TV you've just watched

[Randorama]

AMB:

I never liked X-Men, not even in my short period in which I read super-heroes stuff (12 to 14 years or so). Briefly: too much "white teenage angst", for my taste (I am white but not from the US...). I did like it when Marvel allowed authors to run wacky ideas like the TVA or having a madman trying to kill half of the universe, though (i.e. the '80s stuff). Everything else, no thanks.

Said this... I understand that X-Men '97 compresses several storylines from the '90s (e.g. Magneto's trial) and then goes on its own storyline. I watched it out of curiosity because it was branded as "adult-themed cartoons", and I wouldn't entirely disagree with the label. I felt that some episodes compressed way too much material into 20+ minutes (e.g. the Magneto's trial episode? I remember that the original story was long-ish). I am not sure if I like the animation style, tough (i.e. very advanced cel-shading?). If it opens the gate to more cartoons with adult-themed storytelling, though, that's a plus.

Speaking of adult-themed cartoons and mentioning Roo's comments:

Star Trek could vastly benefit from having one animated series, if only because their production costs seem to have become insane. My understanding is that Discovery was costing Paramount at least 6 million dollars per episode (first season, 2017), and thus it struggled to break even regardless of how wide the paying audiences were. I doubt that Prodigy or Lower Decks were that expensive.

For Lower Decks, I understand that the creator simply couldn't handle working on this series and on Rick & Morty at the same time (legal issues, but also physical lack of time). The odd episodes focusing on canon and/or proper SF/ST themes showed that the authors had a grasp on how to handle more adult themes (e.g. the episode in which Boimler has to wrestle with the death of his teleport clone). For Prodigy, I understand that the show had low ratings due to non-existent promotion (i.e. Paramount basically sabotaged the first season, because "it's for kids").

Still, I think that Paramount could discover that we are in 2024 and that animation is not only for kids and for "family movies". I wouldn't be surprised if the issue is that the average trekkies may belong to generations sporting that kind of attitude, and therefore animated series risk failing due to poor reception. Personally, my Walter Mitty's fantasy is a series animated by Sunrise or Studio I.G., and written by some of the new good crop of ST writers (Akiva Goldsman, for instance), with the occasional guest writer (Oshii Mamoru would pay to direct/write one episode, from what I know, and so would China Mieville).

I doubt that Alex Kurtzman would however accept that actually smart and knowledgeable people would be allowed to work on the franchise, from what I can understand.

Smaller bits:

- Flox is great, if only because the actor portraying him was the most talented one in the cast (also, a luddite doctor curing everything with...organic methods instead of a shot of something? Oh, yes!). Star Trek: Enterprise however relied too much on the "main three" (Archer, Trip, T'Pol), in my opinion. Reed becomes decent once he turns out to be the Section 31 guy, though. Still, wasn't Bashir also a Section 31 stay-behind agent? Is this a "British stereotypes in space" thing? I hope that at some point Paramount returns to this series and their setting. There are a few homages here and there in the newer series, but I feel that authors prefer to avoid mentioning its existence. Setting some stories in the early phases of the Federation would be nice and would allow quite a bit of narrative freedom, in my opinion.

- DS9 becomes excellent once it pursues the "serialised storytelling" approach: it was designed for it, after all. Garak and Gul Dukat are incredibly well-written antagonists, but all characters are really well-written, and the Garak and Dukat actors were superb. Again, I think that DS9 only really belongs to ST as a gaiden/side story, but what they achieved with the last few seasons was impressive. There is a documentary, on the topic (DS9: What we left behind, or something) that should also mention execs making comments such as "serialised storytelling will never become popular!" (eh!).

DS9's In the Pale Moonlight is superb in how it handles...a lot of different themes (but especially Sisko's moral struggles, so to speak). However, I was also stunned when I watched Far Beyond the Stars for the first time, since it is a mesmerising love letter to literary SF and its (immense) cultural relevance. I do remember that the first time around, my grandpa watched it, sat stone-faced for a good minute after the ending, and then said something like: "I now get it, why you read SF. Keep goin', lad". There are a few other gems, but I would need to check their titles.

DS9, however, also has a lot of cultural/moral relativism that really irks me, and irked me back in the day. In one episode in Season one, Sisko ends up defending the Catholic Church and its trial against Galileo, with his son obviously taking Galileo's side and getting mad at his father. Their attempts at trying to put all sides on equal grounds in some discussions sometimes ended up in complete nonsensical situations, honestly. This backfired in at least one case: Gul Dukat became an extremely popular character even if he was an unrepentant mass murderer. Authors found themselves going at great lengths to give him a bad ending, while fans petitioned against this because they liked the character anyway. There was this "regressive left/modern-woke" undertone to the series that was at times grating (but Far Beyond the Stars was EARLY woke in its themes, hence its greatness).

- VOY relies a ton on time travel and clichés, but then again VOY was the series for those who really didn't care about canon and/or vaguely more intellectually engaging stories (and on plots making minimal sense, I'd add...). This includes housemates, wives, younger relatives, etc. That is why I think that PRO is actually a good series: it focuses on kids, so the lighter VOY-style approach makes sense (ahem). I am all for it, to be fair: again, ST works the best for me when I can watch with someone else.

- TNG actually has a good 50% of good episodes (i.e. episodes that rank 8.0 or higher on IMDB...sorry to phrase it like this). Wesley Crusher aside, there are several episodes that seem to handle SF themes in a surprisingly smart manner, for a tv show. Aside Darmok and The Inner Light, I would say that The Measure of a Man is excellent (somebody wants to dismantle Data and Picard delivers a line like this, in the final court trial: "We are supposed to seek out new life. Well, there he sits").

