What you refer to as “Thornton’s fundamental charm” in your Landman review, Alan, comes across as unctuousness to me, unfortunately to the extent that I just avoid him now. Given a choice between watching him and Tom Cruise, I’ll reluctantly choose Thornton, but life has not yet seen fit to hand me that ultimatum. So anyhow, I wasn’t in danger of trying out Landman but gosh-a-mighty did I enjoy your caustic wordsmithery in that review.
As someone who also really isn't a Dune person, the second film is ABSOLUTELY worth seeing. It is visually arresting and way more interesting than the first film.
Splitting the story in two was problematic but together they're a great whole. Villeneuve gets at the ugly underbelly of the Chosen One mythos at the core of the novel that Lynch ignored.
I know you really didn't enjoy the S1 Frasier revival...not sure if you watched the new season. While it's nowhere the greatness of the original, the revival did get into a good rhythm and fixed some problems (less cringy puns & better use of Anders Keith). Still weird they pretend Frasier is an alien about sports & didn't even make a single reference to anything Cheers-related.
Peri Gilpin being a recurring presence helped the season. Speaking of legacy characters, "The Squash Courtship of Freddy's Father" (ep. 5) & "Thank You, Dr. Crane" (ep. 8) are worth checking out.
In your Say Nothing review, you talk about how the book is able to sprawl in ways the show falls short at (a common problem with adaptations), and that the show doesn't do a good job of capturing that sprawl effectively. Therefore the season should be longer to accommodate that.
In the past, we've lamented the problem of studios taking material that merits 2-4 hours of storytelling and stretching it out to 8-10 hours, a cynical effort to stretch content beyond its breaking point.
It's confusing to me that in one instance we complain that stories are being puffed up and stretched out to create more hours of TV where as in the other we are complaining that other shows don't have enough hours to support their various subplots and supporting characters.
Isn't this really just poor writing/showrunning, possibly because the studios have both stripped the traditional writers room down to the bare studs, stressing the writing process while also eliminating many of the ways in which writers could learn the process and develop into effective showrunners.
The problem just seems to be that the series order should fit what works best for the material as opposed to an arbitrary, pre-determined number of episodes, whether that is 8-10 eps or 20-24 eps, simply because the business model demands it. Longer seasons aren't necessarily better and short seasons aren't always the answer either (much like not every drama should be an hour nor should they all be 30 minutes long either).
I am SOOOOO glad that I'm not the only one who doesn't get Dune - even after repeated attempts trying to slog through the book. (When a work of fiction has a GLOSSARY - it's homework, not pleasure - Tolkien falls into this category for me also.)
I did also enjoy the first Villeneuve Dune installment, though not quite enough to have viewed the follow-up, FAR more than the David Lynch take on it - and I'm actually kind of curious to check out this Bene Gesserit-focused Dune Prophecy show (hopefully it won't require deep knowledge of the other Dune-ology).
Having finished Say Nothing today, I think I disagree that the legal disclaimer about Gerry Adams after every episode undermined the story. For me it worked as more than just an obligatory bit of legalese. By consistently reminding me that one of the characters continues to deny participating in any IRA-related violence, it forced me as a viewer to process the story as something relevant not just in the past but in the present as well. It also contributed to the looming tension of the story's depiction of a time in which the threat of that violence was lingering around every corner, and added texture to the narrative's overarching themes of when/how people engage with activism and political violence, how they either regret or don't regret their past actions, and how they grapple with, justify, or avoid/deny them in the present. Not to mention the inherent instability of historical record when people who gain power have the ability to control, erase, or mitigate that record. So even if it wasn't legally required I think the disclaimer still might have had narrative and thematic value. Just my two cents.
That being said, I do agree that Rory Kinnear's disappearance from the show was super unfortunate. I don't even remember what his last scene was. The show should have sent him off with more of a punch given how strong a presence his performance had in those early episodes.
The way I look at it is, the show treats the moment where Gerry publicly denies involvement in the IRA as shocking. Yes, a lot of people who watch the show will go in knowing that he did this (and continues to do this). But even if you do, the way the show works makes it easy to fall into the worldview of Dolours and Brendan and others, so in theory it would still pack a punch when he claims otherwise on TV. But ending every episode with that — while I understand the legal necessity of it — means it's always top of mind, and plays like the audience is ahead of the characters.
