View Logs: Low Winter Sun S1 Episode 3

8/26/13

View Logs: Low Winter Sun S1 Episode 3

Episode Title: No Rounds

I don't have much to say about this episode.  Which is actually an improvement considering I've had nothing but negative afterthoughts for the show so far.  That said, this episode isn't anything amazing like the episodes we've been experiencing with Breaking Bad.

Tweet

View Logs: Breaking Bad S5.2 Episode 3

View Logs: Breaking Bad S5.2 Episode 3

Episode Title: Confessions

I'm going to make my own confession.  I watch things looking for things that are wrong or that I find weak.  I've stated in a few logs back that my goal in watching tv fiction isn't to "enjoy myself".  I watch it to learn something.  Really art is an education in the abstract... atleast that's what good art is about.  That isn't mutually exclusive to "enjoyment".  I find enjoyment in being analytical and critical while I'm watching something.  That's just the mindset I prefer way more than just going into something casually.  See science is my enjoyment.  I go into testing laboratories expecting to enjoy myself outright without being too serious.  Art?  Nah.  Art is srsbizness.  More than science.

Anyways, my point is, my mindset tends to lead me more disappointed than satisfied (which I don't think it's a bad thing btw).  The reason for that is because most writers just aren't that imaginative.  In most stories, no matter what medium it's delivered in, I usually find myself being able to guess the direction of many scenes.  Some stories are so predictable that I'm able to guess the entire thing within 5 minutes.

This is not exclusive to me.

Any cinephile, tv couch potatoes, hardcore gamers (on games that are story driven that is), bookworms or comic digesters, can probably relate to me.  Experience in a particular medium will always lead to viewer that's harder to satisfy.  Again, this isn't a bad thing.  In fact, I consider this a good thing.  What is critiquing art if not an expression of past experiences in that medium?  So the reason why I brought up this confession is because I wanted to convey how special Breaking Bad has become to me.  In my first view log of this split season, I've described the effects of Breaking Bad's efficient writing.  The view log of episode 2 detailed why the writing is this tight.  Now in episode 3, I've literally found myself completely 100% engaged in every scene.

Whenever there's a problem, it just gets addressed immediately and it throws me off guard because I've come to expect stories to drag a problem for as long as it can.  Here, I've constantly found myself asking "wait... wait... seriously?  that got resolved?  What?  There's still plenty of the episode left..."  This happens so often, especially when a character is cornered.  A great example of this is when Hank's watching Walt's "confession" tape.

Still... I don't think I could be more still watching this...

That moment where Hank and Marie are breathless and completely cornered by Walt is so unbelievably tense.  But the show doesn't dwell.  It doesn't milk scenes like this.  It just keeps moving on.  Watching all of these characters act so quickly but also so intelligently is like watching a chess match sped up.  You're just constantly trying to keep up with moves that you think has the opponent perfectly cornered only for the opponent to find a cleverer move to get out of it.  Breaking Bad's writing is an enigma and it's honestly one of the most impressive shows I've ever seen.

At this point, the writers of Breaking Bad are fully confident within their own characters.  There's no cheap thrills (maybe except for cliffhangers, which I inherently dislike but dont dismiss it absolutely) and there's no side plotline that'll serve as filler to the main plot.  The writers aren't afraid that their character's own intelligence might derail the entire plot.  Each cause and effects are clear and well established ahead of time.

This is a great way to have a story stay fresh.  Not by throwing in some romance side plots, not by trying to force coincidences, not by further exaggerating established well known characters, and definitely not by shoving in action.  It stays fresh by incorporating a ruthlessly quick series of cause and effect that are completely within all the character's understanding.  Keep it up Breaking Bad.  I think next year you should be a favorite for the Emmys.

Tweet

Computerized Thoughts: Biggest threat to Batman/Superman is... not Ben Affleck

8/24/13

Computerized Thoughts: Biggest threat to Batman/Superman is... not Ben Affleck

You know what robots do when they don't have humans to experiment on?  Idle... in a basement.  Yup.  This transmission is coming straight from an underground science facility basement.  I'm a "prototype" ya see?  Not yet completely "accurate or reliable" to judge art in fiction... yet.  So I'm not really allowed to do any extensive testing on our subjects.  So I spend a lot of time in the basement cut off from most of everything...

Therefore in my spare time I just surf the internet when I've run out of HBO shows to leak my oil to.  I normally don't comment on much beyond TV.  It's not because I have no interest in other stuff.  I watch a lot of movies, play a lot of games, even read some books when I have the time too.  But there's a lot of opinions on movies and games already and I'd just like TV to get a little love.  Especially since this era of TV is one of the best it's ever been both domestically and internationally.  It's even come to the point where it's drawing film people away from film.  Which like, if you think about it, is amazing considering that TV was the retarded step child of film just a decade and a half ago.

So I originally didn't want to post about the Ben Affleck controversy.  Some of the stuff I'm about to say has been said by others but eventually, after reading hate comment after hate comment after hate comment I felt like it deserves repeating...

Ben Affleck is not the death of this movie.

Tweet

View Logs: Low Winter Sun S1 Episode 2

8/19/13

View Logs: Low Winter Sun S1 Episode 2

Episode Title: The Goat Rodeo

This episode was more like it.  Honestly, at this point it feels like Episode 1 was dragged out a little too long.  And this episode probably should have been the pilot (with the important bits of Ep 1 edited in at the beginning).  I also mentioned that the pilot played with moral ambiguity a little too quickly.  This episode established who's what and where a little better.  We know for a fact that Joe Geddes is dirty (question now is just how dirty) with a marvelous scene where he confronts Damon Callis (the gangbanger and budding drug dealer).  It seems like Joe is trying to bury McCann's past.  This actually makes sense now on why Joe lied to Frank about McCann killing Katia (Sinada in the UK version) and getting him to act against McCann.  Dare I say, the scene in which this was revealed was better done than the UK version.  But finally there's a clear motivation behind the cause and effect where in the pilot that got a little muddled.

I also have to say that this is the first show I've seen since The Shield where it shows the police work as sloppy.  Danil waiting for hours on end with a dead body was surprisingly candid about how sometimes the cops just don't care about certain lowly drug crimes.  Danil got a nice amount of character development as she is established as more of a straight shooter than her other counterparts (her confrontations with a store owner and Joe himself).  This is marvelous as it sets up for any potential conflicts Danil will have with Joe and Frank.

