EricMontreal22

HBO vs Showtime is weird when it comes to sex. Showtime has more overall nudity--however, they rarely show full frontal and never have (that I know of) shown full frontal male, both of which HBO does (well not enough of the male...) QAF was actually pretty tame nudity wise (the early episodes had a lot less than the UK series.)

I think they could have more (and apparently they will, from what critics have said--certainly Weekend had a ton.) But I am a bit surprised given the potential audience they didn't force it on the pilot. At the same time it is kinda telling--and must be frustrating for anyone involved in launching a new "gay" show--that much of the gay press is split between it focuing way way way too much on sex, or not enough. It's practically down the middle. (I frankly still don't know why Showtime didn't buy into the audience they had with QAF by launching another gay drama...)

It was NOTHING like Girls. It was not "funny" at all. Not bad, just not funny. I'll see what episode two is like, I thought episode one was just fine. But compared to that Sunday evening's Girls and True Detective, it was the weakest of the night's offerings. I won't judge though, because a pilot is a pilot. Slowness is par for the course.

I will say though, I had to catch myself when I asked myself, "So what makes this show special? How is it different from QAF?" The problem with such questioning is, it's totally unfair to compare a "gay show" to another "gay show" just because it's gay. That's like saying Good Times is superfluous because Sanford and Son was already a black sitcom. I'll give this show a chance because I tend to trust HBO's offerings on gp. We'll see.

I agree with much of that (though I liked it a lot more than you did.)

But it is very very different from QAF (the awesome UK and the largely awful US versions.) To be fair both had much more soapy pilots (again especially Season one of the US remake what with the team behind Sisters doing it.) No big potential overdose to cap this episode or someone [!@#$%^&*] an underaged kid, etc.

As someone else said, it makes sense this was by the director of Weekend and that's the feel I got. It is slice of life--there's no initial hook (even Girls which does share a slightly similar "indie film" look and feelhad Hannah moving and her relationship with her parents as the hook.)

I did love the pilot. I can't say if I'll love where it goes--and I do think it would have been smart of HBO to air the first two episodes back to back, but... (most of the positive reviews have said that the show finds its footing in the third episode--the critics got sent four, and there are only eight, so...)

I did like what Nussbaum said about complaints that either the show was too slight and not edgy enough (one gay critic complained that they cut away before the blow job) or else that it's too focused on sex. http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/television/2014/01/20/140120crte_television_nussbaum

I don't really relate to any of the main trio to be honest....I absolutely loath Groff's character. I find him annoying and kinda pathetic really. The lack of diversity is clearly there but I'd be willing to overlook it if it were as fun and engaging as Girls.

That being said this is nothing like Girls. The show is way to sad and somber in some ways. It felt like it way way way too depressing at times....

You didn't find much of the last half of Girls sad and somber?? I really enjoy Girls, but...

I've spoken about this on other forums and facebook a lot, but I really really liked it. I also liked Weekend, which I know many found boring (or hated the fact gays were doing drugs yet again,) and I tend to like somewhat slow shows.

It has gotten very positive press but the negative reactions are hilarious to me. Esquire complains that there are no fun "queens" to keep straight men entertained and that it was unrealistic that there was a Dolly Parton mention but no quotes from gay favorites like Wizard of Oz and All About Eve (...), another critic complained that it was like everyone was stuck in the 70s because no younger current gays would have a stripper at their bachelor party (my friends--unfortunately did,) cruise in a park (no comment,) go--in a future episode--to a bathouse (I haven't, but a lot of friends my age or younger have at least once,) or, again I assume in a future episode, know who Erasure is (when I used to club my friends' favorite night was 80s night.) Then several others have said it's just like Sex and the City because it involved a threeway, people debating moving in together, and being single in a city and looking for a hook up and/or a relationship (nevermind that the tone and style of the episode was not remotely like Sex and the City, particularly their clumsy first season.)

Maybe I just liked it because I've been on *two* awkward dates (I should learn) where I've said things I thought the guy would find funny about my past experiences and just put him off, while ordering another drink once he said he wasn't going to have another...

SMH.

Re: ratings, saw this via Deadline:

http://www.deadline.com/2014/01/hbos-family-tree-will-not-be-renewed-hello-ladies-will-wrap-run-with-special-getting-on-eyes-second-season-pickup/

Yeah I wouldn't worry too much. Girls didn't have good numbers (not that I think this is all that much like Girls) early on. Neither did True Blood. Game of Thrones didn't either. These are all very different shows, and HBO has had some flops, but I think all of the social media attention will get people to tune in to the repeats and later episodes -- whether they like it enough to keep watching is really up to debate, but...

