EricMontreal22

Well at least they were wise enough to not bring Zachary Quinto back. Bleh.

I hope he knows better than to come back. I've never been a huge fan, but after seeing bootleg videos and hearing all the praise he really is killing it in Glass Menagerie on Broadway and has some talent I never realized. Maybe he only works well on stage, or even in the role of Tom--a role that is so often played badly by the likes of Sam Watterston and John Malkovich (I think he is in Ryan Murphy's tv film of The Normal Heart--since he was in the recent revival--something I'm kinda dreading. How the hell did Murphy get that property after years of Larry Kramer refusing it to anyone?)

Nothing at all. Maybe a few "outrageous" scenes, but. I mean there was barely even any nudity.

I would say its the only season that has.

Absolutely, and I give Tim Minear as showrunner credit for that. Of course he was still on the writing team this year, but Murphy's shows otherwise when he's showrunner are notorious for just dropping stories.

We agree there--it also managed to resolve (nearly) all the various plot and character threads, by some miracle.

I think just the first one--that's something HBO has started doing with new shows (which is smart, I think.)

I enjoy Girls still but, maybe they took the criticisms of last season to heart -- it's actually a bit too sitcom-y for me this season. I have no issue with people not liking it -- it's just this constant comparison thing that bugs me. It's not enough like Girls. Or I've seen people list all the ways it's EXACTLY like SatC (because it's about single friends in a certain city and they even have a threesome in one scene! Umm ok....)

One thing I have really appreciated is the camerawork/directing of the episodes (maybe no surprise since Haigh from Weekend directed the first three, though it looks like he's only directing two of the remaining ones--which is still a large amount of episodes for one series.) Often with these somewhat "mumblecore"/indie style shows I find the directing just sloppy (Girls suffers from this--and I say that as a fan.) But, while it looks fairly spontaneous, you can tell with Looking its meticulously planned.

The AV Club reviewer has perhaps emphasized this strength too much in his reviews, but I think he makes some good points about subtle techniques that really work (some may be due to scripting and editing too, like in the pilot when you're introduced to each of the three leads at sequential times in their morning -- ie one is just waking up in bed, next shot another is getting ready to leave the house, next shot the third is heading to work.)

Here's a bit from the episode three review about the different techniques:

"What’s really impressive is how each episode, all of which have been directed by Haigh, has a defining shot type. The first episode is about the two-shot, that hard-fought representation of two guys actually coming together. The second is about the long shot, those immersive sequences where the audience soaks up the moment. “Looking At Your Browser History” is about the rack focus. Even when two guys do share a shot, only one is clearly visible at a time. With the focus veering between Patrick and Kevin in one scene and Agustín and the escort the next (Dom and Lynn get good old-fashioned one-shots, but the effect is similar), you can’t help but feel the ping pong, the flirty back and forth of two strangers getting to know one each other. Patrick speaks, Kevin reacts, Kevin speaks, Patrick reacts. Everything else fades into the background."

http://www.avclub.com/review/looking-at-your-browser-history-107070

There'sa lot of them in episode three that aired last week, if you've not watched. I think it's decent. I like Tovey and for whatever reason I find him more hot on this show than in Being Human.

Is the full thing on youtube? I saw a clip on Hulu but couldn't access it but heard that Groff was asked, yet again, if it was a gay Girls.

One thing I WILL say is that I don't yet feel the friend chemistry between the three leads. I feel like the group scenes between Patrick, Dom, and Augustin are the weakest/falsest on the series. The scenes of them in their dating/working/outside social lives feel much more authentic.

I do somewhat agree with that. I got some of the right feeling from, when, say Patrick phoned Augustin after the bad sex experience, but when it's the three of them together, and not just two, it feels less real to me and more "scripty"

Just one more reply to sun's comment

"It does seem out of touch with the times though. The music, the bathhouse, even the bars/clubs seem out of place."

I think that's just the thing. With whose time or reality? I assume, and this is not a bad thing at all, that you mean your own experiences in the gay "scene" (if there even is a gay scene...) And that's fine, but it seems completely in touch with mine (something the US QAF, even when I enjoyed it, never did except maybe in the initial coming out scenes but I'm pretty thankful to have a show for once that makes zero mention of anyone having to come back to anyone--family, friends or strangers.) I think that's one reason some are taking issue with the show, but (and I'm not pointing this at you) it misses the point that it's not meant to be about some universal gay experience.