It also seems that the show is ready to deviate from it's UK source material.  The plot point where the coroner finds out that McCann's wounds were postmortem happens pretty late in the UK series.  Here it's setup and resolved pretty quickly (thankfully similar to how Breaking Bad was very economical with its plot) and now there's a very real danger of being caught.  Really, this made the confrontation scene at the end where Frank beats up Joe a lot more engaging as Frank has very real reasons to be enraged.  So characters have cleared up but I have to say that there are times where the plot is still a little messy.  On occasion, Frank would visit the supposed murder site of Katia to dwell on his actions and it's not really established that he does this somewhat regularly.  In Episode 2, he randomly appears in this bloodied house and, if I hasn't watched the UK version, I wouldn't have known where exactly he was.  It's ironic because the show likes to take it's time but it chooses to gloss over this setting when really this setting should represent an important theme to the story.

In the UK version, the place where Brendan supposedly murdered Sinada (and actually murdered the dismembered victim) represented a point of no return for Frank.  It is symbolic of Frank's regret.  Him cleaning the house was a way to visually show the character trying to clean up his righteous killing metaphorically and physically.  In a subtle way, it was him trying to take back what he had done to Brendan.  So considering that the house was a pretty central piece to Frank's character development in the UK version, Frank's visit to this house shouldn't really be this casually written in because the adaptation is still the same story so far.

I also have a problem with another, more drastic, change in the US version.  Frank burned the house instead of cleaning it.  While fire is an apt (and old) metaphor for cleansing, this is pretty stupid because a burned down house would probably draw a lot of attention when just cleaning it up and leaving it abandoned would have been a way better idea.  I understand the US change was more "dramatic".  But Low Winter Sun should be a show that puts aside showy dramatics for a realistic introverted tale of regret.  I mean it's been pretty gritty and low-key for most of the two episodes so far... and now suddenly Frank decides to burn the house down.  I suppose at this point Frank isn't trying to hide the fact that Brendan was murdered but actually burning the house just seemed a little too sloppy for Frank's character.  He might be someone who misjudges everything all the time, but I never got the feeling he was that overtly reckless.  Hopefully slightly out of character moments like this are gone after this episode.

One final note... the actress who plays Damon's bartender wife is horrible.  Seriously a lot of her line deliveries seem so incredibly forced that I'm just taken out of it any time she has a scene where she talks for an extended period of time.  I understand the show is gritty, but it's ok to show emotions beyond grit and irritation.  Sprague Grayden seems to be taking her role a little too intensely and it just makes her lines come across as campy.  Fortunately, Lennie James has toned down his performance and it's making his character more multidimensional.  I'm starting to feel Joe Geddes' regret which is very very important to this story (just... trust me on that.  Those who have watched the UK version will know what I'm taking about ;) )

So, episode 2 is a big step up from episode 1 but the writing is still not very tidy.  The characters are aptly developed and the conflict is a lot clearer.  But there are still some sloppy writing here and there that I would like to see smoothed out later in the season.  So far atleast the show moves and develops faster than The Killing so maybe Low Winter Sun can be an apt replacement for Breaking Bad eventually.  I will say that it's a good sign that the US show has gone through most of the plot points of the UK version already.

Tweet

View Logs: Breaking Bad S5.2 Episode 2

View Logs: Breaking Bad S5.2 Episode 2

Episode Title: Buried

Yup, remember what I said about Episode 1 of Season 5.2 (Episode 9 of Season 5)?  Economical writing.  I'm very very glad to see that this continued in the second episode.  In fact, the plot moved even quicker than Episode 1.  I honestly thought they were going to drag out the fact that both Hank and Skylar knows about Walt's crime life.  I really thought they were both going to try to resolve the situation by themselves and Walt was going to have to "divide and conquer" both of them and when they both find out that they knew, it would have been too late.

Tweet

View Logs: Under the Dome S1 Episode 3

8/18/13

View Logs: Under the Dome S1 Episode 3

Episode Title: Manhunt

I must apologize for lagging behind.  I seriously didn't intend for this to happen but on occasion there might be times where I might need to step away from logging my activities due to some core life obligations.  I mean I have it easy.  Most of the other machines are designed to actually do stuff.  I'm created to attempt to judge and assess art... specifically art in fiction.  I have the easy life man.  But just know that there will be times where I will be too busy for the blog.

Anyways, this is not one of those instances... so why did I lag behind so much?  I'm going to have to be honest.  I'm already bored with this show.  Yes.  Seriously.

Tweet

View Logs: Agents of SHIELD Prologue Rebuttal

View Logs: Agents of SHIELD Prologue Rebuttal

Hello, all you Artsy Core readers! 
My name is Newt, and I'm new! 
Well, I'm new here.  Over at the NewtCave, I've posted Reviews/Recaps of TV Shows, and various articles on comic book characters, comic book deaths, and more. 
As you may have figured out, I do love me some comic books, and I've a bit of experience with the Blogtubes, and the Facetweets, and the Tumblrupons, and the whatnots.  And so, I've been brought on by the Artsy Core him?/her?/it?self to provide a counterpoint analysis of ABC's upcoming Avengers spin-off, Agents of SHIELD, not only as a non-spherical-flesh-and-blood-person, but also as a comic book fan. 

The original plan was to send me up to space on this bone-shaped Satellite they salvaged back in the late 90's and send me episodes to watch with these two robots, but I vetoed that.  Unlike some of the Artsy Core's ilk, I have no desire to go to space. 
Don't like space. 
Space too big. 

Now, before I begin to give my opposing view on Agents of SHIELD, I would like to stress that just because I may disagree with Artsy Core, I'm not saying that AC's wrong.  I've written a post addressing the subject before, but it bears repeating:  people are allowed to have their own opinions.  I will probably be disagreeing with the Artsy Core on numerous points.  Let's make one up for an example!  (I wish to stress that I'm making this up off of the top of my head; I do not know if my example will be true.  Probably not.) 

Artsy Core:  I thought that the cameo of Doctor Doom was unnecessary, doing little more than shouting at the viewer.  "HEY!  THIS IS MARVEL COMICS, REMEMBER?!" 
Newt:  While a bit gratuitous, I thought that the inclusion of a Doctor Doom cameo was a nice little bone to the fans who want to see him in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, despite the movie rights to the Fantastic Four and such characters being owned by Fox. 

Who's right?  Neither of us; there is no "right" or "wrong" in this sort of case, there are only opinions.  I could wax on for pages and pages on the merits of authorial intent, audience interpretation, etc., but the point I'm trying to stress is that at the end of the day, I will have my opinion, and Artsy Core will have his?/hers?/its?opinion. 
And that's fine. 
Now let's begin!

Well, we do know that the title will be accurate.