More in general, TNG was more consistent in showing that on a good day, ST can offer actual food for thought. The original series also did that, but with a handful of episodes (e.g. Let That Be your Last Battlefield, a few others). It was nevertheless decades ago, so the simple fact that these series tried to offer stimulating concepts as starting points for episodes strikes me as bold. Then again, I don't really watch tv...

- Wild Tangent: Star Trek Uniforms are really cheap, in China (I work here). I am not a trekkie but...I am nevertheless tempted. Maybe an all-black badge and a leather jacket, because I'd certainly and absolutely be a very dodgy Section 31 person, in an ST world

[Randorama]

Double post for a wild tangent:

I watched The Sandman's first season (I write "first", as I assume that there will be more series incoming). I read the comic as a grew up, since its release period roughly overlaps with my teen years (...speaking of white teen angst). I almost forgot that the series would be considered really "woke", by today's standards, so I was quite amused to discuss it with acquaintances of mine who actually thought that it was a new tv series written by Neil Gaiman.

I thought that it was, surprisingly, a good adaptation and that the animated episode with the dreaming cats was delightful (meow!). Nevertheless:

- Some of the divergences in the overarching plot are good: having the Corinthian to appear very early on in the story should allow spectators to better understand its role (and the actor is wickedly good). I do wonder if they will simplify the plot in later seasons, to avoid giving spoilers regarding the series' end. Let's just say that the plot becomes mildly non-linear, at some point;

Some choices in gender- and ethnic-swapping characters left me perplexed because they also involved modifications of the characters themselves. For instance:

- John Constantine became Joanna Constantine, but also a much mellower character (also, a bit too posh for my tastes). Bad idea: John Constantine has always been an angry, bitchy, very white limey from the North!

- Lucien was supposed to be a tall, grumpy and lanky head librarian man in the "Dream World" who always had a smart remark for Dream/Oneiros. The African-British actress playing Lucien is very skilled, but the idea of a
faithful butler as Dream/Oneiros' aide vaguely irks me (too many "yes, my lord" moments...is this the Black Butler manga?);

- Desire being played by a non-binary person is just perfect, but I'd prefer a truly non-binary/ambiguous look, rather than a 'transgender man' look. Desire still appears too masculine, whereas in the comics Desire literally
'flows through genders' at each appearance (i.e. changes aspect and often has deeply ambivalent features);

- Lucifer, Prince of hell, has been gender-swapped to Lucifer, Princess of hell. Quite surprising, because Lucifer should be an hermaphrodite in the myths, so the producers missed a perfect chance for more transgenders'
representation in the story (served on a plate, I'd add);

- The Endless ones look too human. I know that it would have been a CGI/practical effects nightmare to give them the right appearance, but I feel that production could have invested a bit more in underlying their non
human nature (i.e. in several stories, Gaiman carefully shows that the Endless have as many avatara as the number of species across planets and galaxies revering them, and their forms mimic the species' interpretation of
heir essence). Besides, Death is...a black girl. Of course I had black African friends complaining about this!

- The Dream/Oneiros actor is good in portraying the character as a spiteful, perennially brooding individual (...or maybe he was told "be yourself", and he's like that 24/7). However, an extra touch of accuracy would have
been to use some minor filters to modify his voice into a more alien-sounding tone. Dream/Oneiros' balloons were always pitch-black with white/green fonts for the words, to highlight the Endless one's alien nature;

I imagine that future series may either skip some issues, or instead resort to animation. The more episodic stories would vastly benefit from this choice (e.g. August, the one with Prez, and so on).

I must admit that I found the woke-ness of the original comic unproblematic, when I read it in the 1990s...in its Italian translation (i.e. in a country and culture still stuck at the stone age, civil rights-wise). Maybe, though, I was just a bit open-minded that I could enjoy it anway. I mean: it's a fantasy comic, so you want the queer elements to feature strongly, don't you?

Talking with people who find it "too woke" or "truly ground-breaking" in the 2020s just simply cracks me up, especially when they acknowledge that I was reading the original comic 30 years ago, in my teens ("Oh, I never realised how communist/dangerous/transgressive/woke/progressive/X you were, as a teen reading this kind of comics!"). Well, it's never too late, ladettes and lads!

...I do hope that Destruction will be played by David Bautista. In human form, Destruction is a big and burly though generally jovial and eloquent fellow. A lovely casting choice would be choosing some action guy who is willing to go well beyond his usual market, and try to portray a great character for just one short arc/season. Probably they will gender-swap the character with some random LGBTQ+ (something) nobody because it is easier this way, though.

[Air Master Burst]

I watched The Sandman's first season (I write "first", as I assume that there will be more series incoming)

Neil Gaiman's skeletons just came out, so I wouldn't count on it. Even my deeply-rooted cynicism was caught off-guard by this one. Poor Tori Amos must feel like the biggest asshole. I swear if anything comes out about Terry Pratchett I'm giving up on books entirely.

[Randorama]

Oh, dear, I have just looked up the facts. Such a shame...if any of this would be proven true, of course. I will just leave the whole matter aside: the thread is about something else.

[NYN]

Allow me to comment further.

I read all of the comics last year, WITHOUT watching the show. So I found the comparison very helpful in confirming why I don't. Many thanks, Randorama! (to deliver on Delirium is impossible to me)
The second season is already produced, whatever happens after that, well.

I just know I wasn't there to confirm or deny what allegedly happened, and neither can you. Why sit on this for 20 and more years only to come forward now, then? Aaah, the major work of the accused made the transition from best-selling niche to main-consummation (THE streamer). NOW is the time to smear. A whole lot of sense.

