Talk about a multiverse: Steve Carell in the original version of "The Office", Domhnall Gleeson in the new version of "The Office", and in between Domhnall Gleeson killed Steve Carell in "The Patient".
I’ve heard a couple others not love the setting of the new Office. I’m a journalist and not bothered by the choice, and am actually intrigued. But I totally get why anyone would not want to watch something that hits close to home like it could.
As a teen, I bought the first 10 issues (think it was 10) of Wonder Man and loved it. I think my mom threw them out when I went to college and I’m now kicking myself for not keeping them in a safe place!
I feel like Apple+ may be crawling up its own butt (forgive me, it's a turn of phrase I found appropriate here) but they had a really strong run of quality TV during the pandemic; the peak of Apple+ was Ted Lasso S1 (2020) and their last show approaching that level was Severance S1 (2022). Since then, all downhill.
For sure. Severance was fantastic but I am already skeptical of Apple’s ability to nurture it creatively in season 2 given their track record. Aside from Severance and Slow Horses (also terrific), what else have they contributed to Peak TV? Not much. Most often, when I watch a full season or sample a new series on their service, I feel like I wasted my time. (This includes the first season and a half that I watched of For All Mankind. And to think… it gets worse from there?!) Their batting average is still leagues above Netflix but you can’t help but hope for better output with their massive budgets and smart “less is more” approach.
I think Netflix has surpassed them in the last couple years but Netflix takes a lot of shots on a weekly basis, so sheer volume is on their side. But give them credit for bringing us Pachinko, Mythic Quest, The Morning Show, and Dickinson. I'm not a fan of those last two but they are/were both successful series.
The thing about Sugar wasn’t so much that it essentially switches genres at the top of the 9th but that it now forces me to start thinking about logistics and I wasn’t really prepared to do so. Now, all I’m thinking about is how did they get here, when, why, etc. If we get a title card at some point saying “400 years earlier” and it cuts to the end scene of Three Body Problem’s first season, I’d give it points for ultimate crossover.
So I watched all of Sugar in the last week, figuring that Alan would discuss it in this newsletter. Here's my take on the surprise.
First I absolutely agree with Alan in his initial review that if the show just stuck to the normal neo-noir plot, it'd be great. The characters, cast, cinematography, tone, all work really well. In addition, I do agree that the twist obviously completely changes the stakes and motivation.
That said, I did not find the twist that surprising. Maybe it's because I was primed by Alan's review, but there have been clues from the start about his true nature. In no particular order.
*Many episodes end with shots of the Moon
*The way he treats his first injury in Japan with that mysterious block
*Davy saying he'd never heard of any of the films Sugar owns/is reading about (this actually briefly made me think he was time traveler/multiverse guy)
*He speaks many languages very fluently and almost seems like he can talk to dogs.
*The line about his Alcohol metabolism indicates he has some sort of super human biology.
*The whole polygot party had many hints especially the part about "we're here to observe." That's what confirmed it for me.
So I think the show did enough to drop hints that this was coming. And so I didn't feel like I had the rug pulled out from me.
But yes it doesn't does change the genres!
(Also, while rereading Alan's initial review right now, I noticed he commented that Anna Gunn is only six years older than Nate Corddry. Somehow that didn't bother me. But James Cromwell being only 12 years older than Dennis Boutsikaris did.)
Agreed about your take on the "pacing" of John Sugar's true nature, but it does effectively makes the show essentially a sort-of Martian Manhunter show and I can't be mad about that!
I'm finally getting around to finishing up Ripley and while I admire many aspects of, it's way too long. The pacing feels both intentional and like they're trying to stretch 4-5 hours of mini-series into 8. Even when the series was really hitting its marks (eps 5 and 6), the pacing is still calling attention to itself.
I guess all I'm really saying here is Shogun needs to win every award because that mini-series is perfect as-is, and so few of these TV mini-series these days even come close to the bar that show sets.