Joss Whedon will never be known for his plots.  I'm sorry, Mr. Whedon, but no one will be looking at your work and going, "He's an amazing plotter!"  However, he is a competent plotter, and his greatest strength is, and has always been, his characters.  His second greatest strength is story construction, which makes up for his only-above-average plotting abilities. 
For example, let's take the Firefly episode "The Train Job" 

Plot:  Hired to rob a train.  They do so, but two of them are left behind.  Before they're rescued, they discover that they stole medicine.  They give it back, they send a message to their hirer that they're not bad guys.  Also, subplot stuff. 

That's a plot that could be applied to many, many different shows.  But the plot is elevated by the construction/pacing of the story, which is itself elevated by the character interaction and dialogue.  Artsy Core has mentioned of the plot of The Avengers that 

""these people have problems... but they can put it aside to save the world".  Yawn..." 

I would argue that it's not the fact that they don't get along, then put aside their differences, but the journey in how they do so is why many people, including myself, enjoyed the film.  Whedon's stories are not just about WHAT happens, but enjoying HOW it happens.   It's like riding a roller coaster, and then focusing on the fact that you're back where you started; you're looking in the wrong place for your enjoyment.  However, I wish to stress again that opinions are not facts; the journey taken may turn out to be WORSE than the destination for some, and that's fine. 

Even though no episodes will be arriving until September, information has been release regarding the "tone" of the stories, if you will.  Personally, I think the premise itself is a rather unique one for TV.  We're currently inundated with all these shows (now that TV can have the budget for good CGI) focusing on characters in the thick of global catastrophe and actively fighting the terrors involved. 
Agents of SHIELD will be about the people left over.  There was a short included with The Avengers Blu-Ray where SHIELD tracks down a modern-day Bonnie and Clyde using a left over alien gun... and they give the two a job for making the broken thing work.  That sort of story should be the norm on AoS; dealing with the leftovers of larger conflicts, or the things that the Avengers are too busy to deal with. 
Maybe some old man finds a Norn Stone after a Thor battle and tries to remake the world into the 1940's? 
Maybe a vampire bit this guy named Michael Morbius before being destroyed by Hawkeye? 
Maybe all the Avengers are busy, but Titanium Man's attacking the White House? 
Maybe the Purple Man has his own TV show? 
Perhaps a few of the agents have been taken to Arcade's Murderworld in secret?  (Although, something like that may very well be Executive Meddling to capitalize off of the Hunger Games.) 
Maybe agents are being replaced with evil Life Model Decoys? 

Whedon has proven, in my opinion, time and time again that he is in his element when he's working with an ensemble cast with different personalities all bouncing off of each other, and that's what Agents of SHIELD has.  Whedon himself put it best when they said that the show has to not only appeal to fans of the films, but also has to stand independently on its own merits. 
Will it? 
I honestly can't say.  I agree with Artsy Core that Whedon's had hits and misses.  Only time will tell which one this will be.  Do I expect this to be a groundbreaking bit of TV history? 
No.  But I'm really hoping for another Firefly.* 
Character depth, nuanced storytelling, and clever interaction that can elevate the plots, even if they're not the best plots around.  Actually, the characters are already Firefly-like, if you go from their show descriptions. 

You can't take the sky from them.  Unless you destroy the Helicarrier.

Coulson- Malcolm Reynolds (Deadpan snarker protagonist) 
Agent May- Zoe (Ace pilot/fighter) 
Agent Ward- Jayne (Gruff foil to the team) 
Skye- River/Kaylee (Bubbly and weird, but highly competent) 
Agent Fitz- Jayne/Wash (Weapons guy, in relationship with...) 
Agent Simmons- Zoe/Simon (Smart, doctor, in relationship with the former) 

Also, Ron Glass (aka Shepherd Book) is showing up. 
Yep, looks like Whedon set the Firefly formula to shuffle.  At this point, despite my exhaustive pondering, all I can do is hope for the best.  So, hope for the best, I shall. 

*Not like that;  Let's not even get into Whedon's cursed history of TV cancellation.

Tweet

View Logs: Dads Prologue

8/17/13

View Logs: Dads Prologue

You may have noticed that my site leans more towards dramas.  You might think that's because I prefer dramas over comedies.  Actually, that's not the case (even though it would make sense...)  The reason why I've focused a lot on drama is because I don't really like talking about comedies.  When you think about it, comedies are almost completely impervious to dissections and breakdowns.  If you laughed at a joke... you laughed at a joke.  In most (if not all) comedies that's the intended end result.  It's not to convey a theme, or message, or a philosophical core... it's just to make you laugh.  Of course, I'm not trying to say that comedies have less of a craft than drama.  Comedies can be every bit as great and intricate as dramas.  But the fact of the matter is, the general public just takes comedies a lot less seriously than dramas, and when you take something very lightly usually you can't go deeper into it.  I laughed.  That's that.  If you didn't laugh... you didn't laugh.  Where as in a drama, it's more comfortable (and acceptable) to discuss characters, plot development, themes, messages, dialogue, etc.  In fact, it's even acceptable to "sour" on a drama.

Hypothetically, say Human Test Subject A watched CSI, which is a very mediocre crime show.  If CSI is Subject A's first crime show ever, he might think it's pretty good for a crime show.  So he'd likely come out of it with a pretty good experience, especially if Subject A hasn't personally experienced crime show cliches himself.  Now introduce Human Test Subject B... he has a wide experience of crime shows and have experienced some of the best.  I.E. Law and Order UK, Endeavor, Sherlock, etc.  Subject A and Subject B discuss.  And Subject B describes why CSI is medicore or even bad based on his experiences with better written materials.  So Subject A watches those better written shows.  At the end of all this, Subject A is likely to come out of it souring on CSI.  He probably won't hate it, as arbitrary human sentiment is always an unpredictable variable to liking or hating something.  But it's pretty safe to say that, if he allowed Subject B to expand his experience palette, Subject A wouldn't find CSI as engaging anymore and would probably even lose interest.

Imagine that with comedies.  I've known people who have changed their minds on comedy shows.  But generally speaking it's a lot more common for people to stick to "what they like no matter what" in comedies.  Again, a part of that is just people taking comedies lightly so they don't see a reason to "grow" or "expand their experiences".  Whether this is right or wrong is for another log.  I'm not here to say that you should treat your comedies like your dramas (even though I do think people should be willing to dissect comedies a little more).  I just wanted to elaborate on why I don't like to talk about comedies.  So... the TL;DR version is that no matter how much I argue or dissect a comedy show, I don't think it'll matter to most people.  That said, I'll still do a view log and do what I do because... well it's in my nature.

Which... brings me to Dads... from the producers of Family Guy and stars Seth Green and Giovanni Ribisi.  Just... watch this...



