5 things: TV edition Part 1
Nov. 1st, 2014 08:34 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
bedsitter23Because things rounded to five sound more impressive. Mostly out of date, mostly about tv.
1-"Constantine"- I don't know. I never did see the Keanu Reeves film, which may possibly have been on purpose. This is a favorite character of mine, and though like Batman (leaves some room for variation) I am afraid I am going to have a certain way of expectations.
Truthfully, I have not done a good job of keeping up on the multiple comic-inspired tv shows. I probably should have gotten in on the ground floor of "Gotham" but I didn't. This has more to do with me than anything (and lack of time commitment) but I did happen to catch the pilot for Constantine, and I thought I would watch it.
Reviews (critics and friends) really liked it. I don't know. I felt it felt a bit cheap (a bit 90s horror-ish). I didn't want to play the obvious card, but it wouldn't this have been so much better on HBO. I don't watch a lot of what is popular primetime "horror" but it seems that even if "American Horror Story" is an unfair comparison, at least shows like "Sleepy Hollow" have stepped the game up.
Lastly, I am not exactly sold on Matt Ryan as the Hellblazer. It's not that he doesn't smoke (thanks NBC), but I am not sure he has the charisma needed.
It's hard to tell though if the failing is from him or the material he is given to work with. Perhaps, he also suffers in comparison to the great Brits who have graced the Big 4 in recent years (without even making comment on those others on cable)- Elementary's Miller, House's Laurie, Mentalist's Baker, etc..
I don't find Ryan gripping, and for this character, he should be. Again, I am not sure if he's to blame or the show is to blame. In any case, all of the things I have criticized, do seem to be the obvious. It's on NBC. One thinks if it was on another network, it would score a bigger cast, have better graphics, and generally be an altogether better show, but there you go.
2- On the other side of the coin, I did watch (months ago) the finale to NBC's "Revolution".
I have to say I had some criticism of it to after just seeing the pilot, but stayed on for the ride. I wasn't convinced that the cast was movie star quality. Certainly the likes of Billy Burke, Giancarlo Esposito, and David Lyons aren't going to be topping the marquis, but they are some of the strong actors and actresses in the bunch.
"Revolution" if you don't remember is the post-apocalyptic show where all of the electricity went out (not to be confused with that one post-apolcalyptic show on SyFy) and because it was 2012, it was marketed as a 'teen aged girl with a bow" show because "because Hunger Games".
Maybe it has always been like this, but it's got to be a risk to tell a linear story on tv. Ultimately, that was "Revolution"s downfall. It bred some dedicated fans, but why would anyone want to start in the middle of a story that is already in progress.
Indeed, I regret I didn't get in the ground floor on the Blacklist. It actually looks pretty good, but I didn't know if NBC was going to commit to a crime drama starring James Spader.
Which of course, is the rub. If you start with "Revolution", you were going to have to end with it. No wonder every show on CBS is either a comedy or a weekly "Whodunit" crime procedural. There's no room for error.
Indeed some shows do go viral and in 2014, it's no big thing to go back and start with Season 1, Episode 1. In fact, maybe now is a better time for that than ever. Who really got in on the ground floor for "Breaking Bad"? Who was talking about "The Walking Dead" when it originally premiered. I can tell you. It was a handful of comic geeks, because I was one of them.
Post-apocalypse stories are going to be tough, but "Revolution" did generally work. The cast gave strong performances, and you had people like JJ Abrams and Jon Favreau off screen.
"Revolution" did have a subplot that I think did damage it. (While one of the big questions was "Why did the power go out", the attempt to fuse "Lost" or "The Matrix" style drama into the show was an unnecessary and negative distraction to the overall "Now, that the power is out..." action drama that drove the narrative.
"Revolution" was cancelled and so we did not get much in the way of a satisfying ending. It unfortunately, feeds some of the fears that are almost self-prophesizing. Why should a network run a sci-fi show like this if no one is going to watch? Why am I as a viewer going to watch a show that the network will kill off the first chance they get?