It also undercuts, at least a bit, the tension the show wants to create about whether he might actually get into legal trouble over the Jean McConville matter.
So, I haven't watched any of 'Yellowstone', but I moderately enjoyed S1 of Lioness and the start of S2. My Paramount feed suggested the Yellowstone prequel '1883' and I thought "A western with Sam Elliott. Why not?" Whoo boy, what a train wreck. From the insanely lethal wagon train drama to the daughter finding love in all the wrong places it was ridiculous. Sheridan seems to believe that if a little is good then a lot more will be better. It is not.
I was a fan of Superstore - thought it was very funny and had a tremendous amount of heart. St. Denis was shockingly devoid of any humor or heart. I don't think I even cracked a smile. Very disappointing, considering how talented the cast is.
There's a report from Matt Belloni at Puck News that director Pete Berg, showrunner Jason Katims, and producer Brian Grazer are shopping a reboot of Friday Night Lights: still set in Texas but with new characters, new storylines.
You haven't seen Dune part 2? Please do. It is more than worth it. Easily the best portrayal of religious hysteria in recent memory. Timothée Chalamet brings an energy, a deep rumbling voice and a power to the messiah side of Paul Atreides I didn't know he had as an actor. For me, he was still Homeland's Finn Walden, too meek to embrace such a scary part. Dune part 2 proved me dead wrong.
For most of your readers, the Serling subject response anecdote was mildly amusing. But, for a writer, it’s an absolute horror, worthy of Rod himself. I need a drink.
We're reaching the point of the season where the fact that I've seen all the episodes — most of them several weeks ago — makes it trickier for weekly check-ins. I'll definitely try to do more soon. But agreed that Goldstein is fantastic.
What you refer to as “Thornton’s fundamental charm” in your Landman review, Alan, comes across as unctuousness to me, unfortunately to the extent that I just avoid him now. Given a choice between watching him and Tom Cruise, I’ll reluctantly choose Thornton, but life has not yet seen fit to hand me that ultimatum. So anyhow, I wasn’t in danger of trying out Landman but gosh-a-mighty did I enjoy your caustic wordsmithery in that review.
As someone who also really isn't a Dune person, the second film is ABSOLUTELY worth seeing. It is visually arresting and way more interesting than the first film.
Splitting the story in two was problematic but together they're a great whole. Villeneuve gets at the ugly underbelly of the Chosen One mythos at the core of the novel that Lynch ignored.
I know you really didn't enjoy the S1 Frasier revival...not sure if you watched the new season. While it's nowhere the greatness of the original, the revival did get into a good rhythm and fixed some problems (less cringy puns & better use of Anders Keith). Still weird they pretend Frasier is an alien about sports & didn't even make a single reference to anything Cheers-related.
Peri Gilpin being a recurring presence helped the season. Speaking of legacy characters, "The Squash Courtship of Freddy's Father" (ep. 5) & "Thank You, Dr. Crane" (ep. 8) are worth checking out.
Yes, the second-half of S2 was wonderful. (I read that if there is a S3 they will try to bring the Cheers world into this show.)
In your Say Nothing review, you talk about how the book is able to sprawl in ways the show falls short at (a common problem with adaptations), and that the show doesn't do a good job of capturing that sprawl effectively. Therefore the season should be longer to accommodate that.
In the past, we've lamented the problem of studios taking material that merits 2-4 hours of storytelling and stretching it out to 8-10 hours, a cynical effort to stretch content beyond its breaking point.
It's confusing to me that in one instance we complain that stories are being puffed up and stretched out to create more hours of TV where as in the other we are complaining that other shows don't have enough hours to support their various subplots and supporting characters.
Isn't this really just poor writing/showrunning, possibly because the studios have both stripped the traditional writers room down to the bare studs, stressing the writing process while also eliminating many of the ways in which writers could learn the process and develop into effective showrunners.
The problem just seems to be that the series order should fit what works best for the material as opposed to an arbitrary, pre-determined number of episodes, whether that is 8-10 eps or 20-24 eps, simply because the business model demands it. Longer seasons aren't necessarily better and short seasons aren't always the answer either (much like not every drama should be an hour nor should they all be 30 minutes long either).
I am SOOOOO glad that I'm not the only one who doesn't get Dune - even after repeated attempts trying to slog through the book. (When a work of fiction has a GLOSSARY - it's homework, not pleasure - Tolkien falls into this category for me also.)