[Air Master Burst]

Why sit on this for 20 and more years only to come forward now, then? Aaah, the major work of the accused made the transition from best-selling niche to main-consummation (THE streamer). NOW is the time to smear. A whole lot of sense.

Neil Gaiman's been mainstream for decades. He wrote Neverwhere for the BBC in 1996, American Gods won the Hugo and topped the NYT bestseller list for months, and Stardust got a major Hollywood adaptation from Paramount in 2007. I understand having doubts, but that's an incredibly silly argument.

[Randorama]

You are welcome, NYN. Just two observations:

1. The Sandman was regularly in the top 50 to 20 in comics sales, and The Kindly Ones arc should have broken into the top 10.

So, The Sandman started as a niche comic, perhaps, but became a slipstream series and an economically very successful comic at most by the time of Brief Lives (1991, 1992?).

I define it "slipstream" because many themes from the comics were not "mainstream" for the decade of release (e.g. ethnicity, gender, etc. were taboo in the 1990s), but many other themes were quite mainstream. After all, the series included stories about or alluding to Shakespeare, Calvino, 1001 nights, fairies, Emperor Augustus, Orpheos, various religions in their various declinations....etc. Gaiman's certainly successful attempts at giving his series a literary, serious tone were really, really safe (and, frankly, very WASP-ish, very "merry little England" in tone).

After issue 20 or so, it was clear that Gaiman was a very skilled but also very cunning writer, and his editors had strong intuitions on how to sell the series to wider audiences except maybe for people who were firmly stuck to superhero-only diets. A technically superb series, of course! So, concepts-wise, it sat somewhere in a liminal place between "main" and "alternate", but somehow it reached both audiences (that's a prerogative of ruffians).

I dare say: please don't tell me that he was a niche author back in the days, however best-selling he was. It clashes with the facts I know about Gaiman's career and choice of themes in his works, so you'd make me roll my eyes. I have read most of his works, to be fair: but not because I want to be niche, in 2024.

So, please be a sweetie and please avoid making certain claims. If you want (relatively) niche and wonderfully queer comics, please find anything by John Smith, the UK writer (hint: Devlin Waugh!), or the early Grant Morrison works, but when he wrote series that regularly managed to break even, money-wise, though they were not supposed to, due to their sheer weirdness and left-field literary/cultural references (i.e. his "British works", his Vertigo stuff, a few other works). One of these series by Morrison inspired a TV series on which I should give a report in this thread, sooner or later (also to prove that I can be on-topic!).

2. Jokes aside, Desire would simply require a truly androgynous-looking person (non-binary or not) and a very smart use of costumes and make-up. The current actor can be non-binary, but still lacks the "extreme liquidity" that the character would require. Sadly, David Bowie is no longer with us and Grace Jones is not a spring chicken anymore. Truth to be told, though, I'd take Grace Jones as an excellent choice for Desire at any age. Delirium...a hand-drawn or perhaps flat-cel character interacting with human actors could be a good solution. It's a fantasy/new weird story: they should dare to use eccentric solutions, if the budget allows them.

Again, I'd appreciate some heterodox forms of casting, but I am a mythological being for marketing purposes ("white, straight" but definitely not normative and not anglo-phonic; knows the source material well; knows the genre(s) of the series relatively well; does not regularly watch tv; etc.). Therefore, my opinions are so irrelevant, they should be invisible.

3. ...OK, a third point. If you'd like to watch faithful adaptations, you could skip "western" TV adaptations altogether. To cut a long story short, the "western" approach to adaptations is to change stories considerably, because writers for different media need to satisfy (very) different audiences. Anime these days often have very faithful adaptations due to a long, very boring series of reasons that can be reduced to: adaptations that mangled the original stories resulted in massive legal fights, so anime studios have an easy choice to make. There are books on the topic, so please feel free to hate me once I comment that you could check "Adaptation" on e.g. Google Scholar and read any result you find in the list ("Rando, you're a sloth. Post at least one link instead of writing all this non-sense!" is also OK).

Of course, sticking to the original written texts may just be the wisest choice. I did watch this one and Doom Patrol out of sheer curiosity (and The Expanse, speaking of adaptations). Doom Patrol is another post, though, and ranted about The Expanse in some 2022/2023 post.

Well, I may also rant about The Prisoner (original from McGoohan, "re-interpretation" with McKellan and Cavill). I watched them again both, due to Nolan threatening us with a "re-make" (Hide! Flee! Run for the hills!). That's another story as well, though ("another Randorama post! The Apocalypse is upon us!" is perfectly rational reposte).

[NYN]

Neil Gaiman's been mainstream for decades. He wrote Neverwhere for the BBC in 1996, American Gods won the Hugo and topped the NYT bestseller list for months, and Stardust got a major Hollywood adaptation from Paramount in 2007.

He's a writer. Mainly for the literate. You read, I take it. Rando reads. I read. FOR FUN! The majority of any population doesn't read for fun. I don't call that a fact, only a feeling. Call it silly. Most people would rather see the worst production that "plays" itself WITH OTHERS, than read the finest (graphic) novel with the same content on their own. It's imagination related, folks simply don't develop it. From what I hear about Stardust is that it tanked, majorly. So yes, I very much doubt that the name attracts more than the already initiated. I hold it that most on earth know very much what a comic book is in terms of definition, and only a slim slice actually read the wonder-filled things. My very own father laughed at me for maintaining any interest in the source after the age of maybe sixteen. Grow up is what he meant to say. Poor pop, never knowing.

Don't misunderstand me: after reading all of The Sandman, I call the writer a sage, and the works all-wise, the highest praise I can relate to.

I understand having doubts, but that's an incredibly silly argument.

