![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Books, Rectify, and Doctor Song
Sep. 5th, 2015 09:21 pm1. Finished Light Between the Oceans by M.L. Steadman late last night. Read until past 1. (Was a bit wired. Need to work on sugar intake, sliding a bit in that regard. What can I say, it's my weakness. Or my drug of choice. Not sugar per se, but sweet things, desserts...such as coconut milk ice cream, apples dipped in almond/walnut butter, gluten-free brownie (which really didn't agree with me, so sorry, not again.)) The book I have mixed feelings about. It's beautifully written, I adore the message and metaphors, but...the plot and characterization, particularly in regards to the female characters, just did not quite work for me.
Am currently reading Life After Life by Kate Atkinson for the Courtelyou Road book club. It has a sort of Groundhog Day (the film) gimmick. Which I've seen done in other books, films, and television series, but have mixed feelings about. It's why I avoided reading it for so long. Every other chapter shows how events would have progressed if this thing happened instead of that thing.
In short, the baby dies in chapter two. In chapter three, the baby lives and we see what happens because the baby lived. It's the ultimate what if story -- what if I went this direction instead of that direction, what if so and so made this choice instead of that choice, what if I decided to take up painting instead of knitting. Interesting narrative choice...but will it be at the expense of plot and characterization? Perhaps not, if she keeps the plot simple. You sort of have to when you do that.
Of course my definition of simple may vary from others...
2. Gave up on Shameless, and decided to stream Rectify instead. There's two full seasons on Netflix. It's rather compelling and quite good. The story is about a man who gets released from death row due to new DNA evidence which proves that he may not have committed the crime upon which he'd been convicted. Of course it's never that simple. He was convicted at 18, this is obviously 10-15 years later, he's a grown man of 28, who has spent all his time isolated on death row - which is basically a white room with a toilet, no bars, no view, and only the ability to talk to fellow prisoners through grates in the walls. The crime was the rape and murder of a 16 year old girl, who he'd been dating and in love with at the time. His sister has worked her butt off to get him released, becoming rather close to the attorney that has assisted her with his appeal and case.
The rest of the family, it appears, would have been fine if he had not been released. His father appears to be dead and his mother remarried, with a step-brother and step-father running the family business. It's not clear whether he actually murdered his girl-friend. Or if one of his friends had done it. The writers don't tell you.
On episode 4, I think, and so far, I'm rather impressed by it. Same level of acting, production value, writing, etc as The Wire and Breaking Bad --- also falls within the television genre category of hyper-realism, character piece. Not violent, the violence is all under the service. And it examines small town life...in a way that is ever so slightly disturbing, but not quite. Like I said, it's hyper-realism, so it isn't action packed. But compelling. The series explores the moral quagmire.
Or moral ambiguities, without really providing any direct answers. I love tv shows that explore moral quagmires or ambiguity, how people get backed into corners or the correct moral choice isn't always clear.
I also love morally ambiguous characters or characters whose moral choices tend to situational. Clear cut stories about good and evil don't really interest me that much any longer.
The plus side of Rectify, much like Bloodline and Breaking Bad and even the Wire, is it is told in a telenovella style - or is only 12-13 episodes in length. With each season being just that number of episodes. As it result it is not quite as long as broadcast network television shows. And far tighter in plot structure and characterization, with a lot less filler. As much as I adored Buffy, Farscape, Babylon 5, the West Wing, etc...the problem all those series had was too much filler. There were several episodes that you could just skip over or were pointless. But there, because you know, we have to churn out 22 episodes each season. The 12-13 episode style is far kinder to the artist, and the viewer.
It's easier to watch on Netflix streaming -- no commercials. Shows like these are hurt by commercial interruptions. It's hard to stick with the story. I'll wander off during the commercial breaks, and unfortunately fast-forwarding doesn't always work effectively.
