Television Anyone recommend me any TV Shows?

jm99

New Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2011
Messages
4,667
Also, Mr robot is an incredible and very underrated TV show
 

calodo2003

Flaming Full Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
41,578
Location
Florida
Finally found Mr. Inbetween on Hulu & cannot put it down. Blew through the first season (sucks that there were only six episodes) & am diving headlong into the second. Thankfully the second & third seasons are both much longer.
 

Sparky Rhiwabon

New Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2013
Messages
16,946
Finally found Mr. Inbetween on Hulu & cannot put it down. Blew through the first season (sucks that there were only six episodes) & am diving headlong into the second. Thankfully the second & third seasons are both much longer.
Great show
 

Nialler

Alex's Dad
Joined
Aug 19, 2003
Messages
10,436
Location
Nyler
Finally found Mr. Inbetween on Hulu & cannot put it down. Blew through the first season (sucks that there were only six episodes) & am diving headlong into the second. Thankfully the second & third seasons are both much longer.
It's superb, I wonder has Wibble seen it yet?
 

Massive Spanner

Give Mason Mount a chance!
Joined
Jul 2, 2014
Messages
27,893
Location
Tool shed
Also, Mr robot is an incredible and very underrated TV show
It’s a weird one because it cleaned up the Emmys in season one, was really popular, and has always gotten amazing critic reviews, but just sorted faded into the background a bit. I don’t know why, it’s a top 20 tv show for me.
 

Cheimoon

Made of cheese
Scout
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Messages
14,328
Location
Canada
Supports
no-one in particular
@Cheimoon This article in NY Times today focuses on shows being “faithful” to the source material (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/01/arts/television/movie-tv-book-adaptations.html) which can be applied to true stories.

In the end, adaptation isn’t a marriage. At best, it’s an open relationship. Faithfulness is a great quality in real life, but when it comes to fiction, betrayal inevitably makes a better story.
Sorry, I had missed this. I don't have access to the article, but certainly for any work of fiction, I couldn't care less about faithfulness. Each narrative art form (book, movie, series, album, etc.) has its own framework (with its own set of things that work well and less well in that context) and intentions (from the writer, director, etc.), and I don't think there is any need to limit those by a need to be faithful to whatever fictional work of art provided the inspiration. I do think it's good to be honest about that, and say that e.g. a movie that strays from the 'original' book is 'inspired by' rather than 'based on', and maybe even change the title; but anyway.

I mean, I get that fans of books are disappointed when a movie/series doesn't represent their favorite bits the way they would have liked, and I feel the same way myself sometimes. And as much as that's even entirely justified, I don't think the screenwriter/director actually have an obligation to stay within those boundaries. It's their art, their decision (and their risk in commercial terms - unfortunately).

My point in the other thread was really more about art that represents actual historical events and explicitly says that it does. In that case, I think there might be more of an obligation to reliably represent key events, character traits, and that sort of thing, since e.g. movies can have a huge impact on the public consciousness, and a misrepresentation can become the public 'truth'. (As you pointed out.) I'm really not sure where that starts/ends though - I can just tell when I've watched a movie, read about the historical events afterwards, and then feel let down.
 
Last edited:

Wing Attack Plan R

Full Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2019
Messages
10,071
Location
El Pueblo de la Reyna de los Angeles
Sorry, I had missed this. I don't have access to the article, but certainly for any work of fiction, I couldn't care less about faithfulness. Each narrative art form (book, movie, series, album, etc.) has its own framework (which it's own set of things that work well and less well in that context) and intentions (from the writer, director, etc.), and I don't think there is any need to limit those by a need to be faithful to whatever fictional work of art provided the inspiration. I do think it's good to be honest about that, and say that e.g. a movie that strays from the 'original' book is 'inspired by' rather than 'based on', and maybe even change the title; but anyway.

I mean, I get that fans of books are disappointed when a movie/series doesn't represent their favorite bits the way they would have liked, and I feel the same way myself sometimes. And as much as that's even entirely justified, I don't think the screenwriter/director actually have an obligation to stay within those boundaries. It's their art, their decision (and their risk in commercial terms - unfortunately).

My point in the other thread was really more about art that represents actual historical events and explicitly says that it does. In that case, I think there might be more of an obligation to reliably represent key events, character traits, and that sort of thing, since e.g. movies can have a huge impact on the public consciousness, and a misrepresentation can become the public 'truth'. (As you pointed out.) I'm really not sure where that starts/ends though - I can just tell when I've watched a movie, read about the historical events afterwards, and then feel let down.
All true, and good points. I think shows hit the rocks when they take the source material - real life, books, pre-existing film - and change it to meet some modern agenda or sensibility. Case in point: In the first Mission: Impossible movie, they turn the entire concept of the Impossible Missions team on its head by
having the hero of the TV series secretly be a villain. It would be like if a new James Bond movie comes out and Bond has secretly been in Bloveld's pocked the whole time.
.