I'll top that with a paranoid one I'm happy to relate: Netflix will use the allegations to cancel off the series, as a proven act of practice, even when the viewership is "strong" (the stream-ruler doesn't give out ratings), or maybe because of it. Can't have the consumers making "demands", can we now? It's been done before.

[Air Master Burst]

From what I hear about Stardust is that it tanked, majorly. So yes, I very much doubt that the name attracts more than the already initiated.

Well, if the intent is to extort money now that he's made the big time as you seem to be implying, the people in question probably would have gone for their big payout after Paramount paid him all that money to adapt his book in the first place. Or after the major big-budget American Gods adaptation. Or after the major big-budget Corraline adaptation. Or the major big-budget Good Omens adaptation.

He's pretty much been a household name for years now, like Stephen King.

[Randorama]

Sweetie, really:

From what I hear about Stardust is that it tanked, majorly. So yes, I very much doubt that the name attracts more than the already initiated.

Let me quote a passage from Gaiman's Britannica entry, please:

" [...] By the time the series ended in 1996, The Sandman had captured an enviable list of awards and was DC Comics’ top-selling title. Gaiman also topped best-seller lists with his novels Good Omens (with Terry Pratchett, 1990), Neverwhere (1996), Stardust (1999; film 2007), and American Gods (2001) and with his children’s book Coraline (2002; film 2009). He revisited the Sandman characters in 2003 with Endless Nights, an anthology that had the distinction of being the first graphic novel to earn a place on The New York Times best-seller list for hardcover fiction."[...]

I actually do not doubt that one has to be "initiated" to know him as an author: there are many parts of the world were people have an allergy to Anglophonic authors and have no clue about Gaiman's existence and works. It's just that the number of initiated in, say, Western countries is not exactly small, and it even includes Academia.

The lad sells a lot via books, movies and tv series adapted via translations in multiple languages. One movie out of a few (plus tv series) might have not made a huge profit, but as an author he is overall critically and commercially successful, and well-known beyond speculative fiction in several countries (here is a Chinese entry on his work, for instance). I'll quote Harlan Ellison and comment: "Everybody is entitled to an informed opinion", and leave the topic aside, myself (...but maybe I'll post some comments on the "what are you reading?" thread, hence being suddenly on-topic: I did re-read the comic ).

Fun fact: Gaiman was really good friends with Ellison, Pratchett and Michael Moorcock, i.e. three of his literary inspirations. He collaborated in one way or another with each of them, though to differing degrees. Apparently, Gaiman had the habit of visiting Michael Moorcock's house in London, uninvited, to pilfer writing tips, and Moorcock would never kick him out even if he often wanted to (!). Also apparently, Ellison never picked out a fight, not even an argument, with Gaiman. If you know a bit about Ellison as a person and about his work, you will probably think that this "fact" may come from one of his notorious "about the author" back cover entries

I'll top that with a paranoid one I'm happy to relate: Netflix will use the allegations to cancel off the series, as a proven act of practice, even when the viewership is "strong" (the stream-ruler doesn't give out ratings), or maybe because of it. Can't have the consumers making "demands", can we now? It's been done before.

I don't doubt this, actually, but I must bet a 100k zenny coins that they won't. The devil's advocate and so on (but note: the series apparently was successful but expensive). You're supposed to accept the bet, so that once Season 2 is out, we check what Netflix is going to do and we solve the bet. Hey! 100k zenny coins are a lot of money, at least in Capcom games

Fun fact: Netflix seems to track "minutes" of viewership and "episode completion" rates. A little bit of math tells me that The Sandman had something like 1.8 million viewers in the first week (i.e. 1.4 billion minutes divided by 16 (episodes) x 50 (minutes)=800 minutes total). I guess that numbers increased over time, but it is an open question if these numbers are good, globally: "episode completion" rates tell Netflix if people drop episodes out or boredom or not. Netflix has to be in the black in all markets, so having 2 M spectators in the US and zip everywhere else is not good news. I wonder how expensive a single episode was, and if Netflix effectively broke even with the series (...and these numbers are well-guarded, in fact).

Oh well, I am putting the 100k zenny coins in the "bets" safe.

[ChurchOfSolipsism]

Over time I discovered just how creepy Roddenberry was, and the passages in which this creepiness seeps in the episodes are unpleasant (e.g. the head-scratching "utopic" views).

I've only watched a bit of Star Trek here and there over the last couple of decades, care to tell me more about this?

[vol.2]

Just watched a handful of Brooklyn 99 episodes. It was sort of amusing in an old school sit-com way. It was entirely non challenging and it was mostly devoid of the one-upmanship style cringe humor that is so popular today (epitomized by Always Sunny). I don't particularly like Adam Samberg, but I also don't find him offensive; he kind of reminds me of a guy I used to work with in a Chem lab and that fact alone amuses me.

Probably the main thing that kept me watching for awhile was Andre Braugher; he's so good in basically everything. I also liked Stephanie Beatriz's character.

That's about it. I'm not really looking forward to anymore of it, but I guess if I had one of those evenings where I want to shut my brain off while eating dinner, I might switch it on.