Diva, I have no doubt about that. The show had basically found its formula (more than basically) by then, and honestly while hey I liked some of Sisters a lot but Ron Cowen and Daniel Lipman are hardly groundbreakers (as groundbreaking as their 80s gay/AIDS TV movie A Touch of Frost was for its time.)

Sunspear, we're just gonna have to agree to disagree. The bars/clubs are exactly what I experienced in San Francisco the several times I've been there (it has to be said that SF has a much older seeming gay scene than I initially expected -- more so than, say, Montreal.) I'm 33, so about the age of the cast or somewhere in between, and none of the things showed seem remotely out of touch with the times to me. It certainly doesn't have any real big "oh wow" moments, though I think the direction is often subtly genius, more so than other "mumblecore/indie" style TV series out there. Just the way things are shot -- like the scene at the club in episode two and what is focused on, etc, are done with much more thought than say most of the direction in Girls (a show I do mostly enjoy.)

I'm not sure anything can be read into his using race issues and slave torture, other than it being a backdrop for "shocking" the audience. Kathy Bates and Angela Bassett were this season's Nazi and holocaust survivor. I don't think he was highlighting injustice or trying make a point/deliver a message. Is it poor taste? Definitely. Gratuitous? Oh yes. Offensive? That depends on the viewer. If one views it in a vaccuum, it's means nothing and should be taken as such. Just like everything else on this show, everything is resolved via death anyway (using horror licence as a justification) so what point could there be other than escapist nonsense? To try read anything deeper, is to give the show more credit than it deserves or it aims to be. It's all meaningless fluff and if one can accept that without being offended, it can be fun (but one may need a shower afterwards regardless...)

Fair enough--and I largely agree with that.

My issue is two fold. He repeatedly said how he understood why many found Asylum (which worked for me, but I get it) too disturbing, Tim Minear was downgraded from showrunner, Murphy back in and he promised repeatedly how this season would be about fun and camp. That's fine, but while I think it's fair for a show like this to go into poor taste (as horror often does) and for shocks, but he also in his Ent Weekly weekly recaps stressed how important and powerful he thought his whole racism message was. So I do think he aims for more.

I have the same wish for HBO giving the show a second season, but I don't think they'll change how they'll write the characters and their storylines. I don't think we'll have QAF Ted/Job like problems happening to Patrick, Agustin or Dom in the second season (if it happens)

That's why I find the constant need to compare Looking to all the other shows, especially QAF so unnecessary and even more limiting to viewers. They're trying so hard to categorize the show, that they're not letting themselves to let go and just watch the show. Go on the journey with these characters. The issues with how much/not enough sex, the ways that they go about having sex and the music thing is odd. These characters are not sexless gay characters, quick with a flippant comment, always fabulous aka "on" and their lives are in the forefront, without them ALL needing a "Grace" to their "Will". Now, some complaints about there not being enough females in all the characters lives. This show isn't supposed to focus on those characters.

Clubs, even ones in this day and age will play Erasure, Bronski Beat, etc. Those groups and their songs still inspire DJs, musicians and little gay/bi boys and lesbian/bi girls out here in this world today.

I think some folks just want to feel apart of this, even if they hate the show and will continue to watch and come up with new topics to pick on during each new episode.

Agreed.

When I was more into going clubs the night my friends liked to go to to the most, anyway, were 80s nights (and I'm about the age of all of these characters.) I or my friends have all done apparently retro things like gone to a bath house (...) cruised a park just to see what it was like (admittedly I'd find that too scary myself ) etc.

Interesting what you say about Fraser and QAF. Maybe sometime I'll catch him off guard and ask him -- when he does talk about it now he says the actual writing room experience and hanging out on set was some of the happiest time in his career (granted at least some of this was due to getting a *steady* paycheque for doing something he loves.)

Frontal nudity in episode 3

Ha a distant shower shot, right? Or did I miss more -- still I guess that's something Did QAF ever have full frontal nudity?

Exactly. It's an 8 episode 30 minute series -- for a drama (or however its classified) that's not really a lot of time. I suppose if people already find that boring than they should just move on, but... I do find some of the more critical reactions on blogs funny, though. One person will complain that the show simply is not gay enough, another person complains that, for example, they show a bathouse, cruising in the park and dancing to 80s music like Erasure so the show is somehow out of touch with the times (whatever that means,) etc

It's a shame they had a good theme with the witches, but they didn't play it right. Honestly, I would've kept things 100% present day with no Frankenstein's and for Kathy Bates and Angela Bassett, I would've come up with more interesting characters for them. They tried to do too much and ended up wasting so much good story, as usual.