I was bummed to read your review of Dark Matter, just because I had really enjoyed the novel and had high hopes. Your point about multiverse stories did raise a question I've had for a while, though, about critics vs. general audiences. I feel like it's common for critics to tire of pop culture trends faster than the public does (this is based on no research, just a general feeling).
Is it because critics, by nature of their job, have to watch just about everything that comes out? Whereas the masses can be more choosy about how they spend their time. Or, like in my case, just don't have the time to see everything. I can only keep up with a couple of shows at a time, and I see maybe 10-15 new movies a year (and not all in theaters). It's just something I've noticed from time to time--the reviews of a movie will be mediocre, or express that it's paint-by-numbers, and yet I and those around me will find it very entertaining. Maybe it's just that we haven't consumed enough to be fatigued by the idea yet?
On Sugar--I didn't mind the twist. I agree, though, that the storytelling wasn't great. I think it could have worked better if they'd gone all-in on the mystery of the girl's disappearance and sold me as a detective show. But that mystery hasn't been very compelling. Thus far, it's felt like they have been spinning in circles and haven't made much progress in figuring out who is behind it.
There’s a risk of that at times, Mark. But in this case, we’re talking about an idea that’s been explored at length in the biggest pop culture franchise in the world, two mega hit animated films, and a Best Picture winner that was also a big success at the box office. This is not an obscure idea.
Absolutely, I get that. In the case of the MCU, I think the multiverse COULD be fun. But the movies and ideas haven't felt very well-executed. Maybe I wasn't ready to throw the idea out yet, but just wanted to see a more interesting version of it.
Which is close to what you said about Dark Matter! Anyway, thank you for the response.
i was hooked on sugar from the opening iris shot in B&W when he was in japan with the noir music but the following episodes slowly lost my intrigue.
i thought it was neat they added blue eyes during the intro but like you said it's doesn't change our perspective of anything. it's an aesthetically pleasing show with great actors but the story feels hollow at this point.
Huh. I feel like House of Cards was so long ago (relatively), that it doesn’t fit the current conversations about the waxing and waning of prestige TV.
Ok I read it and was feeling sort of defensive and then he shouted out all my favorites as the non-mid shows and now I feel smug. A good morning all in all… 😉
I honestly wasn’t bothered by the big reveal on “Sugar.” It’s been obvious since the beginning that there’s something uncanny about Sugar, and I felt the ground had been amply prepared with plenty of clues. (Not to mention by television critics teasing a big reveal in E6.) The only question left was what *kind* of strange thing he would turn out to be. I’m looking forward to the finale, and I would not be unhappy to have Sugar stay behind in LA for a second season.
I like genre mash ups, but not genre switches, and I don't know how anyone does.
In the case of Sugar, if they had made it clear at the beginning it was an alien playing at being a Noir detective, I might've liked it, and many viewers might've been intrigued by that promise.
But when it switches genres, it seems to me it's guaranteed to displease everyone.
Viewers who signed up for a noir detective series will be turned off when the lead character turns out to be an alien. It violates the premise.
Viewers who might've wanted a series about an alien won't tune in for another noir detective show.
Why do writers keep trying genre switches like this, when it seems to be a tactic that would inherently fail?
Another criticism of Sugar: regardless of the genre, many of the scenes are very unsatisfying. They feel like mere extended beginnings of a scene, but don't build to a climax of any kind — instead, they just peter out or cut off.
"Chris Diamantopoulos can reprise his role as everyone’s favorite Office character: the boom mic guy"
This is very hurtful.
I hope the new Office focuses more on the work aspect than on the zany characters like the US version did in the later seasons. While it might be a bit depressing, it could also be insightful.
Talk about a multiverse: Steve Carell in the original version of "The Office", Domhnall Gleeson in the new version of "The Office", and in between Domhnall Gleeson killed Steve Carell in "The Patient".
I’ve heard a couple others not love the setting of the new Office. I’m a journalist and not bothered by the choice, and am actually intrigued. But I totally get why anyone would not want to watch something that hits close to home like it could.
As a teen, I bought the first 10 issues (think it was 10) of Wonder Man and loved it. I think my mom threw them out when I went to college and I’m now kicking myself for not keeping them in a safe place!
