely. "Can I just have a bit of dignity?" Uh, here, be a prince again. Um . . . We all know that dignity and titles are not equivalent, right? But we'll get to that in a couple more episodes.)
Meanwhile, in "Beryl" we look more closely at Princess Margaret's continued struggle to be a modern woman in an antiquated monarchy. ("Modern" being relative to the 1950s.) I know a lot of people found this episode really interesting, but I didn't. I'm just not as into Margaret's counterculture thing as some others are, I guess. For me, she works better as punctuation throughout the story rather than a whole block of prose in and of herself.
Long story not all that short, Margaret is sad at a friend's wedding because she still can't marry that one divorced guy. So she makes a kind of verbal engagement with Billy Wallace who then can't even come to the event where they're supposed to announce their engagement because he's hungover and all bloodied up from a fight. Margaret disavows him and can hardly stomach Elizabeth's and Philip's tenth anniversary love fest, so she runs off to hang out with a photographer named Tony. Instead of going with Cecil Beaton's official birthday photos, Margaret uses one of Tony's "rawer" photographs, which appears in the newspapers and leaves everyone aghast.
Meh. This episode felt so incredibly slow, and I just didn't buy any tension between Margaret and Tony. I don't know if that's the actors or what, but I yawned my way through it. I would have preferred this woven together with some other story line rather than being the focus of an entire episode. But I know I'm in the minority here, so . . . ::shrug::
12.10.2017
Television: The Crown, "Misadventure" and "A Company of Men"
Season (or Series) 2 of The Crown is here! Huzzah! I'm trying not to gorge on it because I want it to last. Thus far I've only watched the first two episodes. I've got a very busy week ahead, so it may be a while before I get around to watching more.
In any case, this season begins with Elizabeth and Philip having a tense conversation about their relationship. Divorce isn't an option, so Elizabeth asks Philip point blank what it will take to make it work.
Rewind five months. It's 1956 and Nassar, President of Egypt, announces that they will take back the Suez Canal. Meanwhile, Elizabeth is sending Philip on a lengthy tour of a number of remote places via the Britannica. Alas, prior to his leaving, she discovers a little photo of a ballerina in one of Philip's bags.
While Philip is out carousing on board, Elizabeth is (a) witnessing the Suez disaster as Prime Minister Eden colludes with Israel over how to handle the situation and (b) feels compelled to go to the ballet for a look at this woman whose picture she found in her husband's bags.
Philip is, perhaps, running with the wrong crowd. His private secretary Mike is a terrible influence, and they are also part of something called the Thursday Club, which encourages bad behavior, namely infidelity. Mike's own wife is seeking ammunition for a divorce and receives just that from a waitress at the club who admits to having slept with Mike. "He never mentioned a wife or family," she says.
Are we supposed to feel sorry for Philip? By the end of it all, he certainly appears to feel guilty (or "homesick" as Mike labels it for him). Too little too late? Well, we know from history how it plays out, but still. I feel no compassion for him at this stage in the story. Yes, even after the terrible interview that dragged up all his old family horrors. Buck up, man. There's no excuse for your behavior.
Now Philip is headed home toward his reckoning. And the Suez is under military fire from Israel. And Prime Minister Eden has been advised by his doctor to go to Jamaica. Wish my doctor would send me somewhere nice . . . Maybe I'd eat better and exercise more elsewhere?
These were two fairly Philip-heavy episodes. That's fine for the moment, but at the same time, we get it. You don't have to draw the picture in such detail. We know what he did (and at least he saved that one dying sailor, so . . .) Broaden the scope a little? I'm finding it difficult to breathe amid the cigar smoke and testosterone.
In any case, this season begins with Elizabeth and Philip having a tense conversation about their relationship. Divorce isn't an option, so Elizabeth asks Philip point blank what it will take to make it work.
Rewind five months. It's 1956 and Nassar, President of Egypt, announces that they will take back the Suez Canal. Meanwhile, Elizabeth is sending Philip on a lengthy tour of a number of remote places via the Britannica. Alas, prior to his leaving, she discovers a little photo of a ballerina in one of Philip's bags.
While Philip is out carousing on board, Elizabeth is (a) witnessing the Suez disaster as Prime Minister Eden colludes with Israel over how to handle the situation and (b) feels compelled to go to the ballet for a look at this woman whose picture she found in her husband's bags.
Philip is, perhaps, running with the wrong crowd. His private secretary Mike is a terrible influence, and they are also part of something called the Thursday Club, which encourages bad behavior, namely infidelity. Mike's own wife is seeking ammunition for a divorce and receives just that from a waitress at the club who admits to having slept with Mike. "He never mentioned a wife or family," she says.
Are we supposed to feel sorry for Philip? By the end of it all, he certainly appears to feel guilty (or "homesick" as Mike labels it for him). Too little too late? Well, we know from history how it plays out, but still. I feel no compassion for him at this stage in the story. Yes, even after the terrible interview that dragged up all his old family horrors. Buck up, man. There's no excuse for your behavior.