[Randorama]

Church:

If you go back to the original series, you may notice at least a trio of aspects. One is a bit more obvious and not so crucial, and the other two are definitely not obvious but possibly creepier:

1. Women go around in pants (well, extremely short skirts) and are generally portrayed as very passive subjects, even by 1960s standards. For a series that should promote a future utopia of equality, it seems to exclude certain groups from this equality. Besides, alien cultures are portrayed as incredibly homogenous ("we are Klingons and we all reason in terms of honour in battle"). Humans seem the only ones to have evolved different cultures, languages, and so on (OK, this is a practical need in the first series, but even newer series are offenders on this matter, from time to time);

2. The future seems to be a perfect place free of money, vice, drugs, conflict, etc., and everybody solves problems with rational discussion (OK, Kirk added a few karate chops and McCoy bitched & moaned about everything). That's because humankind apparently had to endure a nuclear WWIII, eugenic wars, and so on. There is a certain insistence on humankind risking extinction before the space age begins that can also be found in certain bizarre cult-like movements (e.g. "Posadism", which is...something you may want to google, if you feel courageous);

3. Starfleet and the Federation are supposed to be distinct entities: the space navy (pardon, "exploration fleet") and the government. However, it's often not clear where one ends and the other begins, and how government officials are chohsen. All other powers are empires (Klingon, Romulus) or dictatorships in later series (e.g. the Dominion). If we stick to the original series, the other three planets/societies that founded the Federation along with humans are not democracies. Vulcan is a holigarchy of sorts, Andora is an empire, the Tellarites...I don't know. The Utopia of tomorrow does not seem to have place for democracies, apparently. Besides, Starfleet has a very clear-cut military structure.

There are other minor bits, but these ones seem more apparent to me. The first two seasons of TNG had other creepy aspects, but these could suffice.

...Roddenberry himself spent a lot of time selling the ST mythos to fans as some kind of rapture religion, once the series closed ("the future will be really like this! But we need WWIII and nukes first!"). I do not know if you wish to read more: "Roddenberry creepy" may be a simple search to open this Pandora's box.

[NYN]

Sweetie, really:

You and Air Master Burst successfully broadened my horizon on this. Thank you. It's just...I fairly dislike the trope "Huh? Who reads anymore?", since I know the answer. And Gaiman, obviously.

(i.e. 1.4 billion minutes divided by 16 (episodes) x 50 (minutes)=800 minutes total). I guess that numbers increased over time, but it is an open question if these numbers are good, globally: "episode completion" rates tell Netflix if people drop episodes out or boredom or not.

Of course, a streamer would measure in minutes. I don't use any, so it didn't cross my mind. With the things I pick my fail rate is fairly low, meaning that mostly I like what I see, following the "sounds fun" inclination. Ratings what they are, or what they are supposed to be, are there some who measure when it's just played in the back? Or when boredom sets in and viewers are starting touching themselves or others in accepted personal ways? If it sounds creepy, surely it's all for prosperous perfect programming!

[Randorama]

You and Air Master Burst successfully broadened my horizon on this. Thank you. It's just...I fairly dislike the trope "Huh? Who reads anymore?", since I know the answer. And Gaiman, obviously.

My pleasure, and I hope I didn't sound too overbearing, to be honest. General thoughts on this specific trope...let's just say that the numbers of people reading are generally on the rise, globally (!), though the numbers are still rather depressing. Too much tv, interwebs and so on (the irony of writing this post in this thread is delightful, though). What I know is that in many countries magazines are more or less collapsing: people tend to read more and more books of various types (fiction, education, comics of various types but in trade paperback/tankobon format, etc.). Monthly mid-level, topic specific and non-fiction texts are not of interest anymore, apparently. I do not know much more than this right now, but I may post in the opportune thread once I can find some numbers. Please feel free to harass me in the most obnoxious way if you are interested

Of course, a streamer would measure in minutes. I don't use any, so it didn't cross my mind. With the things I pick my fail rate is fairly low, meaning that mostly I like what I see, following the "sounds fun" inclination. Ratings what they are, or what they are supposed to be, are there some who measure when it's just played in the back? Or when boredom sets in and viewers are starting touching themselves or others in accepted personal ways? If it sounds creepy, surely it's all for prosperous perfect programming!

Personally I get the impression that counting completions via minutes is a wishful about on people actually watching. Then again, tv rates are/were about how many millions of people were watching X, weren't they? Maybe TV channels' stat people spent decades deluding themselves that people were not doing spicy things during their shows

Whatever will happen, Sandman's second season may reach more or less half of the original run, and may actually reach a broader audience: some stories are absolute gems (e.g. the ones about Baghdad, Emperor Augustus, and I'd throw in the whole Brief Lives arc). I am hoping for more animated stories: in my head, Sandman should have been animated by studio Science Saru or, if still with us, Satoshi Kon (NO, NOT STUDIO GHIBLI: they have a decade-long story of mangling the stories they adapt in some disturbing ways).

Some more mini-reviews:

Cowboy Bebop

The original anime was a masterpiece of genre-bending tales, dry and witty humour mixed with that existential dread emerging during mid-life crisis, and a sublime OST. The live-action adaptation obliterates all these key aspects by trying to be 90% "rugged dudes in space", and 10% actual content of some sort. This is a clear case in which the whole "but we must adapt it for audiences who don't know the original!" approach to adaptations has created a minor disaster. That's a shame, because the production values were there and often episodes looked gorgeous, though in a really shallow manner (lots of glitter, awful plots). I think that they planned a second series that would have introduced Edward (i.e. the whimsical hacker girl), but I doubt that we will see it.

Loki

Somehow, I liked this one because it includes great actors, a somewhat wacky plot and a very queer (=bizarre) rendition of the TVA, a wonderfully obscure idea introduced by legend Walt Simonson in his glorious Thor run. I think that the second part is stronger in its focus on time travel and showing the characters' backgrounds. Ouboros is a great concept character, too. I still don't think that Walt Simonson (regarding the Loki stories/concepts) and Jim Starlin (regarding the Thanos stories) ever dreamt of their work becoming the central focus of juggernaut movie productions, to be fair. The original comics were successful, but ultra-mainstream success is something else.