There are a couple of recent Wonder Man collections out, though the prices are pretty high.
The best line of that NYT article was regarding Apple TV+:
“But Apple TV+ just might be the HBO of Mid.”
Succinct and spot-on.
I feel like Apple+ may be crawling up its own butt (forgive me, it's a turn of phrase I found appropriate here) but they had a really strong run of quality TV during the pandemic; the peak of Apple+ was Ted Lasso S1 (2020) and their last show approaching that level was Severance S1 (2022). Since then, all downhill.
For sure. Severance was fantastic but I am already skeptical of Apple’s ability to nurture it creatively in season 2 given their track record. Aside from Severance and Slow Horses (also terrific), what else have they contributed to Peak TV? Not much. Most often, when I watch a full season or sample a new series on their service, I feel like I wasted my time. (This includes the first season and a half that I watched of For All Mankind. And to think… it gets worse from there?!) Their batting average is still leagues above Netflix but you can’t help but hope for better output with their massive budgets and smart “less is more” approach.
I think Netflix has surpassed them in the last couple years but Netflix takes a lot of shots on a weekly basis, so sheer volume is on their side. But give them credit for bringing us Pachinko, Mythic Quest, The Morning Show, and Dickinson. I'm not a fan of those last two but they are/were both successful series.
The thing about Sugar wasn’t so much that it essentially switches genres at the top of the 9th but that it now forces me to start thinking about logistics and I wasn’t really prepared to do so. Now, all I’m thinking about is how did they get here, when, why, etc. If we get a title card at some point saying “400 years earlier” and it cuts to the end scene of Three Body Problem’s first season, I’d give it points for ultimate crossover.
So I watched all of Sugar in the last week, figuring that Alan would discuss it in this newsletter. Here's my take on the surprise.
First I absolutely agree with Alan in his initial review that if the show just stuck to the normal neo-noir plot, it'd be great. The characters, cast, cinematography, tone, all work really well. In addition, I do agree that the twist obviously completely changes the stakes and motivation.
That said, I did not find the twist that surprising. Maybe it's because I was primed by Alan's review, but there have been clues from the start about his true nature. In no particular order.
*Many episodes end with shots of the Moon
*The way he treats his first injury in Japan with that mysterious block
*Davy saying he'd never heard of any of the films Sugar owns/is reading about (this actually briefly made me think he was time traveler/multiverse guy)
*He speaks many languages very fluently and almost seems like he can talk to dogs.
*The line about his Alcohol metabolism indicates he has some sort of super human biology.
*The whole polygot party had many hints especially the part about "we're here to observe." That's what confirmed it for me.
So I think the show did enough to drop hints that this was coming. And so I didn't feel like I had the rug pulled out from me.
But yes it doesn't does change the genres!
(Also, while rereading Alan's initial review right now, I noticed he commented that Anna Gunn is only six years older than Nate Corddry. Somehow that didn't bother me. But James Cromwell being only 12 years older than Dennis Boutsikaris did.)
Agreed about your take on the "pacing" of John Sugar's true nature, but it does effectively makes the show essentially a sort-of Martian Manhunter show and I can't be mad about that!
Thank you for defending Poker Face. I mentioned you on Facebook in comments section because it could not stand, glad to see you reacting.
Also, Poniewozik mentions Watchmen as a true great TV so being connected to IP is not an automatic disqualification of ambition and originality.
Speaking of Studio 60, reading your posts about the show is still enjoyable. I had forgotten Sorkin being mad at you.
http://sepinwall.blogspot.com/search/label/Studio%2060
Oh, he's still mad at me. Or was circa The Newsroom.
I'm finally getting around to finishing up Ripley and while I admire many aspects of, it's way too long. The pacing feels both intentional and like they're trying to stretch 4-5 hours of mini-series into 8. Even when the series was really hitting its marks (eps 5 and 6), the pacing is still calling attention to itself.
I guess all I'm really saying here is Shogun needs to win every award because that mini-series is perfect as-is, and so few of these TV mini-series these days even come close to the bar that show sets.