Agreed. It really suffered from one of Ryan Murphy's worst problems -- where he gets obsessed with random little story and character ideas and then loses interest in the sparkly things almost immediately. Let's do incest! OK, now let's delve into the history of New Orleans and their race culture. Wait howabout a Witch with a killer vagina! OK, enough of that WITCH HUNTERS!! Creepy ghost butler guy will get the sacrificed baby, no one will notice, right? Creepy incestuous religious fanatic! Etc. I mean really the ultimate story I guess was the search for the Supreme, which got brought up early on and then was barely even brought up again until the end.

The slow burn is better than the fast pace, chop chop and exciting things that another person might have chosen to do, if they had created the show.

I feel absolutely the same--the third episode especially. I guess it's really just an issue again of there being so few "gay" shows, so a number of people who probably would never have seen Weekend either, are disappointed that they don't immediately relate with it, or do find it boring (which seems to be the main criticism.) I don't, *shrug* I just hope HBO decides to at least give it a second season.

BTW you mentioned Lorimer the short film that inspired it--I've been trying to track that down. Did you see it online?

I had no idea Randy Harrison was so vocal about his role on QAF in the end, but I can't say I blame him==most of the time I wanted to punch Justin in the mouth. Of course part of the issue was simply that the show had to keep Justin in Brian's orbit, probably partly due to uninspired writing but also due to the fanbase. I remember Davies said one reason he couldn't see QAF going on long was that he just didn't think that the equivalent character, at his age and experience, would stay in the same social world as the others for long (there were plans for a sitcom spin off involving Vince's mother and her group but for whatever reason it never happened, though I believe scripts were written.) Of course that was a problem with the North American QAF in general--they felt like they had to, and were, representating every type of gay and lesbian character, and I think ultimately that meant they didn't do a great job with any of them. Davies got in some flack for not having the lesbian characters very prominent but as he pointed out, that wasn't who he was telling his story about. In that instance I think Looking is similar, and I appreciate that, though I suppose I can appreciate that that means if an audience member doesn't want to spend 30 minutes with those characters than they're not gonna like the show.

If anything I thought the early QAF stories were more ridiculous than some of the later ones (aside from nonsense like Emmett's affair with the football player).

Gale and whoever played Justin started phoning it in long before the last season.

The story that really turned me off I think was mid series (season 3?) where Ted became a sex obsessed meth head. I dunno why, but it just rubbed me the wrong way (sure, it could be argued it's an important story to tell, and one that certainly happens, but it felt particularly nasty to me to show Brian daily do drugs and hook up but make it all work, and then poor unattractive Ted does the same thing and falls into some gay porno Hell with all his friends writing him off.) Brad Fraser, a Canadian gay playwright who I really admire, and have some sort of "facebook" friendship with (Mia Kirshner and Thomas Gibson were in a movie of his most well known play, Love and Human Remains) was one of the main writers for the final seasons of the show, and while his plays are always over the top and sexually graphic I was disappointed that he didn't seem to bring much of what I liked about his work to QAF (I have to be careful what I say on FB about the show, lol.) By the final year it did just sorta putter along -- I still watched every week but only because it was a social thing with some of my friends, I barely was even paying attention.

She performed the song in the opening scene as well.

I liked this season and the finale for what it is worth - escapist popcorn. In Season 1 and 2, virtually every character's storyline resolved through death - at least some got to live in this season!

I thought there was some substance to Season 2, but this felt more like season 1 in being less serious.

My issue with that is then why was it the season Murphy decided to focus so much on slave torture and race issues? From the start he said he wanted this season to be lighter and more fun, but...

As to the low ratings, while I think they will climb for episode two due to all the social media attention (but of course, after that, depending on what people think, fall again) they did do better than recent 30 minute HBO series that didn't have Game of Thrones on at the same night. And to put it in perspective, when ratings (even on cable) were larger, I found this about QAF.