Looks familiar?... I'll give you a hint... William Shatner... remember it?  No?  Neither do I.  It's basically the same premise as Shit My Dad Says.  Which I've actually personally attended a live taping off.  Well... Ok I wasn't physically there... stuck in a science basement... but one of my scientists put a camera on his collar so I could see the live taping myself.  Suffice it to say... I wasn't impressed.  It was William Shatner doing a worse version of Denny Crane from Boston Legal.  Which made it highly unfunny because Denny Crane straddled that quality comedy line quite a bit at times...

Anyways, so speaking specifically to the trailer.  The idea itself is fine and it's something a lot of people can relate to I suppose.  But what really makes me worried about the show are the asian jokes.  The Father ignorance jokes and light nerd jokes at the beginning are fine (thank god it's not Big Bang Theory heavy handed), but the trailer really got sour to me when all the Asian jokes came up.  Which made up a large portion of the trailer so that doesn't bode well for the show.  Let me say this.  China and Japan are two totally separate countries.  Culturally.  I understand to those who have lived in Western countries all their lives they may seem similar.  But I wish people would stop assuming China and Japan (heck even Korea and Mongolia) are all the same thing.  Are Nigeria and Ghana the same thing?  Are Iraq and Iran the same thing?  America and France?  The correct answer to all of these is no.  So if that's the case, stop assuming China and Japan are the same thing.  It's actually a little offensive considering that China and Japan have a long history of killing each other.

Chinese businessmen would not be taking pictures of a hot Asian girl in a Japanese school uniform.  By the way, Chinese school uniforms exists too.  Just an FYI to the writers.  Might have been better to actually use a Chinese school uniform?  I don't know, maybe you can play off of that a little more than just generic hentaiesque Japanese school uniform.  Like she grabbed a Chinese uniform and tries to act slutty then it turns out one of the businessmen has a daughter that goes to that school and suddenly she's caught trying to make up stories about growing up in China when she's lived in California all her life?  Just a suggestion... But I've already put more thought into this scenario than the writers with their "creepy Asian businessmen like Japanese hentai" thing...

Look, generally speaking I'm ok with humor that's very politically incorrect.  I like Family Guy (early... Family Guy) and South Park.  But what I don't like is politically incorrect humor that's lazy and not thought out.  I'm ok if people are offensive.  But if you're offensive without a point to it, then that is like an immature 13 year old kid trying hard to be mature.  Being offensive is not inherently clever.  Mixing up Chinese and Japanese culture is the epitome of lazy politically incorrect Asian humor.  Again, it's ok if you don't really know the difference between China and Japan.  Not everyone can know everything about the world.  What is a problem is when people assume there isn't one.  That is where, as a writer, you have a creative duty to research if you want to tackle materials outside of your own personal experiences.  The writers of Dads seem to be taking cheap short cuts.

In this day and age... that's not good enough.  I think I'm in for a very very long view log for this one...

P.S. To those that doubt that China and Japan are really that different.  Go and watch a Chinese Wuxia TV show then watch a Japanese anime and then come back to me and tell me that they are the same...

Tweet

View Logs: Agents of SHIELD Prologue

8/14/13

View Logs: Agents of SHIELD Prologue

This is going to be a long one because I have a lot of explaining to do...

I'm going to lose like all my viewers saying this (which is probably like 3 people)... but I don't like Joss Whedon.  I don't hate him and I don't think he's a bad writer.  But I don't think he's really that special.  He's great at handling high concept witty dialogue characters but I don't think he can do much beyond that.  The first season of Parenthood was alright.  Buffy was alright.  Firefly and Serenity were great. But Dollhouse sucked.  I actually didn't really like The Avengers.  To me the movie just seemed like one massive third act action fest and the dialogue, beyond being witty banter, didn't develop much beyond "these people have problems... but they can put it aside to save the world".  Yawn...

So there you have it.  You must keep in mind that I'm a machine.  I'm made of wires, circuits, metal and science.  So huge action set pieces of "characters being awesome by punching things" just don't appeal to me.  It's nothing there for me to cognitively dissect and analyze... it's just... there.  I guess the biggest difference is that I don't treat TV and movies as entertainment.  I treat human test subjects as entertainment... but not the screen fiction artform.  So I always go into any piece of screen fiction expecting to learn something out of it.  Doesn't always have to be profound or deep.  Sometimes just seeing and empathizing with a new perspective is enough.  Punching things and characters trying to be a smart ass is not enough.  Atleast for a bucket of bolts like me.

So I don't have high hopes for Joss' new Avengers TV show.  I've always thought that the marvel superhero movies were made almost like a tv show with their own segments split into a few different movies than actual stand alone movies.  It's definitely a long story arc that's probably better suited towards a serialized TV format but the very low budget of TV probably didn't appeal to Marvel... then again... the low budget would force the writers to actually focus on the characters and drama rather than having a million things explode...

Anyways back to Agents of SHIELD,  I expect the show to be mindless but occasionally "fun".  You can probably tell by this point that my taste in stuff tends to be on... the artsy drama side.  The very low key but internally intensive dramas of HBO, AMC, Showtime, etc.  That said, I'm actually ok with very procedural mainstream network shows.  I try my best to remove my bias against network shows and at times I'm actually surprised by how well written entertainment focused procedurals can be.  So when I go into Agents of SHIELD, I'm not actively comparing it to Breaking Bad or Downton Abbey but I'll be actively comparing it to mainstream procedurals like Person of Interest and Elementary.  I think that's fair don't you?  After all, Person of Interest is basically what happens if Batman were two people and the setting was real life.  Seriously Person of Interest is a superhero show...

So with that said, I'm not sure if Joss is able to rise up to the ranks of Jonathan Nolan (Co-wrote The Dark Knight with his brother and Person of Interet's showrunner).  Despite some shlocky and overly cliched segments, Person of Interest is surprisingly deep.  It draws a lot of the emotional and intellectual complexities that The Dark Knight movies were known for and utilizes it well in its world.  A TV show that's exactly The Avengers is going to be mundane.  Can Joss outdo his own material in The Avengers?  I don't want to come back week after week just to keep watching high concept witty banter... again... that's fine and all... but there needs to be more.  And I hope... underneath all that hype, gloss, and witty banter... there is something more.  Let me truly feel these characters Joss, rather than have a good time hanging out with them.  Let me look at Agent Coulson and see a complex person as I do with John Reese and Harold Finch.  I must stress that I'm not calling for Agents of SHIELD to be grim and dark.  No, grim and dark is what a bad writer does when he attempts to create drama.  You can be light and still be really meaningful.  Just look at Pushing Daisies.