Doom Patrol

The original comics from the '60s was interesting in that it followed a different approach to the X-Men idea: roughly, less "white teenage angst" and more "we push forward, even if we are loathed". The Grant Morrison run was a masterpiece in its being a superhero comic, after all, while also being very literate, VERY queer/weird/far out there, and very ironic when needed. I know that DC tried to resurrect the series several times, at some point giving it to Gerald Wray (the musician guy, he also created some lame comic adapted into tv series).

Doom Patrol tries to adapt some of Grant Morrison's ideas during the first and second seasons, then throws in ideas from the original run and the Wray run during the third and fourth seasons. All of this chaotic blending is performed while increasing the amount of time that the characters spent in self-commiseration to near 100% of episode time, as the series progresses. I endured anything after season one as an act of love towards Grant (Morrison)'s run: it helped that I basically listened to episodes rather than watching them, often at x2 speed (but hey, the completion rate is 100%!).

An anime from the aforementioned studies, adapting the whole Morrison run, remains my Walter Mitty dream. Some stories would have costed a fortune to adapt (e.g. a proper adaptation of The painting that ate Paris), so I can understand that production preferred to focus on people crying over themselves for 50 minutes on end.

The Prisoner (The one with Ian McKellen and John Caveziel, I guess?)

Re-imagining of the series by Patrick McGoohan . The seriess starts in an interesting manner and drowns into a sea of poor execution and vague non-explanations. They probably had ideas for a movie, but they diluted them to churn out six episodes. Such a shame, because the final revelation suggests that the writers had an interesting take on the basic concept. I am being purposefully vague because even introducing the basic premise might be a spoiler. Ah, wait, right:

Spoiler

A man finds himself in a mysterious village, in a state of amnesia. The "Village" is slowly revealed to be a prison for people who apparently have committed undefined crimes; its administrators force a false life of harmony and compliance to its citizens, using psychological and physical violence as they see fit. The story revolves around the titular prisoner, "N.6", and the administrator of the village, N. 2, who wants to know why N.6 resigned from his previous post as...something. I struggled to follow the plot out of boredom, but let's just say that the show focuses focuses too much on being vague rather than ambiguous. In the original show, for instance, it was clear that N.2 and whoever managed the village want a very simple answer from N.6 (the question being "why (did you resign)?"). In this one, it is not even clear what question(s) N.2 has, if he has one in mind. The pace struck me as awful, anyway, as you can guess from my comment. I take it that the final answer was "it was all a dream, dude, you just wanted to escape in the Village because life sucks!". Well, the best part of the original series is that the answer was...oh well, later.

I will post my comments on the original in another post. I feel like I have watched more or less teevee stuff for my next 40 years. I should actually read (Oh wait, I do that. Maybe just do naughty things?).

Oh, Vol.2, if you are reading this: I tried to watch Always sunny... and Rick & Morty, but gave up after two episodes due to the problems you mention. I definitely don't get "modern US tv humour/sit-coms", I guess? At some point I simply had no idea when and how I was supposed to laugh, let alone why jokes were supposed to be entertaining (...or perhaps, what counted as joke).

[Air Master Burst]

What I know is that in many countries magazines are more or less collapsing: people tend to read more and more books of various types (fiction, education, comics of various types but in trade paperback/tankobon format, etc.). Monthly mid-level, topic specific and non-fiction texts are not of interest anymore, apparently.

Most of the specialist hobby content creators have cut out the middleman entirely and just do patreons or release their own magazines through itch.io and crowdfunding. For instance, Sega Mania's 8th issue is already well over the funding goal in their crodfunding attempt to revive their magazine.

[Randorama]

AMB:

interesting! In Italy, the main publisher (Mondadori) has been reporting record sales increases for books (+300% in the 2021-2023 period), but they announced that they wanted to completely overhaul their magazines section and turn it into a yet to be defined digital format. Technically they would still act as middlemen, but I understand that something similar is happening in a few other European countries (e.g. UK and France, from what I know). I admit that I like to read well-informed, well-researched articles, and some magazines can offer such entries in their own field of specialisation. I never developed any "allegiances" to periodical publications, though (e.g. I never read entire issues of scientific journals, for work: just articles relevant for my goals).

So:

The Prisoner

This is a British series from 1967 or so, with Patrick McGoohan as the creator, lead actor and producer. The first episode opens with a mysterious man driving an old model Lotus car and entering the underground parking premises of the British Parliament. He is very angry and stiff, and when he reaches the desk of a likely superior of his, he hands a resignation letter. He goes back to his apartment, prepares a suitcase for a holiday, and suddenly faints because some agents pump sleeping gas in his apartment, unnoticed. He wakes up in "The Village", a place where each inhabitant has not a name but a number: he is now "N.6". The Village has cameras everywhere and the administration monitors each citizen in a really oppressive manner, to ensure that they are always happy (whether they want it or not...), and that they do not even think of escaping.

The head of The Village is "N.2", a mysterious figure who appears to only have one goal: discover why N.6 resigned. Failure in obtaining this information is not tolerated: in most episodes, a new N.2 appears when the previous N.2 fails to overcome N.6's callous resistance to information extraction (i.e. very roundabout psychological warfare).

I don't want to add spoilers, because the show actually works better if you have no idea about what is going to happen. It suffices to say that McGoohan went at extreme lengths to create a modern mystery play in which he offered a bitter fight between "The Individual" on one side (i.e. N.6) and "The System" on the other side. Therefore, the story is designed to be deeply ambiguous: viewers are invited to figure its "meaning" or "theme" according to their own view of the overarching plots. The ending was indeed considered so ambiguous that McGoohan had to hide in the Scottish highlands for weeks, since mobs of angry spectators demanded a clear-cut answer! (...or so the legend goes).