I was bummed to read your review of Dark Matter, just because I had really enjoyed the novel and had high hopes. Your point about multiverse stories did raise a question I've had for a while, though, about critics vs. general audiences. I feel like it's common for critics to tire of pop culture trends faster than the public does (this is based on no research, just a general feeling).
Is it because critics, by nature of their job, have to watch just about everything that comes out? Whereas the masses can be more choosy about how they spend their time. Or, like in my case, just don't have the time to see everything. I can only keep up with a couple of shows at a time, and I see maybe 10-15 new movies a year (and not all in theaters). It's just something I've noticed from time to time--the reviews of a movie will be mediocre, or express that it's paint-by-numbers, and yet I and those around me will find it very entertaining. Maybe it's just that we haven't consumed enough to be fatigued by the idea yet?
On Sugar--I didn't mind the twist. I agree, though, that the storytelling wasn't great. I think it could have worked better if they'd gone all-in on the mystery of the girl's disappearance and sold me as a detective show. But that mystery hasn't been very compelling. Thus far, it's felt like they have been spinning in circles and haven't made much progress in figuring out who is behind it.
There’s a risk of that at times, Mark. But in this case, we’re talking about an idea that’s been explored at length in the biggest pop culture franchise in the world, two mega hit animated films, and a Best Picture winner that was also a big success at the box office. This is not an obscure idea.
Absolutely, I get that. In the case of the MCU, I think the multiverse COULD be fun. But the movies and ideas haven't felt very well-executed. Maybe I wasn't ready to throw the idea out yet, but just wanted to see a more interesting version of it.
Which is close to what you said about Dark Matter! Anyway, thank you for the response.
i was hooked on sugar from the opening iris shot in B&W when he was in japan with the noir music but the following episodes slowly lost my intrigue.
i thought it was neat they added blue eyes during the intro but like you said it's doesn't change our perspective of anything. it's an aesthetically pleasing show with great actors but the story feels hollow at this point.
Did you mean House of Dragons when you said House of Cards?
No. I think both of those shows are fairly pale imitations of the things they're trying to be.
Huh. I feel like House of Cards was so long ago (relatively), that it doesn’t fit the current conversations about the waxing and waning of prestige TV.
Jim mentioned it in his column as the very first example of this trend.
Ok I read it and was feeling sort of defensive and then he shouted out all my favorites as the non-mid shows and now I feel smug. A good morning all in all… 😉
That’s what I get for not going to the source.
I honestly wasn’t bothered by the big reveal on “Sugar.” It’s been obvious since the beginning that there’s something uncanny about Sugar, and I felt the ground had been amply prepared with plenty of clues. (Not to mention by television critics teasing a big reveal in E6.) The only question left was what *kind* of strange thing he would turn out to be. I’m looking forward to the finale, and I would not be unhappy to have Sugar stay behind in LA for a second season.
I like genre mash ups, but not genre switches, and I don't know how anyone does.
In the case of Sugar, if they had made it clear at the beginning it was an alien playing at being a Noir detective, I might've liked it, and many viewers might've been intrigued by that promise.
But when it switches genres, it seems to me it's guaranteed to displease everyone.
Viewers who signed up for a noir detective series will be turned off when the lead character turns out to be an alien. It violates the premise.
Viewers who might've wanted a series about an alien won't tune in for another noir detective show.
Why do writers keep trying genre switches like this, when it seems to be a tactic that would inherently fail?
Another criticism of Sugar: regardless of the genre, many of the scenes are very unsatisfying. They feel like mere extended beginnings of a scene, but don't build to a climax of any kind — instead, they just peter out or cut off.
"Chris Diamantopoulos can reprise his role as everyone’s favorite Office character: the boom mic guy"
This is very hurtful.
I hope the new Office focuses more on the work aspect than on the zany characters like the US version did in the later seasons. While it might be a bit depressing, it could also be insightful.
I cannot imagine how delighted Kathryn is with the comments section on her article right now LOLOL