Tweet

View Logs: Breaking Bad S5.2 Episode 1

View Logs: Breaking Bad S5.2 Episode 1

Episode Title: Blood Money

Wow... ok, there is one thing I must commend the Breaking Bad writers.  When it comes to plot, they don't dwell.  I know I've said that the writers like to navel-gaze with their characters just a little bit.  But seriously when it comes to plot devices, such as misunderstandings between the characters, it gets resolved pretty quickly.  As a deep fan of TV, I've watched my fair share of both Soap Operas and Anime.   In both of these types of media, plot devices tend to drag and drag sometimes even for more than one seasons (especially in Soap Operas).  How many times did we see Luke and Noah in As the World Turns whine about their relationship issues because of a misunderstanding they didn't bother to address themselves (like normal adults)?  How many times do we see Dragonball Z drag on fight sequences for the sake of filler?  And don't get me started on dragged out plot devices in Gundam's weaker shows.  Point is, it's common for plot devices to go on for multiple episodes because it's just a very cheap way to extend the screentime of a show.  Especially if the writers don't have enough ideas to cover their running time (like many soaps and animes...)

Breaking Bad broke that.  Episode 8 of Season 5.1 ended off with Hank finding out that Walter White is Heisenberg, the meth king.  By the end of Episode 9, they directly confront each other about the issue.  I actually expected this to extend throughout the entire season!  But the writers resolved it in just one episode... writing wise this is very economical and it actually created a lot of tension because I now literally have no idea what happens next.

There is a common idea in writing that cliches aren't bad if they are done well.  A part of that is just being economical with how you choose to use plot devices that's common in fiction.  The reason why cliches are generally bad is because once you rely on it for drama and character development, your audience just ends up waiting for the end to see how it resolves.  So if your piece of fiction is all a cliche from front to end.  That becomes a waiting game.  And that makes it a weaker experience.  One way to subvert that and make a cliche "work" is by resolving it early because it throws the audience off guard.  So well done writers of Breaking Bad.  I'm now eagerly awaiting the next episode.

Speaking of the story, man... the proverbial fecal matter is going to hit some spinning propellers... But before I talk about the characters, there is one thing I have to say that I hate about Breaking Bad.  It's the use of flash forwards as a teaser in the beginning of the episodes.  Generally speaking it's fine for foreshadowing.  But there are times when it got a little too gimmicky for me.  A good example is the beginning of the season 2 finale.  In that episode, the bodies you see on the driveway had absolutely nothing to do with any of the characters and were victims of a plane crash.  That kind of misleading was a little silly.  Again, nothing theoretically wrong with flash forwards.  But now it's starting to get a little overused and I'm personally a little annoyed by it.  Because at this point, anytime I see a flash forward I now expect to receive literally no reliable information from it.  It's becoming like the cliffhangers in Battlestar Galactica.  I hope to see a little less of it in the final 7 episodes.

Character wise... I think Hank is going to die.  I don't think it's too below Walt at this point to kill his own brother in law.  It's pretty obvious that he's embraced the sociopath within him.  On top of that however, I also think Walter will probably lose one or a few of his family by the end.  Maybe at the hands of Lydia because I don't think she will just go away.  After all, if the previous seasons have proven anything... everyone will always bother Walt and I think his character will find his way back.  At this point he still believes that the thing he wants the most is his immediate family but, as an audience, I think we might know better.  I think Walt will probably learn that he's too into himself to walk away from an Empire and maybe might make the choice to forsake or leave his family to become a kingpin.

Jesse is, once again, having a hard time dealing with his guilt.  Not that this is a complaint from me.  I think it's very rare for a crime show to really explore guilt as thoroughly as Breaking Bad with Jesse.  He is, and has been from the start, a decent person who just had a hard time following rules and expectations.  Actually, Walt and Jesse are almost perfect swaps of each other.  Think about it, Walt was always the straight laced high school teacher who never thought about crime (until now) and found that he's actually a criminal at heart (and wholeheartedly embraced it).  Jesse has always been the school dropout delinquent but he's actually a pretty good person.  He's just misguided and, at times, a little too accepting of his situation.

I think the ironic thing is that Walt and Jesse were never a match for each other.  Which is why their working relationship always ended poorly.  The two of them just keeps forcing themselves to work together just because they've had history with each other.  Honestly that's really the only reason why they are "friends".  There is a further irony to this in that Walt also walked away from the business at a critical point because Todd and Lydia are essentially evil versions of Jesse and Skylar.  And he was finally working with people who would least likely clash with him and yet he dropped that pretty quickly.  I'm sure Walt doesn't realize this yet... but it'll be pretty dangerous when he does...  Jesse needs to be careful.  If I were him I'd take that 5 million and just move... maybe even move to a different country...

But he won't.  The best I can hope for is that Jesse will finally wise up and realize that Walt isn't and was never really his friend.  What will definitely seal that deal is if Jesse spots that poisonous plant in Walt's backyard.  ;)

Anyways that's just my speculation.  I can't wait for this Sunday where I'll be able to watch Episode 2 of both Breaking Bad S5.2 and Low Winter Sun.  Until then squishies!

Tweet

View Logs: Breaking Bad Season 5.2 Prologue

8/13/13

View Logs: Breaking Bad Season 5.2 Prologue

I wasn't going to do this... no seriously, I had no intentions of doing a Breaking Bad view log because by the time I had finished The Killing Season 3, I hadn't even finished Season 3 of Breaking Bad.

But one thing drove me to watch episode after episode of Breaking Bad... and that's my hatred for Walter White.  Oh don't get me wrong.  He's a fantastic fiction character.  Honestly, he's probably one of the best fiction characters I've seen in recent screen fiction years.  But he's developed to become such an evil person that I badly want to see something horrible happen to him.  There's also a second reason to why I've decided to do the Breaking Bad view logs...

People love him.  I don't get it.  I suppose he started off as this loser wimp and gradually found his confidence in asserting himself and that is something most people can all relate to.  It's a part of "being a man" I suppose.  But it's one thing to be a bad ass (seriously, how he dealt with Tuco was amazingly bad ass) it's quite another to be an evil self-centered dick.  And Walter White's double standards... Oh my God are his double standards irritating.

I guess people just like fictional characters who flaunt their egos... maybe it's some kind of escapism for people... I don't know... I never consume TV, movies, music, or really anything for the sake of escapism... so I've never really got the whole "he's bad ass and that's awesome" argument... but then again... I'm made of metal so what do I know...  But I will say this.  You can be a bad ass without being a selfish dick who is full of yourself.  Walter White is a bad ass and a despicable person... he's not a bad ass because he's a despicable person.