The other plus side - or the reason that television series in the hyper-realism in genre or aka literary genre, get nominated for awards, and television series in fantasy/sci-fi, etc, do not -- is that you don't have to worry all that much about world-building and rules. Just follow the ones we have. While in fantasy/sci-fi you make up your rules and world, but you have to abide by it, which is hard to do with a television series -- requires a lot of tracking, memory, and maintenance, particularly when television series by their very nature have what I like to call writer/actor/director revolving door syndrom. People get burned out after 100 episodes. You're lucky if they make it to 100. So, most if not all sci-fantasy television series tend to have a problem in the world-building maintainence/rules department. In short they aren't consistent, and contradict themselves.
Also, there's a tendency towards cheesy writing, over-acting, over-emphasis on special effects (which seem cool at the time, but get outdated really quickly), and wayward plots, not to mention OOC character moments..or wayward characters. And, moral ambiguity isn't always a strong suit. Nothing against the genre, I happen to adore it, but, alas, there's a reason it rarely gets awards or much attention from professional critics. It's in a word, sloppy. Even fans notice this -- because they whine about it incessantly.
Rectify, like Breaking Bad and Mad Men, doesn't suffer from this problem. In addition it's on Sundance, not HBO or Showtime or Starz, so it doesn't feel the need for over-the-top displays of sexual prowess or violence. (Which is getting tiresome. I wish these premium cable series would scale it back a bit. It's gratiutious. And the reason why I gave up on Shameless.)
3. Apparently Doctor River Song is coming back to Doctor Who for the Xmas Episode. YAY. (I think River Song may be the only thing I love about this series. When she's not in it, I find that I'm rather ambivalent, and tend to wander off while its on, when she is in it, I'm riveted. Which is interesting, considering the actress doesn't do a lot for me either way. And admittedly, I tended to half-watch it until she popped up. Actually I failed to understand the "fannish" appeal of Doctor Who until she popped up. It was okay, but hardly a show to get obsessed or fannish over. Then up popped River Song, and I went, whoa, this is sooo awesome, I love love love this. Then she just completely disappeared, and I was like, okay, bored now. Methinks, I need a smart forty-something woman in this series for it to work for me? Except, I liked Amy and Rory better than any of the other companions...so. In fact, I think I'd be happiest if we had David Tennant, Amy/Rory, and River Song and just went from there. The current Doctor/Companion I'm rather ambivalent about. My flist's adoration of the pairing is lost on me. But then, I didn't understand their love of Doctor/Rose either.)
Am currently reading Life After Life by Kate Atkinson for the Courtelyou Road book club. It has a sort of Groundhog Day (the film) gimmick. Which I've seen done in other books, films, and television series, but have mixed feelings about. It's why I avoided reading it for so long. Every other chapter shows how events would have progressed if this thing happened instead of that thing.
In short, the baby dies in chapter two. In chapter three, the baby lives and we see what happens because the baby lived. It's the ultimate what if story -- what if I went this direction instead of that direction, what if so and so made this choice instead of that choice, what if I decided to take up painting instead of knitting. Interesting narrative choice...but will it be at the expense of plot and characterization? Perhaps not, if she keeps the plot simple. You sort of have to when you do that.
Of course my definition of simple may vary from others...
2. Gave up on Shameless, and decided to stream Rectify instead. There's two full seasons on Netflix. It's rather compelling and quite good. The story is about a man who gets released from death row due to new DNA evidence which proves that he may not have committed the crime upon which he'd been convicted. Of course it's never that simple. He was convicted at 18, this is obviously 10-15 years later, he's a grown man of 28, who has spent all his time isolated on death row - which is basically a white room with a toilet, no bars, no view, and only the ability to talk to fellow prisoners through grates in the walls. The crime was the rape and murder of a 16 year old girl, who he'd been dating and in love with at the time. His sister has worked her butt off to get him released, becoming rather close to the attorney that has assisted her with his appeal and case.
The rest of the family, it appears, would have been fine if he had not been released. His father appears to be dead and his mother remarried, with a step-brother and step-father running the family business. It's not clear whether he actually murdered his girl-friend. Or if one of his friends had done it. The writers don't tell you.