Now Philip is headed home toward his reckoning. And the Suez is under military fire from Israel. And Prime Minister Eden has been advised by his doctor to go to Jamaica. Wish my doctor would send me somewhere nice . . . Maybe I'd eat better and exercise more elsewhere?
These were two fairly Philip-heavy episodes. That's fine for the moment, but at the same time, we get it. You don't have to draw the picture in such detail. We know what he did (and at least he saved that one dying sailor, so . . .) Broaden the scope a little? I'm finding it difficult to breathe amid the cigar smoke and testosterone.
8.14.2017
Television: Doctor Who, "Thin Ice"
It's going to take forever for me to get through all the episodes stockpiled on my DVR. Doctor Who just isn't must-watch television for me any more, which kind of makes me sad. It's like I'm trying desperately to care but it's a struggle. There are so many other shows, or even other things to do, that are more appealing.
This episode is a case in point. The Doctor and Bill go to a Frost Fair in London, 1814. (I think it was 1814 anyway. Could be remembering wrong.) There is something large that lives in the Thames and must be fed. There are aristocrats eager to feed it, and the "food" is mainly people of lower classes who are expendable. So . . . social commentary, which is par for the course, but not even very interesting social commentary because it's nothing we haven't heard or seen, nor is it all that original a take. The episode therefore felt very generic.
Meh. This is only the third episode for this season, and while the show is not as bad as it used to be, it's also not as good as it could be. I feel indifferent, which is better than when I felt angry and annoyed, I guess. Then again, when a show can make you feel something, that means you still care. When you cease to feel anything, it means you've stopped caring. Hrm.
This episode is a case in point. The Doctor and Bill go to a Frost Fair in London, 1814. (I think it was 1814 anyway. Could be remembering wrong.) There is something large that lives in the Thames and must be fed. There are aristocrats eager to feed it, and the "food" is mainly people of lower classes who are expendable. So . . . social commentary, which is par for the course, but not even very interesting social commentary because it's nothing we haven't heard or seen, nor is it all that original a take. The episode therefore felt very generic.
Meh. This is only the third episode for this season, and while the show is not as bad as it used to be, it's also not as good as it could be. I feel indifferent, which is better than when I felt angry and annoyed, I guess. Then again, when a show can make you feel something, that means you still care. When you cease to feel anything, it means you've stopped caring. Hrm.
7.17.2017
Television: The 13th Doctor
I've pretty much actively avoided reading any comments or ongoing debate about the reveal of Jodie Whittaker as the 13th Doctor in the Doctor Who universe. I don't really care what most people think, I guess, and I don't particularly need the input to figure out my own thoughts and feelings about it. Which are:
So, yeah, I think this will be interesting.
- Yay! Not because it's a woman, specifically, but because at least it's not another white man.
- If people can change gender, why not the Doctor?
- I don't give a flying fig about "retconning" or whatever is being claimed. (Okay, yes, I saw at least that much fuss thanks to a friend's Facebook comment.) Moffat mucked up plenty, so it's all fair game now.
- I liked Whittaker on Broadchurch, but that was a very serious and dramatic role. Will this new Doctor be that serious? Or will I simply see Whittaker in a new light? Curious to find out.
- I'm confident in Chibnall's abilities, too, as showrunner. And I know he's worked well with Whittaker in the past, which is a good start.
So, yeah, I think this will be interesting.
7.13.2017
Television: Doctor Who, "Smile"
I've got all these DW episodes on my DVR. Class, too. Don't know when or if I'll ever get around to watching it all.
I mentioned liking Bill when she was introduced in "The Pilot." And I do still like her; I think she's a nice contrast to Capaldi's grumpy old man schtick. But I do also feel like Bill is something of a device. It's like the writers decided she would ask all the questions posed on the Internet about the Doctor/Doctor Who so that the show could pithily answer them. "Why is the TARDIS shaped like a police box?" "Why are you Scottish?" etc.
And this episode about killer emojis . . . more or less, anyway . . . Eh.
I suppose I should keep in mind that Doctor Who really is middle-grade television. It's meant at heart for pre-teens, I think, regardless of the adult following. When I remind myself that it's really more on par with something like The Librarians, it's easier to forgive a lot of the dumb. (Nothing against The Librarians, either, which is a lot of fun. The correlation just gives me more perspective.)
Still. The Doctor couldn't have "rebooted" the robots with his sonic screwdriver, like, first thing? Would have saved everyone some serious trouble.
I mentioned liking Bill when she was introduced in "The Pilot." And I do still like her; I think she's a nice contrast to Capaldi's grumpy old man schtick. But I do also feel like Bill is something of a device. It's like the writers decided she would ask all the questions posed on the Internet about the Doctor/Doctor Who so that the show could pithily answer them. "Why is the TARDIS shaped like a police box?" "Why are you Scottish?" etc.