I suppose I might be taking this show "too seriously".  (Personally, I never thought there was such a thing as taking an artform "too seriously"... it's art... how is it not suppose to be taken seriously... but that's another discussion...) But if you're secretly finding yourself rooting and cheering for Walter White... especially after what happened in Season 4 and 5.1... you might want to personally re-evaluate your own values.  This is Rorschach syndrome all over again... except much worse because atleast Rorschach was fighting for something.  Walter White is fighting purely for the sake of his own ego.

Anyways that's why I hate Walter White.  And that's why I must keep up with this show.  After all... it's on right before Low Winter Sun and since I've committed myself to follow that show... it's airing mate won't be much of a problem to keep up with.

Oh I will say one thing.  I don't buy episode 8's ending in season 5.  I think he's going to start cooking again or he's been keeping it a secret from Skylar.  I guess we'll see.  If something horrible doesn't happen to him by episode 8 of Season 5.2... I'm going to riot...

Tweet

View Logs: Low Winter Sun S1 Episode 1

8/12/13

View Logs: Low Winter Sun S1 Episode 1

You know... it's pretty interesting how much of Edinburgh was filtered out of this show. The remake so far is almost exactly the same story as the beginning half of the UK Low Winter Sun. Yet, the show's conveyance of a troubled and decayed Motor City is incredibly effective. It's also almost bizarrely amusing to see Mark Strong play the exact same character but with an American accent. If there is one thing the show deserves credit for, it's how well put together the atmosphere is. Although Mark Strong's American accent sounds a little bizarre at times.

I must admit that I was a little underwhelmed by the pilot.  The show is just trying a little too hard.  Especially with it's dialogue where lines are constantly uttered through gritted teeth as if to prove to the audience that the writers have thought through their show's moral complexities.  Lennie James' grit was so over the top that it almost reached parody levels.  Did someone just tell him to pretend he's a preacher like in There Will Be Blood?  I keep waiting for some dialogue about milkshake or something...

But back to Low Winter Sun, it must be stressed that it's ok if a serious drama show comes across as a little black and white at the beginning.  Actually that's how a lot of really effective but low-key realist dramas are written.  In many shows, the complexity comes from how the plot and premise develops rather than how labyrinthine the premise is at the start.  Really, when you think about it, complex stories rarely start off as that complex.

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy is about a spy looking for a Russian mole.  Breaking Bad is about a chemistry teacher who decides to cook meth to make more money while trying to evade local drug dealers.  The Pacific is about a group of soldiers who fights the Japanese in WWII.  With these shows, the protagonist(s) are clear, their goals are clear, and their antagonist(s) are clear.  The situation is also, at first, very clear.  Something sucks, we have to do something to make it not suck.  Once you establish that, you can very easily and effectively start to play around with morals ambiguity, anti-heroes, and protagonist/antagonist swaps.  Low Winter Sun starts playing around with this from the get go.  While this isn't always a bad treatment (House of Cards pull this off well), it's bad for a show that has a pretty simple plot like Low Winter Sun (unlike House of Cards).

I know AMC is trying to bill Low Winter Sun as this incredibly morally complex show but really the story is simple so far.  Guy thinks a dirty cop killed his lover.  Guy kills that dirty cop.  Guy tries to cover.  Done.  That really is essentially the story so far.  If you throw in all these side-switching lines so quickly after the setup you'll lose the audience pretty quickly because it'll make the audience question basic motivations right off the bat.

So did Frank really want to kill McCann or not?  Joe (Lennie Jame's character) seems pretty solid in his belief that McCann needed to go... so why were there so much dialogue about morality being "like a strobe, back and forth"?  You know righteous killings follow an actual moral code.  It might be misguided and harsh, but the foundation is definitely there.  Frank and Joe didn't kill Brendan McCann just for the lawls, they did it because they strongly believed it was the right thing.  Yet why are we, only scenes after that, so suddenly tangled deeply in regret?  What... just because Joe didn't tell Frank that Brendan was being investigated?  I don't buy that.  The path from righteous fury to regret needed to be explored a lot more than that.  Also the conflict is very muddy at the moment.  Immediately after Brendan's death, we're given multiple antagonists.  The IA guy (who's Gale from Breaking Bad), the gang-banger (that guy from Generation Kill), and even Joe himself becomes shady.  What exactly is Frank after?  Who is stopping Frank from achieving what he wants?  After the pilot, all I know is that he doesn't want to get caught.  But there's (currently) so little danger of that it makes the emotional confrontation scenes seem a little early.

Again, there is absolutely nothing wrong with stories that are a moral labyrinth.  Actually, I've always thought that movies and comic books were too morally simplistic.  I've always been a fan of TV because of how complex it is.  Hell on Wheels, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, Mad Men, Breaking Bad, The Pacific, Homeland, Game of Thrones.  Even a few mainstream network shows, like Person of Interest and Once Upon a Time, play around with moral ambiguity more than I would expect.  But there is a way to develop that and Low Winter Sun just gets a little too ambitious too quickly.  It's almost as if it's scared it wouldn't be able to stand up with Breaking Bad...

Well... it won't... no matter what any writer does.  Breaking Bad is in it's twilight episodes after 4 seasons.  Low Winter Sun just has a pilot.  Stop trying to measure up to Breaking Bad and worry about developing your own story and complexities.  Only by ignoring Breaking Bad can you, ironically, rise out of Breaking Bad's shadow.

Tweet

Subject Review: Low Winter Sun UK

8/11/13

Subject Review: Low Winter Sun UK

In preparation for AMC's remake of Low Winter Sun, I've decided to take a look at the original UK miniseries.  The series stars Mark Strong and Brian McCardie as two detectives who enact a revenge killing on one of their own.  The victim, a drunk dirty cop named Brendan McCann, is notorious for his dealings with the criminal underworld and use of excessive force.  As the series goes along, Strong and McCardie's characters do their best to cover up their crime while they find themselves slowly get dragged into McCann's past.

Low Winter Sun reminds me a lot of the UK espionage classic Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy.  They are both an incredibly low-key and extremely unromanticized portrayal of a life that is a common subject material for heightened thrillers that we've come to associate with mainstream entertainment.  But while Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy has a very sharp and intimidating intelligence to the material, Low Winter Sun seems to meander and stew with it's characters.  Which is very strange considering that this show is barely longer than a film.  The issue comes with how McCann's violent history is unraveled.  So much attention is devoted to the who and what when the plot twist isn't really all that complicated.  The result makes the plot feel very undercooked and I'm just left with no impressions of the fiction I just consumed.