On episode 4, I think, and so far, I'm rather impressed by it. Same level of acting, production value, writing, etc as The Wire and Breaking Bad --- also falls within the television genre category of hyper-realism, character piece. Not violent, the violence is all under the service. And it examines small town life...in a way that is ever so slightly disturbing, but not quite. Like I said, it's hyper-realism, so it isn't action packed. But compelling. The series explores the moral quagmire.
Or moral ambiguities, without really providing any direct answers. I love tv shows that explore moral quagmires or ambiguity, how people get backed into corners or the correct moral choice isn't always clear.
I also love morally ambiguous characters or characters whose moral choices tend to situational. Clear cut stories about good and evil don't really interest me that much any longer.
The plus side of Rectify, much like Bloodline and Breaking Bad and even the Wire, is it is told in a telenovella style - or is only 12-13 episodes in length. With each season being just that number of episodes. As it result it is not quite as long as broadcast network television shows. And far tighter in plot structure and characterization, with a lot less filler. As much as I adored Buffy, Farscape, Babylon 5, the West Wing, etc...the problem all those series had was too much filler. There were several episodes that you could just skip over or were pointless. But there, because you know, we have to churn out 22 episodes each season. The 12-13 episode style is far kinder to the artist, and the viewer.
It's easier to watch on Netflix streaming -- no commercials. Shows like these are hurt by commercial interruptions. It's hard to stick with the story. I'll wander off during the commercial breaks, and unfortunately fast-forwarding doesn't always work effectively.
The other plus side - or the reason that television series in the hyper-realism in genre or aka literary genre, get nominated for awards, and television series in fantasy/sci-fi, etc, do not -- is that you don't have to worry all that much about world-building and rules. Just follow the ones we have. While in fantasy/sci-fi you make up your rules and world, but you have to abide by it, which is hard to do with a television series -- requires a lot of tracking, memory, and maintenance, particularly when television series by their very nature have what I like to call writer/actor/director revolving door syndrom. People get burned out after 100 episodes. You're lucky if they make it to 100. So, most if not all sci-fantasy television series tend to have a problem in the world-building maintainence/rules department. In short they aren't consistent, and contradict themselves.
Also, there's a tendency towards cheesy writing, over-acting, over-emphasis on special effects (which seem cool at the time, but get outdated really quickly), and wayward plots, not to mention OOC character moments..or wayward characters. And, moral ambiguity isn't always a strong suit. Nothing against the genre, I happen to adore it, but, alas, there's a reason it rarely gets awards or much attention from professional critics. It's in a word, sloppy. Even fans notice this -- because they whine about it incessantly.
Rectify, like Breaking Bad and Mad Men, doesn't suffer from this problem. In addition it's on Sundance, not HBO or Showtime or Starz, so it doesn't feel the need for over-the-top displays of sexual prowess or violence. (Which is getting tiresome. I wish these premium cable series would scale it back a bit. It's gratiutious. And the reason why I gave up on Shameless.)
3. Apparently Doctor River Song is coming back to Doctor Who for the Xmas Episode. YAY. (I think River Song may be the only thing I love about this series. When she's not in it, I find that I'm rather ambivalent, and tend to wander off while its on, when she is in it, I'm riveted. Which is interesting, considering the actress doesn't do a lot for me either way. And admittedly, I tended to half-watch it until she popped up. Actually I failed to understand the "fannish" appeal of Doctor Who until she popped up. It was okay, but hardly a show to get obsessed or fannish over. Then up popped River Song, and I went, whoa, this is sooo awesome, I love love love this. Then she just completely disappeared, and I was like, okay, bored now. Methinks, I need a smart forty-something woman in this series for it to work for me? Except, I liked Amy and Rory better than any of the other companions...so. In fact, I think I'd be happiest if we had David Tennant, Amy/Rory, and River Song and just went from there. The current Doctor/Companion I'm rather ambivalent about. My flist's adoration of the pairing is lost on me. But then, I didn't understand their love of Doctor/Rose either.)