And this episode about killer emojis . . . more or less, anyway . . . Eh.
I suppose I should keep in mind that Doctor Who really is middle-grade television. It's meant at heart for pre-teens, I think, regardless of the adult following. When I remind myself that it's really more on par with something like The Librarians, it's easier to forgive a lot of the dumb. (Nothing against The Librarians, either, which is a lot of fun. The correlation just gives me more perspective.)
Still. The Doctor couldn't have "rebooted" the robots with his sonic screwdriver, like, first thing? Would have saved everyone some serious trouble.
4.29.2017
Television: Doctor Who, "The Pilot"
This was actually a pretty good episode. Pardon me for sounding surprised, but good Doctor Who has been few and far between in recent days.
Here we establish a few things: that the Doctor has given up on his wandering ways and settled down to being a university professor; he has Nardole (Matt Lucas) on hand as an assistant; and there is a new companion in town, a young woman named Bill who works in the canteen (cafeteria) serving chips (fries) but sits in on lectures in her spare time. Which is how she comes to the Doctor's attention. He offers to tutor her.
If it's a bit coincident that weird things begin to happen only once Bill begins hanging out with the Doctor, well . . .
In this episode, Bill meets a girl named Heather (Bill is a black lesbian, btw, which makes me wonder whether Moffat was ticking boxes after all the backlash of putting yet another old white guy in charge of the Box—yet there's no denying Pearl Mackie is fabulous and the chemistry between her and Capaldi is spot on for the roles) and of course things go south when Heather shows Bill a weird puddle that distorts people's faces. The puddle eventually absorbs Heather and then chases Bill, Nardole, and the Doctor across time and space, all because whatever is left of Heather remembers Bill and still has a crush on her. When Heather had said she wanted to leave, Bill had jokingly asked, "Can I come with you?" and Heather had said, "Maybe." The invitation still stands as Heather has become the titular pilot for this watery entity.
Yeah, it's a bit hokey. But so is a lot of Doctor Who, and it was still loads better than most recent episodes. And as I mentioned, the introduction of Bill breathes some new life into the series. She's fresh and fun and just a really good foil for Capaldi's Doctor.
Here we establish a few things: that the Doctor has given up on his wandering ways and settled down to being a university professor; he has Nardole (Matt Lucas) on hand as an assistant; and there is a new companion in town, a young woman named Bill who works in the canteen (cafeteria) serving chips (fries) but sits in on lectures in her spare time. Which is how she comes to the Doctor's attention. He offers to tutor her.
If it's a bit coincident that weird things begin to happen only once Bill begins hanging out with the Doctor, well . . .
In this episode, Bill meets a girl named Heather (Bill is a black lesbian, btw, which makes me wonder whether Moffat was ticking boxes after all the backlash of putting yet another old white guy in charge of the Box—yet there's no denying Pearl Mackie is fabulous and the chemistry between her and Capaldi is spot on for the roles) and of course things go south when Heather shows Bill a weird puddle that distorts people's faces. The puddle eventually absorbs Heather and then chases Bill, Nardole, and the Doctor across time and space, all because whatever is left of Heather remembers Bill and still has a crush on her. When Heather had said she wanted to leave, Bill had jokingly asked, "Can I come with you?" and Heather had said, "Maybe." The invitation still stands as Heather has become the titular pilot for this watery entity.
Yeah, it's a bit hokey. But so is a lot of Doctor Who, and it was still loads better than most recent episodes. And as I mentioned, the introduction of Bill breathes some new life into the series. She's fresh and fun and just a really good foil for Capaldi's Doctor.
4.19.2017
Television: Broadchurch 3.8
And so it ends, again with a lot of misleads, though I had the gist of a lot of it correct. (SPOILERS FOLLOW)
1. I did suspect that the porn videos were playing into the rape, and they were to an extent.
2. I thought more than one person was involved, and that was true.
3. I had Leo pegged as the mastermind, and he was.
It is, of course, a shame that Michael ended up roped in. There is a definite thread of "be careful who your friends are" throughout this series.
I won't spoil the ending (any more than I already have) by going into details. Let's just say it was satisfying enough, and that I'll miss the show. Part of me really wanted Hardy to go to the pub with Miller, but I know that to have it be so would have undermined the character and the relationship between Hardy and Miller that had been so carefully constructed over the three series (seasons). Miller will always be looking for ways into Hardy's life, and he'll always be fending her off.
I don't know that I would say the third series was as compelling as the first or second—though definitely more difficult to watch—but I'm gratified with how story lines were wrapped up as much as they could be and still give the sense that life goes on. I'm not entirely sure why they felt the need to have Paul or Maggie around since they didn't really get much in terms of plot, but I suppose if they'd been absent things would have felt strange. Better to have a little something than a vacuum.
