Entry tags:
Battlestar Galactica 3x17 Maelstrom and 3x18 The Son Also Rises
I get why Maelstrom was more interesting than a lot of episodes prior (because we all love Kara and her issues) but I maintain that it is a character episode. There is no addition to the existing body of knowledge that would progress the show. Yes, we knew Kara was abused as a child, we knew she had issues with her mother, we knew she had a connection with the temple symbol and we knew Leoben spouted a lot of mystical stuff at her.
What’s new? Nothing. Her death didn’t reveal anything about her, the Cylon, the Fleet or their future and as such I resent having a lot of emotional triggers thrust at me without any payoff.
The Son Also Rises was a bit more interesting. It’s nice to see Lee back after being body snatched and out of character for a long, long time and our new lawyer Romo Lampkin was smokin’ (I mean that in a complex and interesting new character kind of way and a ‘god I love your voice’ kind of way – I loved Mark Sheppard as Badger in Firefly too). I’m not entirely clear on how this arc will answer my questions but they’ve got two whole episodes left in which to do it.
This is where Torchwood really fell apart, by the last few episodes I didn’t have any questions I wanted answered and I didn’t trust the writers. In sad, sad irony, the show that has consistently left me with a) questions and b) the hope of answers is Supernatural, which also has the lowest status (and most of my love).
What’s new? Nothing. Her death didn’t reveal anything about her, the Cylon, the Fleet or their future and as such I resent having a lot of emotional triggers thrust at me without any payoff.
The Son Also Rises was a bit more interesting. It’s nice to see Lee back after being body snatched and out of character for a long, long time and our new lawyer Romo Lampkin was smokin’ (I mean that in a complex and interesting new character kind of way and a ‘god I love your voice’ kind of way – I loved Mark Sheppard as Badger in Firefly too). I’m not entirely clear on how this arc will answer my questions but they’ve got two whole episodes left in which to do it.
This is where Torchwood really fell apart, by the last few episodes I didn’t have any questions I wanted answered and I didn’t trust the writers. In sad, sad irony, the show that has consistently left me with a) questions and b) the hope of answers is Supernatural, which also has the lowest status (and most of my love).
no subject
On the Torchwood thingy I think there were a number of contributing factors. One was that we were looking forward to meeting the Captain Jack we loved from Doctor Who and he wasn't that guy. Two was that it didn't seem to have an underlying theme / goal / question tying the episodes together. This pisses me off because the writing was often sophisticated and interesting and I wanted it so be so much better than what it was.
I think the reinvented Doctor Who is subtly failing this way as well, although it has the advantage of a pre-established Monster of the Week format and is actually more a soap opera then a show with a narrative.
My love for Supernatural is a big, big, shiny thing and no doubt warps my judgement ;-) It is however the only show that I currently trust to ask questions then answer them - in as angsty and drawn out a manner as possible of course.
no subject
I think this is where Supernatural is pwning all. It is very sure of what it is and it is embracing that. Actually more than that its plunging in with abandon. This weeks ep could've failed miserably if it hadn't have held its head high and gone full on where it did. (how many metaphors did I just butcher?) I always think of its philosophy as "go hard or go home".
no subject
no subject
no subject
It wasn't the characterisation that put me off though, it was the feeling the show wasn't going anywhere.
There would be this great, flashy introduction and a thrilling voice saying The 21st century is when it all changes and then get yet another Monster of the Week with a side serve of bisexuality.
no subject
no subject
I want to make some complicated point about constructing sexuality and about how heterosexuality is assumed and homosexuality or bisexuality is constructed because no-one knows how to write it without overdoing it and making it some sort of horrible, complex joke. I'll probably make it badly.
no subject