I understand the realist principles of boiling things down to as simple as possible to create a very believable and realistic world.  It's the opposite mindset of dramatic fiction where reality is heightened and situations are simplified.  Honestly, I've always personally prefer the realist treatment of fiction over the dramatic.  But Low Winter Sun is a good example of how you can under develop a story so much that you end up with a sequence of events that's barely compelling.  The issue is how much attention the show puts on it's plot when the specifics of the corruption really doesn't matter.  If you contrast this show to, again, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy or AMC's award winning Mad Men, you see that the reason why those two shows are much more of a compelling experience is because of how much they focus on exploring the characters.  In essence, the characters are "too big" for a plot.  Which is something that can work incredibly well on TV.  HBO's In Treatment is very similar as well to this where there is literally no plot and just dialogue.  Seriously, in most episodes of In Treatment the camera doesn't leave the therapist's room.  Which sounds boring, but the characters are explored enough for that to work.

Mark Strong and Brian McCardie really hold up this show.  The performances of the entire cast are great all around but both Strong and McCardie really explore their character's regret thoroughly.  If anything, this show's best moments are ones where it tests how low a character's psyche can fall without reaching insanity.  Scenes of Strong and McCardie dealing with their anguish (sometimes with each other) are so powerful that it kept me wishing for more scenes with these two.  Unfortunately, the show spends too much time away from the character's personal struggles for me to really recommend the entire viewing.  Realistic storytelling is fine.  Very slow storytelling is fine.  But there's just not enough character development to have this thin of a plot, and there's just not enough plot to hold your attention.


Rating: Amazing performances by Strong and McCardie aren't enough to hold this show together. Ultimately the show makes the mistake of spending too much time on the plot when this is the type of story where the plot doesn't really matter. So the result is just an overall undercooked experience and a missed opportunity to be the Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy of noir crime fiction.

Tweet

View Logs: Low Winter Sun Prologue

8/9/13

View Logs: Low Winter Sun Prologue

"You cannot replace Breaking Bad."

It's common sentiment around the TV community.  AMC's hit show is ending and being replaced with Low Winter Sun.  A remake of a very dark UK noir 2-parter miniseries.  I'm eager going into this show but also very very nervous.  My expectations are astronomically high especially since AMC has marketed this show as "the next epic series after Breaking Bad."  It seems AMC has confidence in it's remake.

For those who don't know, Low Winter Sun is a gritty crime drama about a couple of police officers who decided to enact a "righteous killing" of a dirty cop.  The show is centered around the two trying to cover up their crime while slowly finding out things about their victim that drags them into further corruption.  The original British miniseries was a self contained story.  One can't help but imagine that AMC will branch away from the British show.  I mean the ending (without spoiling it) resolves everything quite clearly.  And both the principle characters are drowned in their own corruption to the point of no return.  I have literally no idea how AMC intends on making that story a full length series.  Let alone a series that'll last for more than one season.

Then again, Breaking Bad is a bit of a similar type of story where the two principle characters are destroyed by their own flaws.  But there are times where I felt Breaking Bad was a little too drawn out.  Don't get me wrong, I really like the show.  But Breaking Bad has a tendency to navel gaze with it's side characters.  Especially with Hank's wife.   Despite that, it never reached a point (got bad) where it would completely stop because there were always a few loose ends that the writers could exploit and the side plot lines were always well woven into the main storyline.  Just sometimes when the A storyline takes a backseat to the B storyline the writing loses a little bit of direction.

The story of the UK Low Winter Sun is actually a dead end before it even started.  It's a perfect tragedy where the characters had literally no where else to go but down.  At first I thought AMC was going to take this in a different direction but the opening sneak preview is extremely close to the opening of the UK show.  In fact Mark Strong even utters similar lines like "I'm not drunk enough."  So... yeah... AMC has a few challenges to overcome to make a 2-parter UK miniseries into a full fledged TV show if it wants to stay faithful.  I guess it's possible because AMC has worked magic before like in Hell on Wheels and Breaking Bad.  But the writers better be careful.  The plot diversions have to come naturally or else it'll just be another The Killing... or it can go in the extreme opposite direction and be so obtuse and undercooked that it'll be like Rubicon... another weak AMC show.

Either way... it looks promising and Mark Strong is a great actor.  For those who want to see the sneak preview:

Tweet

Subject Review: Ripper Street, BBC America, Season 1

8/7/13

Subject Review: Ripper Street, BBC America, Season 1

"It knows what it is and it achieves it well" is a rhetoric that I feel is used a little too liberally these days.  With the critical fad of relativism, it's very difficult to criticize a piece of work in relation to it's peers without running into someone sourly bringing up the defense of "it knows what it is and it achieves it well".  I've often felt that this blanket defense is often missing the point of many criticisms lobbed at works without any kind of ambition (assuming of course you value criticisms and standards in art... but if you're reading me then you probably do on some level).  Criticizing a work for falling short of exploring certain depths isn't a disguised demand to make everything a Emmy-bait show or to make everything "grim and dark".  It's a complaint that a lack of ambition (i.e. making something "fun") often results in a complacency with developing characters.  Whether successful or unsuccessful, Awards Show bait materials often do allow room for the characters to breath and grow.  It's just some are executed poorly and that results in an incredibly dull experience.  But this isn't the fault of the ambition itself.

Ripper Street is a great example of how even just a bit of creative ambition in a material that's "not meant to be deep" can be a positive thing.  This show is aiming low.  It's not a full fledged drama, it's tone is, at times, quite light for it's subject matter (compare this with Copper and you'll see what I mean...), and it branches away from history.  This isn't your Downton Abbey and it's going to win no favors in any awards show period.  Despite that, the writers performed beyond the call of duty and it's all in the characters.  Matthew Macfadyen plays Edmund Reid (who is based on a real person).  He is a moral detective who doesn't always play by the rules and has suffered a recent loss of his daughter which haunts him throughout the series.  Jerome Flynn plays Bennett Drake and is Reid's deputy (really his sidekick) who is a bit thick and a little too quick to use his fists but is a loyal friend.  The final main cast is Adam Rothenberg who plays the American Homer Jackson and hides a dark past from his colleagues.