All in all, Broadchurch remains some of the best dramatic television I've seen in recent years, due largely to its fabulous writing and acting, the consistency of the characters while still giving them compelling arcs, and the beauty of the cinematography. Lovely work all around. We need more television like this.
1. I did suspect that the porn videos were playing into the rape, and they were to an extent.
2. I thought more than one person was involved, and that was true.
3. I had Leo pegged as the mastermind, and he was.
It is, of course, a shame that Michael ended up roped in. There is a definite thread of "be careful who your friends are" throughout this series.
I won't spoil the ending (any more than I already have) by going into details. Let's just say it was satisfying enough, and that I'll miss the show. Part of me really wanted Hardy to go to the pub with Miller, but I know that to have it be so would have undermined the character and the relationship between Hardy and Miller that had been so carefully constructed over the three series (seasons). Miller will always be looking for ways into Hardy's life, and he'll always be fending her off.
I don't know that I would say the third series was as compelling as the first or second—though definitely more difficult to watch—but I'm gratified with how story lines were wrapped up as much as they could be and still give the sense that life goes on. I'm not entirely sure why they felt the need to have Paul or Maggie around since they didn't really get much in terms of plot, but I suppose if they'd been absent things would have felt strange. Better to have a little something than a vacuum.
All in all, Broadchurch remains some of the best dramatic television I've seen in recent years, due largely to its fabulous writing and acting, the consistency of the characters while still giving them compelling arcs, and the beauty of the cinematography. Lovely work all around. We need more television like this.
4.16.2017
Television: Broadchurch 3.7
In the penultimate episode, the net begins to close not around Ed but Jim.
But first things first, Mark Latimer is pulled from the water suffering hypothermia. Beth tells him to live in the present instead of the past, and Chloe asks him why they aren't enough for him. Sometimes I do think there's a subtle sexism going on here—that Mark is fixated on the loss of his son in a way he might not have been if it had been his daughter?
Speaking of daughters, Hardy's wants to leave town after being really embarrassed by some digital photos of her that got passed around the school. Miller tells Hardy to tear up her train ticket, and he eventually dresses down the boys who started the whole thing and does as Miller suggested. "I've been too nice," Hardy tells Miller, and her expression at that is priceless. Olivia Colman has the best reactions.
Anyway, they're unable to keep Ed in custody due to lack of hard evidence (though I would have thought a dirty suit with blue twine in the pocket would be enough?), so he's released on bail and told not to contact Trish or her family either directly or indirectly. Ed slouches off home to drink and his daughter comes around to lash him a bit, too. Later, while moving pallets at the store, Ed finds a bag of blue twine, shows it to Harford, who examines it and notes there are blood stains on it.
Ian comes into the station and tells Hardy and Miller that he had put spyware on Trish's computer. They drill him down and he is forced to admit he didn't put the spyware on, but he's not ready to tell who did. They give him until that night to cough up the name, and he does eventually call in and let them know it was Leo.
Leo is oddly contrite during his police interview. After everything we've seen of him, it doesn't feel honest that he would behave in such a way. He admits to doing it, says Ian was a teacher who helped him a lot, finally admits he was at the party for a little bit...
Meanwhile, Cath's spidey sense begins to tingle and she finds a box of condoms in Jim's car, complete with timed and dated receipt. Guess when they were bought? The afternoon of her party, natch.
Jim gets pulled in, and it's confirmed that he towed one of the other victims' cars, and Cath also confirms that she was away the two dates of the other two attacks. Uh-oh, Jim.
BUT. In the midst of all this the cab driver's wife discovers his porn on his computer and then discovers Trish's keychain in a locked drawer in Lucas' workshop. Of course Lucas drives up just in time to see her finding the evidence. Uh-oh indeed.
But first things first, Mark Latimer is pulled from the water suffering hypothermia. Beth tells him to live in the present instead of the past, and Chloe asks him why they aren't enough for him. Sometimes I do think there's a subtle sexism going on here—that Mark is fixated on the loss of his son in a way he might not have been if it had been his daughter?
Speaking of daughters, Hardy's wants to leave town after being really embarrassed by some digital photos of her that got passed around the school. Miller tells Hardy to tear up her train ticket, and he eventually dresses down the boys who started the whole thing and does as Miller suggested. "I've been too nice," Hardy tells Miller, and her expression at that is priceless. Olivia Colman has the best reactions.
Anyway, they're unable to keep Ed in custody due to lack of hard evidence (though I would have thought a dirty suit with blue twine in the pocket would be enough?), so he's released on bail and told not to contact Trish or her family either directly or indirectly. Ed slouches off home to drink and his daughter comes around to lash him a bit, too. Later, while moving pallets at the store, Ed finds a bag of blue twine, shows it to Harford, who examines it and notes there are blood stains on it.
Ian comes into the station and tells Hardy and Miller that he had put spyware on Trish's computer. They drill him down and he is forced to admit he didn't put the spyware on, but he's not ready to tell who did. They give him until that night to cough up the name, and he does eventually call in and let them know it was Leo.