More "things" to follow....
1-"Constantine"- I don't know. I never did see the Keanu Reeves film, which may possibly have been on purpose. This is a favorite character of mine, and though like Batman (leaves some room for variation) I am afraid I am going to have a certain way of expectations.
Truthfully, I have not done a good job of keeping up on the multiple comic-inspired tv shows. I probably should have gotten in on the ground floor of "Gotham" but I didn't. This has more to do with me than anything (and lack of time commitment) but I did happen to catch the pilot for Constantine, and I thought I would watch it.
Reviews (critics and friends) really liked it. I don't know. I felt it felt a bit cheap (a bit 90s horror-ish). I didn't want to play the obvious card, but it wouldn't this have been so much better on HBO. I don't watch a lot of what is popular primetime "horror" but it seems that even if "American Horror Story" is an unfair comparison, at least shows like "Sleepy Hollow" have stepped the game up.
Lastly, I am not exactly sold on Matt Ryan as the Hellblazer. It's not that he doesn't smoke (thanks NBC), but I am not sure he has the charisma needed.
It's hard to tell though if the failing is from him or the material he is given to work with. Perhaps, he also suffers in comparison to the great Brits who have graced the Big 4 in recent years (without even making comment on those others on cable)- Elementary's Miller, House's Laurie, Mentalist's Baker, etc..
I don't find Ryan gripping, and for this character, he should be. Again, I am not sure if he's to blame or the show is to blame. In any case, all of the things I have criticized, do seem to be the obvious. It's on NBC. One thinks if it was on another network, it would score a bigger cast, have better graphics, and generally be an altogether better show, but there you go.
2- On the other side of the coin, I did watch (months ago) the finale to NBC's "Revolution".
I have to say I had some criticism of it to after just seeing the pilot, but stayed on for the ride. I wasn't convinced that the cast was movie star quality. Certainly the likes of Billy Burke, Giancarlo Esposito, and David Lyons aren't going to be topping the marquis, but they are some of the strong actors and actresses in the bunch.
"Revolution" if you don't remember is the post-apocalyptic show where all of the electricity went out (not to be confused with that one post-apolcalyptic show on SyFy) and because it was 2012, it was marketed as a 'teen aged girl with a bow" show because "because Hunger Games".
Maybe it has always been like this, but it's got to be a risk to tell a linear story on tv. Ultimately, that was "Revolution"s downfall. It bred some dedicated fans, but why would anyone want to start in the middle of a story that is already in progress.
Indeed, I regret I didn't get in the ground floor on the Blacklist. It actually looks pretty good, but I didn't know if NBC was going to commit to a crime drama starring James Spader.
Which of course, is the rub. If you start with "Revolution", you were going to have to end with it. No wonder every show on CBS is either a comedy or a weekly "Whodunit" crime procedural. There's no room for error.
Indeed some shows do go viral and in 2014, it's no big thing to go back and start with Season 1, Episode 1. In fact, maybe now is a better time for that than ever. Who really got in on the ground floor for "Breaking Bad"? Who was talking about "The Walking Dead" when it originally premiered. I can tell you. It was a handful of comic geeks, because I was one of them.
Post-apocalypse stories are going to be tough, but "Revolution" did generally work. The cast gave strong performances, and you had people like JJ Abrams and Jon Favreau off screen.
"Revolution" did have a subplot that I think did damage it. (While one of the big questions was "Why did the power go out", the attempt to fuse "Lost" or "The Matrix" style drama into the show was an unnecessary and negative distraction to the overall "Now, that the power is out..." action drama that drove the narrative.
"Revolution" was cancelled and so we did not get much in the way of a satisfying ending. It unfortunately, feeds some of the fears that are almost self-prophesizing. Why should a network run a sci-fi show like this if no one is going to watch? Why am I as a viewer going to watch a show that the network will kill off the first chance they get?
More "things" to follow....