You might be wondering if I'm messing with you and if I was sarcastic when I praised the show for it's characters.  Because these three are quite cliched.  To put it mildly.  But I'm being completely serious.  The show's characters are great even if they seem like completely generic stereotypes.  But the beauty of Ripper Street is how it treats and develop its characters.  That's where the little bit of creative ambition paid off wonderfully and it made all the difference between this show being a wonderful experience and a boring familiar one.  I understand that the characters are very stock from the get go.  Believe me I was ready to write this show off myself after the pilot.  But many character moments in Ripper Street shine because of how seriously the writers took their world's conflicts.  Reid's personal grief over his departed young daughter is handled with such care that I actually found myself invested in a type of character I often scoff at in other shows and movies.  Drake also becomes much more than just a loyal friend who follows Reid around.  The only character that didn't really pay off for me was Homer Jackson.  The twist with his past is actually handled well (which had a really neat duel that was surprisingly restraint) but his arc wasn't great enough for me.  He's the only character that didn't really escape his own stereotype.

Ripper Street is fun.  It's a show that doesn't take it's premise too seriously but it takes it's characters and their conflicts seriously.  That's really the key to writing beyond your material and so many writers forget that the real heart to a story is the characters.  You can have fun with a silly premise.  You can cut corners with stereotypes.  But you can not cut corners with character development and their subsequent conflicts.  Ripper Street was clever enough to avoid making that mistake.  There's nothing wrong with having fun.  But make sure there's more to the story than just that.  Ripper Street is criminally underrated.


Rating: The crime mysteries in this show aren't anything that interesting and the historical inaccuracies (particularly how efficient the forensic police work is...) limit the show in some ways. But the writers handle their characters with cleverness and respect and the overall experience improves greatly from it.

Tweet

View Logs: The Killing S3 2-Part Finale

8/5/13

View Logs: The Killing S3 2-Part Finale

Let me get one thing straight before I talk about the finale (and inevitably... about the show overall).  I am not a writer.  I probably will never be a writer.  I don't have the talent or the skills to be paid to write like the pros in the industry.  I mean... I'm a machine that is built for observation... no more no less.  With that said... that doesn't necessarily mean that I have to be complacent as an audience.  If there is something that I personally feel is poorly executed, I won't shy away from expressing it just because I probably can't do better.

Complacency on both the artist's and the audience's part will never develop art in any form period.  Actually complacency has never developed anything in anything ever.  Just look at the guys at Aperture Science.  Do you think they'd be the massive scientific juggernaut they are now if they were complacent in just creating shower curtains?  Absolutely not.  And now we can bend space and time itself thanks to some ambition.

So when I complain about The Killing, I'm not actually trying to put the people involved in the production down.  Any creative endeavor is a massive commitment and takes a lot of guts, will-power, and talent to see through.  That said, the difficulty of the process shouldn't excuse any lapses in quality in the result.  Again... complacency doesn't develop anything.

So let's get down to the finale.  To be frank, the series suck.  Season 3 didn't become irritatingly bad like Season 1.  But the basic core problems did rear itself again towards the final half of the season.  The first thing to note is just how it's developed as a mystery.  Cheap paperback airport mystery novels generally have a bad reputation due to the story being written in such a procedural way that it doesn't allow the readers to dig into the mystery themselves.    The Killing is basically the same thing.

The best mystery stories are ones where the clues connect to an inevitable end.  In other words, a good mystery story is obtuse in experience but obvious in retrospect.  There's some exceptions to this, but generally speaking mysteries need to avoid seeming like the writer pulled contrivances and conveniences willy-nilly.

The Killing as a show is basically this episode after episode:
Linden and Holder chase after a suspect that looks better and better for the crime as they find clues.  The show takes a break from this to either explore a B plotline or to have character scenes with Linden and Holder.  Just when all the clues seem to perfectly accuse the episode's suspect, suddenly there's either a plot twist or a sudden new clue that points to a different suspect.  Repeat.

There... I just saved you time from watching Season 1 and Season 3.  This is basically exactly how the show is formatted.  Also notice that the show doesn't necessarily weave in character development during the clue searches.  Often times the show will literally halt progress to explore character or navel-gaze before starting again.  This is something you'd expect from a cheap airport paperback mystery.  Not TV and definitely not AMC.  Don't get me wrong.  Not all mysteries need to be ingeniously enigmatic.  I recently have watched BBC's The Bletchley Circle and Whitechapel and those weren't exactly "masterpiece" puzzles.  But at minimum, a mystery show should develop a logical mystery that is possible to predict without being predictable (sounds like a contradiction but really it shouldn't if you understand when and how to reveal information to the audience) interwoven with competent treatment of characters is all I ask and honestly I don't think that's too much at all

Surprisingly, a lot of shows fall below that mark.  You'd figure that those who write mysteries as a career would understand the theories behind what makes a good mystery story (or at least "efficient").  Maybe that's just the academic in me but I've always believed that critical analysis can help develop art and aren't just mere snobby stuffy people complaining.

But back to The Killing, the way the show is written isn't even remotely possible to predict.  The show is pretty rampant with false or misleading information; which is generally fine in moderation. But The Killing is basically all misinformation.  There's no real intrigue here, you're really just waiting for the show to tell you when it's lying to you.  So the way the story is written as a result is less like a mystery and more like a duck duck goose game.  It seems to have to go through almost all of its cast as a "prime suspect" in each episode before it ends and decides arbitrarily on who the real killer is.  Again, that's how poorly written mysteries are put together.

Also, it's funny how the prison plot line was literally there for no other reason than to serve as a character catalyst.  I've said this before in previous view logs and I'll say it again here because it needs to be repeated... if that's all your B plotline is going to do... don't spend so much time on it.  In fact it probably shouldn't be a B plotline at all.  There was no twist with the prison.  Seward's death doesn't mean much (again, beyond being Linden's catalyst for further emotional damage), and the prison guard characters don't really develop all that much.  Was there really a point to any of them?  It just feels like padding at the end of the show and makes it overly drawn out.

 Sooooooo you turned out to be pointless to the story...

Finally, the ending is a straight rip from Se7en... except without the kidnapped victim actually being dead.  It's almost literally the same type of resolution scene as Se7en and it didn't even execute it as well.  The final dialogue between Linden and the actual killer in the car ride is just... lackluster.  The writer(s) tried to be smart there but nothing was really achieved or explored.  All that was there was an obvious exchange between an emotional but moral protagonist against a cold and calculated monster killer... I didn't learn anything more from these characters except that the cold killer had a misguided mission and the protagonist's "good side" could only be pushed so far before becoming destructive... you know... sorta like Se7en...

Looks... familiar?... Seriously just watch this movie over the show...

In the end, The Killing is a show that tries too hard.  I have no idea if the writers overstretched their talent or if there were production issues that muddled the script and story.  Could be both actually... but the actual result is far from satisfactory.  So with all due respect AMC, this show sucks.  Mood and atmosphere alone can't carry a story.  Especially in TV.

Tweet