Leo is oddly contrite during his police interview. After everything we've seen of him, it doesn't feel honest that he would behave in such a way. He admits to doing it, says Ian was a teacher who helped him a lot, finally admits he was at the party for a little bit...
Meanwhile, Cath's spidey sense begins to tingle and she finds a box of condoms in Jim's car, complete with timed and dated receipt. Guess when they were bought? The afternoon of her party, natch.
Jim gets pulled in, and it's confirmed that he towed one of the other victims' cars, and Cath also confirms that she was away the two dates of the other two attacks. Uh-oh, Jim.
BUT. In the midst of all this the cab driver's wife discovers his porn on his computer and then discovers Trish's keychain in a locked drawer in Lucas' workshop. Of course Lucas drives up just in time to see her finding the evidence. Uh-oh indeed.
4.11.2017
Television: Broadchurch 3.6
Known as: "The one where Ed gets arrested."
AKA: "The one where Harford gets in big trouble."
So in the previous episode, Ed went and beat Jim up. Turns out this was less about defending Cath as it was about Ed having a crush on Trish. A terrible, awkward, stalkery crush that (we discover) includes taking lots of pictures of her, though at least he only seemed to do that when she was out in public?
No big surprise that Ed is the one who sent Trish the anonymous flowers. Miller finds the exact same kinds of cards in Ed's desk. (I'm not sure if the UK has the same rules as we in the U.S. do in terms of things having to be in plain sight or else you needing a warrant? Maybe it was okay to look in the desk because Ed admitted to beating up Jim? But then the cards were not directly related to the offense Ed was being arrested for . . . It's a little muddy to me.) Anyway, then Miller also notices the blue twine Ed uses on the vegetables in his store. And when they ask Ed to show him what he wore to the party the night Trish was attacked? Yeah, blue twine in the jacket pocket.
Looks bad for Ed. Which probably means he didn't do it, but you never know.
Meanwhile, Harford only now thinks to mention Ed is her father. Way to compromise the case, Little Miss! She's immediately booted from the investigation, of course, but the damage is [potentially] done. If the case were to go to trial, this bit of info would make for a veritable media circus.
Ian steals the laptop and tries to get Leo to clean it for him, but Leo won't touch it because things are getting too hot for his liking. Cath and Jim talk about leaving everything behind and starting fresh elsewhere. Beth has no luck trying to convince Nira—another rape victim who had been attacked some time before all this—to come forward and help the investigation. And Mark, who had tracked down Joe, finally confronts him . . . but can't bring himself to act on his anger. Instead he has Joe tell him everything that happened, and Joe tells Mark there's nothing he [Mark] could have done to stop it. By the time Mark had returned to the car park, Danny was already dead. So . . . Mark calls Chloe and says a kind of goodbye, takes the boat out, and tosses himself into the water.
Only a couple episodes left! (Well, only one if you're up to date; I'm a week behind.) The gyre is narrowing . . .
AKA: "The one where Harford gets in big trouble."
So in the previous episode, Ed went and beat Jim up. Turns out this was less about defending Cath as it was about Ed having a crush on Trish. A terrible, awkward, stalkery crush that (we discover) includes taking lots of pictures of her, though at least he only seemed to do that when she was out in public?
No big surprise that Ed is the one who sent Trish the anonymous flowers. Miller finds the exact same kinds of cards in Ed's desk. (I'm not sure if the UK has the same rules as we in the U.S. do in terms of things having to be in plain sight or else you needing a warrant? Maybe it was okay to look in the desk because Ed admitted to beating up Jim? But then the cards were not directly related to the offense Ed was being arrested for . . . It's a little muddy to me.) Anyway, then Miller also notices the blue twine Ed uses on the vegetables in his store. And when they ask Ed to show him what he wore to the party the night Trish was attacked? Yeah, blue twine in the jacket pocket.
Looks bad for Ed. Which probably means he didn't do it, but you never know.
Meanwhile, Harford only now thinks to mention Ed is her father. Way to compromise the case, Little Miss! She's immediately booted from the investigation, of course, but the damage is [potentially] done. If the case were to go to trial, this bit of info would make for a veritable media circus.
Ian steals the laptop and tries to get Leo to clean it for him, but Leo won't touch it because things are getting too hot for his liking. Cath and Jim talk about leaving everything behind and starting fresh elsewhere. Beth has no luck trying to convince Nira—another rape victim who had been attacked some time before all this—to come forward and help the investigation. And Mark, who had tracked down Joe, finally confronts him . . . but can't bring himself to act on his anger. Instead he has Joe tell him everything that happened, and Joe tells Mark there's nothing he [Mark] could have done to stop it. By the time Mark had returned to the car park, Danny was already dead. So . . . Mark calls Chloe and says a kind of goodbye, takes the boat out, and tosses himself into the water.