The central problem is that McGoohan wanted to produce a one season, six episodes series. The producers forced him to work on a first season with 5 extra fillers, and then a second season that was aborted half way. The legend also goes that he went to production offices, a bit like his fictional counterpart, and shouted & yelled that the series had to end immediately, lest he resigned. The final episode is the seventh episode that McGoohan had in mind, and...it contains large parts that are more or less improvised, or at least written in a Situationist style. The redeeming grace about the filler episodes in the first season is that McGoohan wrote them in such a way that they were consistent with the show's themes. In a sense, they just decompress the story or, more accurately, the world setting. Each episode boils down to one basic plot repeated over and over again, but with minimal changes to the "battle score" between N. 6 and N.2 that precipitate in the final episode. By season two, it was however obvious that McGoohan had no ideas left and production wanted to milk the show.

The show has a cult status, in the sense that it was really popular in the Anglophonic countries it was initially distributed in (UK, US, CAN, AU and NZ), and then it became a cult tv show in the countries in which translations popped up (e.g. France, Germany, Italy, probably Japan, and a few others). It is generally considered as a deeply surreal, avant garde show that at the same time offered rather sinister predictions about the modern world. A testament to its popularity is that the very mainstream manga Kaguya-sama and Spy x Family have homages to the series (K-s, anime version, recreates a "Rover chase" scene in season 3; SxF has the protagonist quote this famous line from the series: "Questions are a burden to others. Answers are prison for oneself."). Though he hasn't admitted it explicitly so far, Isayama of Attack on, Titan fame elaborated some ideas into his series (arguably, in a very indirect manner).

Is the show any good, though? My answer would be "go and watch it, and interpret it as you like it. It was meant to be watched that way, filler notwithstanding". I do not understand horror as a genre: beyond 14 or so, I became used to gore and body horror-style movies/comics/etc. also because my father decided to show me what actually happens in war theatres he had to work in. For psychological/eschatological/etc. horror...duh, my unit of measure is Lovecraft, who basically was terrorised by the fact that the world does not give a fuck about MAGA people and inbred far-right minus habentes (...also because "the world" does not think, to cut a long story short).

I'd however consider The Prisoner truly terrifying at first watch, because it aims to bring out all the most uncomfortable aspects of modern society (any modern society, including the ones that are stone age+facebook+smart phones) in the face of audiences. Watching it again now, however, has been a very calming experience. Let's just say that I live in a situation that is similar to the one in The Village, squared...and that anyway it is not a big deal. Even if we entertain that the final episode is an accurate metaphor about our lives, I'd am OK with it. One (or, should I write "1"?) has to make sometimes painful choices, in life.

I do know people who freaked out after one or two episodes due to the deeply oppressive atmosphere clashing with the sometimes really gay (=cheerful) and bright design choices, so it may be a hard series to sell to everyone. Tread carefully. By the way, Portmeirion is a beautiful place with a bizarre story. Short: it was designed to be a Mediterranean-style resort in the rainiest part of ultra-rainy North Wales, so it became a failure until the arrival of the "N.6 festival". Do visit if you have a chance, though it should be really expensive by now.

I am aware that Christopher Nolan has planned a remake (since 2017, actually). I definitely will not lose sleep over it, even if the idea of an ambiguous, allegorical show being re-interpreted by an author notorious for his ultra-dense movies makes me run for the hills.

Nah, I am joking, big kudos to him: he could work on a TV series trimmed down to the core McGoohan's vision. It will probably appear as a banal series to the masses, if no modern re-interpretation is offered ("Oh, cameras everywhere? What's new about it?"), but maybe just maybe, Nolan might offer an interesting new vision. Or maybe not.

"Be seeing you", anyway (Oh, and this one is also quoted at least once in SxF, I believe).

I swear that I am done with spamming in this thread, and I will write up my Gaiapolis rants ASAP. Please excuse the inconvenience.

[ChurchOfSolipsism]

Police Squad episodes 1-6 - 8/10
Had totally forgotten how hilarious/ silly these were

[neorichieb1971]

Unsolved mysteries (Netflix).

I just love the unknown. Its a pretty well made show covering lots of different subject matters.

[GaijinPunch]

The Righteous Gemstones Season 3.
Amazing, as expected. Baby Billy is still my favorite, but almost everyone else is tied for second... although most of the time Keefe shows up on scream I glow inside.

Twin Peaks: The Return
Probably my 4th time through. Watched it with the GF this time, as she had seen everything up until then and didn't even know they made The Return. Still enjoyable. I can't believe how rewatchable and amazing that fucking show is.

There are a few things I want to watch but seriously fucking busy so, won't for a while.

[Obiwanshinobi]

Mostly sitcom (such as Friends to name US one, and a couple of others) - I don't really expect much of TV when I switch it on, and sitcom is typically my safest bet. Well, something like Xena: Warrior Princess I can dig when it happens to be on. One of the ladies leading therapy group meetings I attend looks a lot like Lucy Lawless, so, hooray!
I've been having something of a quick and dirty affair with Alarm für Cobra 11 – Die Autobahnpolizei long-running series, most recently the earliest, 1996 episodes (with very little vehicular stunts in them, if any at all). I'm highly-tolerant to it.
Other shows I've enjoyed lately: Nash Bridges (as good as remembered actually), Columbo (even better than remembered), Bonanza, Ghost Whsiperer. As well as things you won't likely find in English, so I'm not elaborating.
(I'd watch very little TV as a kid, so much of it is "as good as new" to me.) Walker, Texas Ranger isn't great, though. Unless I'm missing something.

[GaijinPunch]

I leave Friends on in the background when I'm doing my other hobbies that don't require much thought. I've gone through it like 3-4 times. Crazy when you think we had actually funny shows on network TV at one time.