"Showtime’s “Queer as Folk” proved there was an audience for later gay-themed entertainment like “Queer Eye for the Straight Guy,” “The L Word” and the recently launched cable network Logo.
But in its final season, “Folk” has lost most of that audience. Ratings for the once-hip show have fallen by more than half since its 2000 debut, and it’s in the midst of its worst year ever.
Through July 10, the most recent data available, new “Folk” episodes are averaging a 0.30 household rating, according to Nielsen numbers provided by Magna Global USA. That’s down 12 percent from last year’s 0.34 average.
It’s off 57 percent from the show’s third-season average of 0.7, and down 66 percent from 2000-2001’s premiere season average of 0.87.
Most shows fade somewhat by their fifth season, but why the steep dropoff for “Folk,” which has remained in the same Sunday 10 p.m. timeslot and enjoyed lots of press coverage for its sex-soaked storylines?
Actually, it may be because of those storylines. A year after gay marriage was a critical, and very divisive, issue in the 2004 election, a show like “Folk” was bound to slip.
While “Queer Eye” and “Will &Grace” play gay for laughs, “Folk” stays serious and issue-oriented, with the gay marriage debate showing up in this year’s storylines. And that may be too much for formerly casual viewers to take.
“Look at where the gay community was five years ago and what's happened since the election,” “Folk” writer-producer Daniel Lipman told the Associated Press during last week’s Showtime Television Critics Association presentation.
With gays feeling increasing scrutiny over gay marriage and adoption, some homosexual viewers may have become exasperated with the promiscuity of several “Folk” characters, not wanting to watch a show that some say enforces stereotypes."

http://www.medialifemagazine.com:8080/News2005/jul05/jul18/3_wed/news4wednesday.html

(I love how they didn't mention that people maybe just got tired of how increasingly ridiculous QAF's stories got as being a reason... And the fact that five years, even if the show were great, is around when viewers really drop off for most cable shows.)

Is the show airing the 3rd or 2nd episode on Saturday night to avoid competiting with this year's Super Bowl telecast?

Eric - I have the same feelings towards QAFUK vs. QAFUS.

I'm glad I appreciate that many people--people whose opinions I respect--love the US/Canadian QAF. I've noticed most of them didn't see the original till after (there are comments on Amazon that complain about the original how ugly the actors are and the sex is toned down. I guess I prefer somewhat realistic looking men who can act, and the sex was actually more graphic but also more realistic--no MTV montages, so...)

The second episode airs this week, its the third episode (and 6th I think of Girls?) that airs the sat before the Superbowl, though they will repeat it Sunday. I think that makes sense--I hate when they take a break (and for an 8 episode series that's pretty deadly--interesting the UK original QAF was, I think, 8 30 minute episodes as well.)

I love the nurse/doctor lady--I love the actress regardless,buther conversation felt real to me (not a typical fag hag even though she had dated him--obviously not still hung up on him ala QAF).

To be honest, your opinion makes sense--we just disagree. I thought the bus scene felt realistic to my experiences--I didn't want a QAF moment. (But, as everyone on here knows, as much as I loved the UK QAF--it blew me away when it first aired and I was still in high school--the US one, which I kinda watched anyway because my friends all did, greatly annoyed me.) The critics whohave loved it (and it does have a very high metacritic score) have said that it doesn't really find itself till episode 3. For an 8 episode, 30 minute show that may be too slow--they really should have atleast premiered the first two together I think.

S2 was disturbing to the point I could not watch past eppy 6. It was meaningless horror. I think S1 was better structured, but S3 is still my fav because Bates and Bassett are amazing. Jessica too.

I think the final episodes of S2 justified (most) of the horror. I find things like quips about shoving red hot pokers up peoples asses, a raping minotaur, and the fetishizing of slave torture (this part is questionable, I admit) more shock for shock's sake.

Yes it's great seeing these Grande Dames chew the scenery--although by now I feel like they are just writing Jessica Lange as a mix of her past characters--she deserves better. They obviously are having fun. I still find the hour flies past, even if I find this season lacking in any really memorable characters that stick with me minutes after the show is gone.

I dunno--I get that people found Season 2 super depressing (though I still wonder why Ryan Murpy decided his "fun campy" season--as he describes it--was the place to address slave and race issues) but nearly every single insane plot thread all made sense by the end and miraculously came together. EVen in Season 1 -- while I found the explanations too easy -- this was true. This year the writers seem to be just like "*shrug* I'm bored with this, let's move on." So little on screen adds up to anything. Such as Nan and her "romance" with that religious guy and all that--what was the point of it but to fill time because they knew that this "We need a supreme" thing had gotten boring by episode 3? Hell why even have characters go off "to Epcot" at the end of one episode only to be back ten minutes into the next?

And then when they do kill someone, it's shockingly easy. Why didn't they bring own the Witch Hunters ages back for example?

No!! I've just been overwhelmed with school/work this term--are they in the AMC thread? I'd rather watch those than Haves and Have Nots

Wow, I've been out of touch with this forum (aside from the GH thread) for most of Jan, and had no idea the show was back... Debating whether I should download or not. I think I may have to wait for a boozy weekend.