Only a couple episodes left! (Well, only one if you're up to date; I'm a week behind.) The gyre is narrowing . . .
4.01.2017
Television: Broadchurch 3.4 & 3.5
I have the definite feeling that what we're dealing with is an underground porn ring where they attack women and film the attack. Like, the light that Trish saw? Camera light from someone filming?
Just a theory.
But I'm pretty sure the boys watching porn and the computer stuff (remote viewing spyware so Ian can watch Trish is my guess) is all related to the attack(s). I use the plural because two more potential victims turn up in the course of these episodes, one from as long ago as two years before. She never reported it because she assumed that, because she was done up for a night at the pub, she'd be considered as "asking for it." Or earn a reputation as a slut.
Look, this is a difficult season to watch. Painful even. But it's doing a very nice job of delicately prying apart the layers of rape culture. I commend it for that. (Still, if it were any other show but Broadchurch, I probably wouldn't be able to stomach it.)
Meanwhile, Mark has gone off to find Joe after getting info on his whereabouts from a private investigator. We find out the man Trish slept with the morning of Cath's party was Cath's husband Jim—no relationship ties, just both feeling sex starved. Still, after the police get to the truth of it, Trish feels like she must tell Cath before Cath finds out some other way, and that goes about as well as can be expected. Ed weighs in, too, by beating Jim up.
Still can't entirely figure Ed out. At first I thought maybe he was sweet on Trish, but then he also seems protective of Cath? Or did he beat Jim up because Jim slept with Trish, not because Jim betrayed Cath? SMH. Who knows!
We're halfway through—more than halfway—so things should begin to tighten. Dare I say the net, the rope? I still feel like Leo is the lynchpin in all this . . .
Just a theory.
But I'm pretty sure the boys watching porn and the computer stuff (remote viewing spyware so Ian can watch Trish is my guess) is all related to the attack(s). I use the plural because two more potential victims turn up in the course of these episodes, one from as long ago as two years before. She never reported it because she assumed that, because she was done up for a night at the pub, she'd be considered as "asking for it." Or earn a reputation as a slut.
Look, this is a difficult season to watch. Painful even. But it's doing a very nice job of delicately prying apart the layers of rape culture. I commend it for that. (Still, if it were any other show but Broadchurch, I probably wouldn't be able to stomach it.)
Meanwhile, Mark has gone off to find Joe after getting info on his whereabouts from a private investigator. We find out the man Trish slept with the morning of Cath's party was Cath's husband Jim—no relationship ties, just both feeling sex starved. Still, after the police get to the truth of it, Trish feels like she must tell Cath before Cath finds out some other way, and that goes about as well as can be expected. Ed weighs in, too, by beating Jim up.
Still can't entirely figure Ed out. At first I thought maybe he was sweet on Trish, but then he also seems protective of Cath? Or did he beat Jim up because Jim slept with Trish, not because Jim betrayed Cath? SMH. Who knows!
We're halfway through—more than halfway—so things should begin to tighten. Dare I say the net, the rope? I still feel like Leo is the lynchpin in all this . . .
3.19.2017
Television: Broadchurch 3.3
So Trish is understandably weirded out by the anonymous text telling her to "shut up or else." Shut up about what? She doesn't know who attacked her. So is there something else—something she does know—that someone doesn't want her to spill? Does it have anything to do with whoever she slept with the morning of the party, whose name she refuses to give to the police?
There's a lot going on but not a lot of progress being made. The man who owns the estate where the party (and rape) took place mentions in passing that he used to go by the waterfall as a child. Ding ding ding! Ian confesses to Jim that he made up what he told the police because he blacked out and can't actually remember everything that happened at the party. Guess that explains why he went and cleaned his clothes, except . . . Why have the clothes in a bag hidden in the closet? And what's on his computer that he needs Leo to scrub? (Probably more of that porn...)
And why do I have a sneaking suspicion the porn Tom and his friend (who turns out to be the cab driver's stepson) are watching may eventually connect to all this? Did someone video the attack?
People I hope bad things happen to: Leo mostly, but Harford a little bit too. Leo is the worst. Harford needs to be taken down a few, which Hardy did a little bit. Need more of that.
Oh, and Mark Latimer refuses to move on with his life because he feels justice hasn't been done. So he corners Beth with an attorney who starts giving them information on pursuing a civil case against Joe (they don't even know where he lives now or under what name). But Beth isn't interested, and neither is Chloe. Beth points out that Mark is wasting his time with his living children by fixating on the dead one. Ouch. I mean, not inaccurate, but still. Ouch.
Best moments are always between Miller and Hardy. Let's just take a second to admire Olivia Colman's amazing reactions to her co-star's grouchy. The two of them do so well together. It will be sad when this season ends and the show with it, but I can see a line of novels picking up these two characters. They're the starting point of what makes it all worth watching.