This season has been DREADFUL. I can't believe many critics (and people on my facebook) seem to think it's the best season ever. Just utter crap. Of course now we have confirmation Tim Minear WAS the show runner for Asylum because Murphy and Falchuk were too busy, but was demoted thisyear which makes some sort of sense.

The AV Critic said every single thing I was going to say (and have said over, randomly enough, on a theatre forum where everyone seemed to agree.) http://www.avclub.com/review/go-to-hell-107108

But these two quotes kinda sum it up:

Asylum felt like being driven along a mountain road in a blizzard by a drunk driver who miraculously avoided every single moose that kept leaping out in front of him. Coven is like that same drunk driver going 15 miles per hour down a sleepy suburban street and hitting every mailbox he sees. I cannot wait for American Horror Story, season four, “Probably About Aliens Or Werewolves And Also Communism Or Something.”

• to illustrate the problems with the season, let’s take on LaLaurie’s character arc: Historical serial killer. Made immortal and buried beneath the Earth for centuries. Dug up by Fiona. Made a maid for some reason. Daughter resurrected as a zombie. (Actually, up until this point, it sort of works.) Becomes sympathetic to Queenie. Sold out by Queenie. Becomes an animated head. Goes back to being a serial killer after being reassembled. Takes over her former home. Made mortal again and killed. There’s nothing even approaching a coherent throughline there, and you can extend that to everybody else on the show.
• At least Kathy Bates seems to be having fun, right? Lance Reddick, too. He’s having the time of his life, and who can blame him? And Lily Rabe is really good at stage combat, so that’s something!

I know I should expect it but I hate how episodes leave complete characters out or don't explain how revelations are made.

Ceara was killed offscreen right??? I have lots of questions

Yes, well played by a double. I don't think they ever had a Ceara funeral or anything on Loving so I doubt she showed up[--I was a pretty faithful viewer by then.

I did love that Kate and Louie came to Jeremy and Ceara's wedding, it makes sense since she stayed at Kate's a few months before on Lovi9ng and helped get them back together.

 

I hated S2. It was just too dark for me and none of the characters besides maybe Kit were appealing

 

And yet I loved Season 2 (though I am completely with you about this year, good and bad...)

I actually didn't watch the last two episodes either--as much as I love to hate-watch the show, it just got SOOOOOO slow.

I think they blew the show's entire budget on that promo.

So the witch hunter kills the black people and LaLaurie suddenly cares about the "darkies." Murphy has serious issues about race/ethnicity.

But that's not why she became tolerant, silly. It was listening to them singing. Sheesh--you really can't understand the subtle way Murphy is dealing with this theme.

I really liked this episode, actually... Until the ending montage. UGH. OK, I was not upset because for once and for all Ryan Murphy's statement in the Summer that after having a kid, and yet another high school shooting he would avoid gun violence on his shows. But come on. Between the massacre of black people (including a suicide,) played to an important piece of music and Kathy Bate's head FINALLY crying after not showing an inch of remorse while listening to it...

Sigh. Oh well, three weeks I guess till the last few episodes.

It is, but it holds up for me. For me RTD's show was more about character, Moffat is more about cool/epic moments (Hey! Wouldn't it be cool if the Doctor rode up the side of a building! Yeah let's put that in, etc.) Of course the irony is Moffat wrote probably my fave individual episodes.

And yes it's old--I tried to find a round table discussion with various Who writers about the strengths and weaknesses of both men done after the anniversary ep but for the life of me I can't find the link. I think calling Moffat a misogynistis wrong, but there's little doubt that every female character he creates exists as a sort of puzzle for the Doctor to solve. It's getting old for me.

I love both of those things. Fight me IRL.

Well you can't always show great taste.

I don't "get" the Cybermen. They're not visually interesting or terribly scary (whereas I as a grown man think the Dalek's are pretty terrifying (they're garbage cans on wheelies, it's ridiculous!)) I don't know why they keep coming back other than they used to be one of the Doctor's big foes.

Really? I actually find them scarier...

I don't "get" the Cybermen. They're not visually interesting or terribly scary (whereas I as a grown man think the Dalek's are pretty terrifying (they're garbage cans on wheelies, it's ridiculous!)) I don't know why they keep coming back other than they used to be one of the Doctor's big foes.