I did also enjoy the first Villeneuve Dune installment, though not quite enough to have viewed the follow-up, FAR more than the David Lynch take on it - and I'm actually kind of curious to check out this Bene Gesserit-focused Dune Prophecy show (hopefully it won't require deep knowledge of the other Dune-ology).
Having finished Say Nothing today, I think I disagree that the legal disclaimer about Gerry Adams after every episode undermined the story. For me it worked as more than just an obligatory bit of legalese. By consistently reminding me that one of the characters continues to deny participating in any IRA-related violence, it forced me as a viewer to process the story as something relevant not just in the past but in the present as well. It also contributed to the looming tension of the story's depiction of a time in which the threat of that violence was lingering around every corner, and added texture to the narrative's overarching themes of when/how people engage with activism and political violence, how they either regret or don't regret their past actions, and how they grapple with, justify, or avoid/deny them in the present. Not to mention the inherent instability of historical record when people who gain power have the ability to control, erase, or mitigate that record. So even if it wasn't legally required I think the disclaimer still might have had narrative and thematic value. Just my two cents.
That being said, I do agree that Rory Kinnear's disappearance from the show was super unfortunate. I don't even remember what his last scene was. The show should have sent him off with more of a punch given how strong a presence his performance had in those early episodes.
The way I look at it is, the show treats the moment where Gerry publicly denies involvement in the IRA as shocking. Yes, a lot of people who watch the show will go in knowing that he did this (and continues to do this). But even if you do, the way the show works makes it easy to fall into the worldview of Dolours and Brendan and others, so in theory it would still pack a punch when he claims otherwise on TV. But ending every episode with that — while I understand the legal necessity of it — means it's always top of mind, and plays like the audience is ahead of the characters.
It also undercuts, at least a bit, the tension the show wants to create about whether he might actually get into legal trouble over the Jean McConville matter.
So, I haven't watched any of 'Yellowstone', but I moderately enjoyed S1 of Lioness and the start of S2. My Paramount feed suggested the Yellowstone prequel '1883' and I thought "A western with Sam Elliott. Why not?" Whoo boy, what a train wreck. From the insanely lethal wagon train drama to the daughter finding love in all the wrong places it was ridiculous. Sheridan seems to believe that if a little is good then a lot more will be better. It is not.
I was a fan of Superstore - thought it was very funny and had a tremendous amount of heart. St. Denis was shockingly devoid of any humor or heart. I don't think I even cracked a smile. Very disappointing, considering how talented the cast is.
There's a report from Matt Belloni at Puck News that director Pete Berg, showrunner Jason Katims, and producer Brian Grazer are shopping a reboot of Friday Night Lights: still set in Texas but with new characters, new storylines.
Sounds like a horrible idea.
"dramatically inert, one-note character"
Wow. That's not the show I watched. Sorry you missed it.
I'm glad you enjoyed the same show I didn't like, Jim.
It didn't have that guy in it. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
You haven't seen Dune part 2? Please do. It is more than worth it. Easily the best portrayal of religious hysteria in recent memory. Timothée Chalamet brings an energy, a deep rumbling voice and a power to the messiah side of Paul Atreides I didn't know he had as an actor. For me, he was still Homeland's Finn Walden, too meek to embrace such a scary part. Dune part 2 proved me dead wrong.
A lot of FNL talk today: in your Landman review, your interview with Aldis Hodge, and the news about a reboot.
The title “Landman” reminds me of a bit from the Adult Swim series HOME MOVIES. “I stand on land!”
https://youtu.be/toaZ0auVay0?feature=shared
For most of your readers, the Serling subject response anecdote was mildly amusing. But, for a writer, it’s an absolute horror, worthy of Rod himself. I need a drink.
No shrinking update? I really enjoyed Brett’s stuff this week
We're reaching the point of the season where the fact that I've seen all the episodes — most of them several weeks ago — makes it trickier for weekly check-ins. I'll definitely try to do more soon. But agreed that Goldstein is fantastic.
A great episode.
Any plans to watch or review The Day of the Jackal?
No. That's another one that David Fear covered for us: https://www.rollingstone.com/tv-movies/tv-movie-reviews/the-day-of-the-jackal-review-eddie-redmayne-peacock-1235152104/
Both he and Fienberg are largely on the same page, and it doesn't sound like it's worth me finding 10 hours to watch.