There's a lot going on but not a lot of progress being made. The man who owns the estate where the party (and rape) took place mentions in passing that he used to go by the waterfall as a child. Ding ding ding! Ian confesses to Jim that he made up what he told the police because he blacked out and can't actually remember everything that happened at the party. Guess that explains why he went and cleaned his clothes, except . . . Why have the clothes in a bag hidden in the closet? And what's on his computer that he needs Leo to scrub? (Probably more of that porn...)
And why do I have a sneaking suspicion the porn Tom and his friend (who turns out to be the cab driver's stepson) are watching may eventually connect to all this? Did someone video the attack?
People I hope bad things happen to: Leo mostly, but Harford a little bit too. Leo is the worst. Harford needs to be taken down a few, which Hardy did a little bit. Need more of that.
Oh, and Mark Latimer refuses to move on with his life because he feels justice hasn't been done. So he corners Beth with an attorney who starts giving them information on pursuing a civil case against Joe (they don't even know where he lives now or under what name). But Beth isn't interested, and neither is Chloe. Beth points out that Mark is wasting his time with his living children by fixating on the dead one. Ouch. I mean, not inaccurate, but still. Ouch.
Best moments are always between Miller and Hardy. Let's just take a second to admire Olivia Colman's amazing reactions to her co-star's grouchy. The two of them do so well together. It will be sad when this season ends and the show with it, but I can see a line of novels picking up these two characters. They're the starting point of what makes it all worth watching.
3.10.2017
Television: Broadchurch 3.2
We begin compiling a list of potential suspects by taking note of their strange behavior, which mainly consists of them looking shifty. Trish's estranged husband (is "estranged" the word? they're separated but still see each other around town) tops the list, not for refusing the DNA swab, though that's reason for pause, but because he pulled a bag out of his closet and began washing the clothes in it, right down to the soles of the shoes. Hmm?
Also, smarmy kid running the fishing line manufacturer, acting like heir to a throne (made of fishing net). Someone slap him, please.
Ellie asks Beth to nudge Trish in the direction of giving her statement, even though Trish isn't ready. Then Hardy makes the decision for everyone by demanding Trish get down to the station at 4:00. I think the acting here is brilliant, btw. The tug of war between wanting to be compassionate and needing to find the rapist before he can strike again is both subtle and palpably tense. I also had a moment in which I felt like Hardy was angry, not just about the urgency of the case, but about being a man forced to deal with what another man had done to a woman. (Angry at the rapist, mind, not at having to do his job. Angry and maybe a little guilty by association with his gender.) I'm not sure I'm explaining that well, but again, it's such a subtle thing but done so well. It's why I love this show.
What else? Maggie hates what's happening to her little newspaper, and then she's told that they're closing the Broadchurch office anyway and taking the paper in a more regional direction. "Redefining 'local'" they said. I can see both sides of this. Newspapers don't sell like they used to. People go online or to the telly for news. Crying, "It's an institution!" won't save things. But, cute as the kittens were, they shouldn't have been the lead. Sure, put the picture on the front page, but then direct readers to page six or eight or whatever.
It occurs to me that I sort of miss getting a newspaper . . .
And Paul is mad, too, because no one goes to church any more. Or they only go when something is wrong, never when times are good. Church has become a kind of last resort when one is desperate.
There's a lot of social commentary in this show. But for the millionth time, it's done so well, I don't even mind.
Finally, that little pissant Harford runs off to . . . was it her dad? Anyway, she's related to the guy who owns the store Trish works in, and after being told not to talk about the case, of course she does just that. Well, we assume she does. We don't see the conversation, so we can't know what she said.
Sum total of all that occurs in this episode: Trish is sent a threatening text from an unknown caller telling her to shut up.
Dun dun DUN.
Seriously, though, I do love this show. I'll be sorry when it's well and truly over, but at the same time it's not the kind of thing I'd want to see them drag on indefinitely. Better to end while you're on top. *sob*
Also, smarmy kid running the fishing line manufacturer, acting like heir to a throne (made of fishing net). Someone slap him, please.
Ellie asks Beth to nudge Trish in the direction of giving her statement, even though Trish isn't ready. Then Hardy makes the decision for everyone by demanding Trish get down to the station at 4:00. I think the acting here is brilliant, btw. The tug of war between wanting to be compassionate and needing to find the rapist before he can strike again is both subtle and palpably tense. I also had a moment in which I felt like Hardy was angry, not just about the urgency of the case, but about being a man forced to deal with what another man had done to a woman. (Angry at the rapist, mind, not at having to do his job. Angry and maybe a little guilty by association with his gender.) I'm not sure I'm explaining that well, but again, it's such a subtle thing but done so well. It's why I love this show.
What else? Maggie hates what's happening to her little newspaper, and then she's told that they're closing the Broadchurch office anyway and taking the paper in a more regional direction. "Redefining 'local'" they said. I can see both sides of this. Newspapers don't sell like they used to. People go online or to the telly for news. Crying, "It's an institution!" won't save things. But, cute as the kittens were, they shouldn't have been the lead. Sure, put the picture on the front page, but then direct readers to page six or eight or whatever.