In general I can live without remakes, I agree that drama is better than 'just the facts, ma'am', but in terms of historical films (Spotlight, Zero Dark Thirty, In the Name of the Father, et al.) that could have a deleterious effect on viewers who will never bother finding the source material, they do need to stick to the facts. Feeling let down is only the half of it, I'm more worried when movies parrot pure propaganda (like the lies about CIA torture programs). I mean, they have to create all the dialogue in those movies, but a viewer should be able to know that the main plot points of the film line up with reality.
 

Cheimoon

Made of cheese
Scout
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Messages
14,328
Location
Canada
Supports
no-one in particular
All true, and good points. I think shows hit the rocks when they take the source material - real life, books, pre-existing film - and change it to meet some modern agenda or sensibility. Case in point: In the first Mission: Impossible movie, they turn the entire concept of the Impossible Missions team on its head by
having the hero of the TV series secretly be a villain. It would be like if a new James Bond movie comes out and Bond has secretly been in Bloveld's pocked the whole time.
.

In general I can live without remakes, I agree that drama is better than 'just the facts, ma'am', but in terms of historical films (Spotlight, Zero Dark Thirty, In the Name of the Father, et al.) that could have a deleterious effect on viewers who will never bother finding the source material, they do need to stick to the facts. Feeling let down is only the half of it, I'm more worried when movies parrot pure propaganda (like the lies about CIA torture programs). I mean, they have to create all the dialogue in those movies, but a viewer should be able to know that the main plot points of the film line up with reality.
Yeah totally agree!

And that is for sharing access to that NYT article btw, it's very good!
 

Wibble

In Gadus Speramus
Staff
Joined
Jun 15, 2000
Messages
88,603
Location
Centreback
It's pretty damn solid. Half hour episodes make for easy binging. It's the product of an Aussie actor / director camed Scott Ryan, he is the lead anti-hero & gives a well done performance.
Sounds like my sort of thing :)
 

njred

HALA MADRID!
Joined
Nov 3, 2001
Messages
7,172
Supports
Liverpool
It's pretty damn solid. Half hour episodes make for easy binging. It's the product of an Aussie actor / director camed Scott Ryan, he is the lead anti-hero & gives a well done performance.
Holy crap just watched the trailer. That looks great
 

Wibble

In Gadus Speramus
Staff
Joined
Jun 15, 2000
Messages
88,603
Location
Centreback
Holy crap just watched the trailer. That looks great
It is very good indeed. And it builds throughout the 3 series and turns out to have far more depth than S1 suggests. And you should hate Ray but you don't. The S3 finale is seriously good TV.

A bonus for me is it is largely filmed in the Inner West of Sydney so I recognise many of the locations.
 
Last edited:

Ahmer Baig

Full Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2017
Messages
3,042
If anyone is into Vikings then Vinland Saga is great manga. Still on season 1 and loving it.
 

calodo2003

Flaming Full Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
41,578
Location
Florida
I enjoyed it. Its not fantastic, but i love Woddy Harrelson
Yeah, it was good enough to warrant continuing, but there's just something about it that seems off. Maybe the comedic slant it adopts at times?

I might be comparing it too harshly wagsinst Gaslit which I loved.
 

Spoony

The People's President
Joined
Oct 27, 2001
Messages
63,107
Location
eerF Palestine.
Only seen the first episode of Blue Light's, and yeah I agree it's a good'en. Not exactly light viewing is it? And The Diplomat is dross.
 

calodo2003

Flaming Full Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
41,578
Location
Florida
I was surprised to discover the actor who played his brother did not have a disability himself. Phenomenal performance.
In the same vein, Eddie Marsan depicting a Parkinson's struck ex-boxer was spectacular as well.

Some viewers of both shows were convinced both brothers were actually suffering from their depicted maladies. I bet that both disease charities were pleased with the respectful performances & probably received a bump in donations as well.
 

Salt Bailly

Auburn, not Ginger.
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
9,416
Location
Valinor
In the same vein, Eddie Marsan depicting a Parkinson's struck ex-boxer was spectacular as well.

Some viewers of both shows were convinced both brothers were actually suffering from their depicted maladies. I bet that both disease charities were pleased with the respectful performances & probably received a bump in donations as well.
Ray Donovan? Still on my list. He's always been a stellar character actor.
 

calodo2003

Flaming Full Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
41,578
Location
Florida
Ray Donovan? Still on my list. He's always been a stellar character actor.
Completely forgot to reference Ray Donovan in the spoiler. You’ll immediately see the connection.

Watch all the seasons of RD, avoid the movie like the plague.