[RGC]

Twin Peaks: The Return
Probably my 4th time through. Watched it with the GF this time, as she had seen everything up until then and didn't even know they made The Return. Still enjoyable. I can't believe how rewatchable and amazing that fucking show is.

I'm getting closer to a rewatch of The Return myself, having only seen it once as it aired. In preparation I'm rewatching s1&2, which I've seen quite a few times but which I'll use any excuse to watch again (surely in my top 5 shows).

I only recall snippets of The Return now, so I'm looking forward to getting to it again. I've just reached the part in s2 where it starts to sag a little, so if I can power through that all will be good.

[guigui]

I leave Friends on in the background when I'm doing my other hobbies that don't require much thought. I've gone through it like 3-4 times. Crazy when you think we had actually funny shows on network TV at one time.

Friends is also a definite cornerstone for me. Aired in France when I was like 16, could not watch it regularly because it aired at a time when I was not always at home (and no binge Netflix at this time ...)
When I could, I got my revenge by buying the VHS of seasons 1-6, original version with French subtitles ; the series also taught me the largest part of the English I know.

Also rewatch some parts regularly. Sure it has some weak parts (by the end it gets very overdramatized), but I still cannot believe how well those writers could create and develop such a synergy on the long term with all those characters. Ten of favorite quotes, can hardcore fans put them back in context ?
1. Chanendler Bong
2. Totally worth it ! Yeah.
3. It was just what you needed to get a little perspective
4. It's unisex, U-N-I-S-E-X
5. Who's singing ?
6. You and I, we're the same ! No we're not. Yeah we are !
7. If I had to, I'd pea on anyone of you.
8. Self-cleaning ? Then think about the thing I wash last, and the thing you wash first.
9. Put Joey on the phone !
10. (last one is so easy) : I, Ross, take thee Rachel...

[GaijinPunch]

I only recall snippets of The Return now, so I'm looking forward to getting to it again. I've just reached the part in s2 where it starts to sag a little, so if I can power through that all will be good.

It's amazing how much you miss... and then forget...
I could go through it again today!

1. Chanendler Bong
2. Totally worth it ! Yeah.
3. It was just what you needed to get a little perspective
4. It's unisex, U-N-I-S-E-X
5. Who's singing ?
6. You and I, we're the same ! No we're not. Yeah we are !
7. If I had to, I'd pea on anyone of you.
8. Self-cleaning ? Then think about the thing I wash last, and the thing you wash first.
9. Put Joey on the phone !
10. (last one is so easy) : I, Ross, take thee Rachel...

The thing is, a few seasons in, you know the characters so well, that you could guess most of the jokes, but loads are still funny. No clue what my favorite quotes are, but some that come to mind are ...

- PIVOT!
- Oh my god! That is so not the opposite of hiding someone's clothes!
- Don't you have a little to penis for that [dress]
- What is Chandler's job?
- [Ross & Monica's outer wrist bump]
- Ross, if you're not gonna sleep with her, should I?

[guigui]

Love that game !

- PIVOT!

Ross, Chandler, and Monica (?) trying to lift a couch to Ross' new appartment. Ross does say they need to PIVOT it in the stairs. End with "SHUT-UP, SHUT-UP, SHUT-UP !" Real poetry.

- Oh my god! That is so not the opposite of hiding someone's clothes!

After a fight for whatever reason, Joey puts on all Chandler's clothes at the same time. Looks real fat with all those layers of clothes, and he's going commando and doing big big steps....

- Don't you have a little to penis for that [dress]

Cannot recall this one. Would say this is Chandler to either Ross or Joey, but dont know why/when

- What is Chandler's job?

Quizz organized to determine who, between the boys and girls, know the others the best. Pression rises up and they end up betting for the big appartment. The appartment switch is definitely one of my favorite series of episode.
The quizz also has "Chanendler Bong" in it. The appartment switching thing has the "we got free porn !" and the "totally worth it !" parts in it. Splendid.

- [Ross & Monica's outer wrist bump]

Not sure about this one. I guess this is not "vafanapoli", but maybe in the routine they invented young and presented at Dick Clark's New Year Rocking Eve ?

- Ross, if you're not gonna sleep with her, should I?

Cant recall either. Certainly Joey's quote, but not sure which girl this is about.

[neorichieb1971]

Silo is my fave show of 2023/4.

Apple plus. Season 2 November.

[GaijinPunch]

- Don't you have a little to penis for that [dress]

Cannot recall this one. Would say this is Chandler to either Ross or Joey, but dont know why/when

Chandler's mother (played by Morgan Fairchild) to Chandler's father, (played by Kathleen Turner)
https://youtu.be/BHrWXyCi3z8?si=MuywihvYZ9O5xR9B

- [Ross & Monica's outer wrist bump]

Not sure about this one. I guess this is not "vafanapoli", but maybe in the routine they invented young and presented at Dick Clark's New Year Rocking Eve ?

The Friendly Finger
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naOyG_1VZS4

- Ross, if you're not gonna sleep with her, should I?

Cant recall either. Certainly Joey's quote, but not sure which girl this is about.

One of the later episodes... yes, definitely Joey, but the nonchalant delivery stuck with me.

I think I've seen PIVOT T-shrits even. It's clearly the winner.

[GaijinPunch]

Oh and that reminds me, I'm also thankful for thongs.

[guigui]

Thanks for the clarification GP, and yes P.I.V.O.T. tshirts are all over the place on the interweb ! Might buy one for sports if I can find a good quality pink color.

There's also this time when the "Chick and the Duck" become the "Dick and the Chuck" ; remember it as a real good laugh but cannot place it back in context or episode ... ?