It occurs to me that I sort of miss getting a newspaper . . .
And Paul is mad, too, because no one goes to church any more. Or they only go when something is wrong, never when times are good. Church has become a kind of last resort when one is desperate.
There's a lot of social commentary in this show. But for the millionth time, it's done so well, I don't even mind.
Finally, that little pissant Harford runs off to . . . was it her dad? Anyway, she's related to the guy who owns the store Trish works in, and after being told not to talk about the case, of course she does just that. Well, we assume she does. We don't see the conversation, so we can't know what she said.
Sum total of all that occurs in this episode: Trish is sent a threatening text from an unknown caller telling her to shut up.
Dun dun DUN.
Seriously, though, I do love this show. I'll be sorry when it's well and truly over, but at the same time it's not the kind of thing I'd want to see them drag on indefinitely. Better to end while you're on top. *sob*
3.05.2017
Television: Broadchurch 3.1
The final series (season) begins with Hardy and Miller handling a rape victim. Fair warning: it's difficult to watch, even though the program handles it with utmost tact and respect.
Trish was raped while at a party on Saturday night but doesn't say anything to the police until Monday. Why? Shame, confusion, ??? Evidence supports her story, but there does seem to be something "off" about the whole thing, too. So long as this does not turn into yet another "she lied about rape" story line, I think I'll be okay. I'm pretty sick of accusers being portrayed as liars in television and movies just for the sake of drama.
Meanwhile, Miller's father is apparently staying with her. Pro: he can watch the kids. Con: he doesn't seem quite all there? Hard to tell from the short scene in which he was featured. Oh, and surprise, surprise, Tom is having issues. After everything that's happened, color me not at all shocked.
The episode is a subtle enough start, the equivalent of dipping toes in. This has never been a fast-moving show, so the sedate pace is nothing new. The episode lays the groundwork; let's see what builds from here.
Trish was raped while at a party on Saturday night but doesn't say anything to the police until Monday. Why? Shame, confusion, ??? Evidence supports her story, but there does seem to be something "off" about the whole thing, too. So long as this does not turn into yet another "she lied about rape" story line, I think I'll be okay. I'm pretty sick of accusers being portrayed as liars in television and movies just for the sake of drama.
Meanwhile, Miller's father is apparently staying with her. Pro: he can watch the kids. Con: he doesn't seem quite all there? Hard to tell from the short scene in which he was featured. Oh, and surprise, surprise, Tom is having issues. After everything that's happened, color me not at all shocked.
The episode is a subtle enough start, the equivalent of dipping toes in. This has never been a fast-moving show, so the sedate pace is nothing new. The episode lays the groundwork; let's see what builds from here.
1.16.2017
Presented Without Commentary
- Irene - a "strong" woman with a shady past who ultimately needs to be rescued by the hero
- Mary - a "strong" woman with a shady past who ultimately needs to be rescued by the hero (but isn't)
- Eurus - a "strong" woman with a shady past who ultimately needs to be rescued by the hero
- Molly - a weak woman whose attempts to assert herself are unconvincing and unsuccessful, and who pines for the hero and allows him to manipulate her repeatedly
- Mrs. Hudson - a strong [older] woman played for comic relief
1.01.2017
Television: Doctor Who, "The Return of Doctor Mysterio"
I finally watched this. Kind of.
Ever think you care about something only to realize you really just don't? At all?
Thing about this particular Christmas special is that there was a perfectly cute story going on about a superhero masquerading as a nanny (or "manny") for the reporter whose infant daughter hecriminally neglected cared for satisfactorily except when saving other people.
But then there was some other, stupid, confusing, boring story about brains in jars. Do. Not. Care.
This just didn't really need to be a Doctor Who special. It would have been fine as its own thing. Or maybe we could retrofit my original TV pilot to be a Doctor Who, too. I mean, we could just make everything DW, right?
Whatever. I don't even care enough to be angry or annoyed, except at their version of New York, which was just ridiculous.
I guess when you can still be bothered, it means you still care. When you're indifferent, it means you've given up on something.
I'm indifferent to Doctor Who now.
Ever think you care about something only to realize you really just don't? At all?
Thing about this particular Christmas special is that there was a perfectly cute story going on about a superhero masquerading as a nanny (or "manny") for the reporter whose infant daughter he
But then there was some other, stupid, confusing, boring story about brains in jars. Do. Not. Care.
This just didn't really need to be a Doctor Who special. It would have been fine as its own thing. Or maybe we could retrofit my original TV pilot to be a Doctor Who, too. I mean, we could just make everything DW, right?
Whatever. I don't even care enough to be angry or annoyed, except at their version of New York, which was just ridiculous.
I guess when you can still be bothered, it means you still care. When you're indifferent, it means you've given up on something.
I'm indifferent to Doctor Who now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)