Really? I actually find them scarier...

Not particularly fond of her. In fact I find her immensely annoying. The only reason I don't completely hate her is because of my inexplicable fondness for Alex Kingston even though I think she's wildly miscast.

River's such clusterfuck of a character. I think of characters like her as "paper clips." They get bent and twisted back and forth and finally they break. Archaeologist, friend, nemesis, daughter, diva, wife, hologram...I really didn't buy any of it. I didn't see any chemistry. Not with The Doctors or Amy or Rory. I did think she worked well enough as a con artist, thief, time traveler.

I guess that the bottom line is that whenever River Song showed up, my first thought was "Argh. You again?" The show never gave me a decent answer to that.

ETA: Plus I hate the fact that her existence is a result of Amy and Rory being cheated out of being young parents.

River Song is an example of what I hate about Moffatt's writing (the long story arcs and his female characters, anyway.) I liked her when she made one or two appearances during Davies' run (in episodes written by Moffat, I believe) but...

The River Song problem http://io9.com/5938410/does-steven-moffat-have-a-master-plan-for-doctor-who

OK now I'm confused--the US cinema screenings were Monday? here we got it live on Sat early afternoon. Hrmm.

As for Colin -- I wish he would have done two years. I loved Tennant, much of the time, but near the end he often was slightly unbearable to me with all of his catchphrases and goofy moments.

I caught it in Canada and the showing was sold out for a month in advance (a friend of a friend couldn't go so I snagged his ticket.)

I loved Colin as the doctor. There, I said it.

Anyway, this article completely exaggerates things - as blog posts tend to do, but I have to say I agree with many of the points about how Moffat writes women. https://theidiotboxx.wordpress.com/2013/05/03/what-is-wrong-with-doctor-who/

Awwww Cristian#1!!! My 10 year old self was too mad when he was replaced with David fumero.

My twin sister had a brief period there where she really got into OLTL (after i had been watching it a few years.) It was the only soap she took to, and though she had largely stopped watching by the time they replaced Christian, she was horrified by the fact that her big crush had been replaced by a typical soap male model stud who (at the time) could barely deliver lines.

I think if they played there cards right this opening could be just as iconic as the AMC "Falling Pictures" opening.

It was a good compromise--I'm not a huge fan but I could accept it, using elements of the 80s opening, but updated (sorry Peobo fans, that beloved song with nonsensical lyrics simply can not work on a show post 1980s )

Well, it is one of the greatest movies Hollywood ever made with a story that is a classic. I am more interested in the accusation that this perceived slight to soap actors really. She is being accused of some crummy things and that will thing sure seems fishy.

I totally agree there. But it doesn't sound like they even tried to contact her for a statement (maybe legally she's not allowed?) That's why it doesn't sound like legit journalism but more something from a gossip rag.

Yes, I adore All About Eve. But if I was a reporter, I wouldn't try to see a story that could somewhat be shoehorned into the film's scenario and run with it. *shrug*. I see it as a *slight* dig at soap stars just because they underplay her career by referring her simply as a a minor soap star so that the story sounds even more like Eve -- if that makes sense. If they had said "Francesca James who has a history working on screen and off screen on soaps" that wouldn't give the story the spin they want.

I mean they are pretty awful accusations, but in cases like this there are always multiple sides. Harris is well known to have had a tumultuous time with her family and children, going back before (from what this article says) Francesca moved in. I know in the 80s she had her son barred from some awards show (the Tonys?)

(I admit though, I love the idea of picturing James playing Mrs Danvers )

Personally, I don't want a romance. I like them most as partners and family. So many shows get ruined by shipping, I pray this won't be one.

Oh please make it clear -- nor do I. I just don't have enough faith to think they aren't holding on to that card to play later.

We'll see, but an interracial romance by two lead characters is a rare thing on tv outside of Scandal which has an African American woman producer. Based on the interviews with the producers of SH, they have no intention of going there with Abby and Ichabod. And after the Person of Interest Carter/Reese debacle, I am taking the SH producers at their word until I see something otherwise on the screen.

I dunno, I think they're just keeping it as their ace in the hole when they run out of things or ratings slide. Yes, I sound cynical, and the producers so far seem smart about this--but I stand by that. I mean even X-Files succumbed.

I dunno, I suspect come season 2 (OK, maybe three...) there will be. Yeah they know that the show works best without it, but they will be unable to resist going there. Mark my words.