EricMontreal22

What was Weekend's plot? It showed character growth, I agree, but a plot is a sequence of events. Looking has far more of a plot. You're right about Frank--I guess I saw it more as them trying to show (and perhaps too obviously) that he was the more domestic of the two, rather than the more "girlie" one. I dunno. The show works for me -- even comparing it to something like the US Queer as Folk I find it a refreshing change. That said, I do appreciate reading differing opinions, and I liked that you actually gave reasons for why you don't like it as opposed to just saying it was boring (And I actually find myself agreeing with some of your points.)

I don't think they even tried to hide the fact, unlike most TV shows, but it did make some parts--at least from my perspective as someone who lived for a while in Toronto and around the Church Street gay village--unintentionally funny. Like the whole charity bike ride storyline. I think Cowen/Lipp were too earnest to realize when their show fell into camp. However, I am certain some of the other writers, like Brad Fraser must have realized it. I do agree with you that, despite my many complaints, the show was sometimes deeply affecting.

Ha I love when people feel the need to apologize for disliking a show. I don't think I'd like a show if it was one that nobody disliked (if that makes any sense...) But at least you watch which helps the show I never thought Frank was girlish, but I don't think Auggie's story is about him trying to get rid of him. Granted, part of the style of the show is that it doesn't have strong stories--and this goes back to people finding it boring. You either find that interesting, or not. I find all the characters to *some* level relatable enough that I can't say any are unlikeable, but then again, as I've said before here, I often tend to like shows (books, movies, plays...) where others complain that the characters are not likeable. I don't watch tv because the characters are people I'd want to have over for a dinner party. The show was given the greenlight, I suspect, largely due to the praise given Weekend (a film some hate for the same reasons.) And yeah, it's cheap, and it appeals to a desirable demographic. I do laugh whenever Dom brings up Piri Piri Chicken, but I think that's partly meant to happen. It's not like anyone involved thinks this is a all-important issue, but it shows what a rut the character is in and how desperate he is to try to get out of it. (Maybe it helps that I have a friend who was similarly obsessed with the food truck he opened in Montreal which, much to my other friends' amazement has actually been a success. He discussed his specialized sushi *endlessly*)

Soaps what parts did you see that seemed to be going for shock, out of curiousity? I mean compared to something like QAF where each character fit a gay "type" and they did party drugs (I'm not counting weed) every episode...

Trade journals tend to classify anything that's 30mins as a comedy. Odd.

Shows like this polarize people, so I wouldn't take that too seriously. The fact it's one of the only scripted "gay" dramas on right now, and that it's done in a style that people seem to love or hate, it makes sense that it's split people so much. But I agree with you.

Great news. I wonder if it's 8 episodes again--I wouldn't mind a bump to 10.

I think you did. Not saying you'd love the show, but when people react to the show usually and don't like it they call it out on being completely boring, not titillating or cheap But I guess you caught the sex scene.

Well the AVclub critic for Looking does love talking about the "camera angles" lol, but I mostly appreciate that. Haigh's a great director at subtle but realistic stuff, and the few other directors who have helmed the episodes he hasn't have done a good job of following his style (incidentally the director of this week's episode, Joe Swanberg is one of the top "mumblecore" indie directors out there, although I have found the films of his I've seen pretty dull to sit through, LOL.) I hate to say it but I could sadly kinda relate to Patrick suddenly inviting him to the wedding as a pretty lame, but earnest attempt to prove he was serious. I know in the past when I've had falling outs in relationships (friends or more) I've suddenly jumped into panic mode and done the same thing, only later either regretting it, or else realizing why the person in question, rightly, found it kinda insulting. Again, in my early thirties, I think I'm much more aware and do that less, but as Patrick said, he's slow. (And yeah about that preview, and Patrick's mom, I assume, asking if Kevin who is somehow at the wedding--it's like he has a tracking device on Pat--asking if that's his bf Richie... I think there'll be more cringing to come.)

Completely agreed. I know Davies said (maybe in the introduction to the published scripts of the first season which are interesting with the cut material) that he didn't really see how these three characters (specifically 14-15 year old Nathan, who of course they aged up for the US version) could remain in each others world. This speaks to another problem I've stated having with the US version. Davies unapologetically always said he was writing about these specific characters, not the gay scene or experience as a whole. That's one reason the lesbians aren't really seen. Cowlip productions said in way too many interviews they wanted to represent the gay world as a whole--including gay women. An admirable goal but it doesn't work for me--aside from the fact that they simply didn't. I mean from one obvious perspective, where were the non-white people? And their world felt more insular to me--yes they had gay bashing, etc, stories but for an American town almost all of these characters lived in a very gay world, which made even less sense than focusing on Canal street in the UK version when Manchester does have a large gay scene compared to Pittsburgh or whatever the remake was. And that's fine, the US show worked best IMHO as a sorta gay fantasy, with some real issues. I just found the creators disingenuous and deluded when they insisted it was so realistic of the time. But yeah, the second season of the UK version (which really plays more as a two hour movie followup) has a lot of great stuff, but ultimately was a bit disappointing, although I kinda liked the crazy Vince and Stuart fantasy ending that nearly everyone hated. As you probably know, CH4 was all set, and even got scripts written for a more sitcom-y spin off featuring Hazel and the other periphery characters but for whatever reason it fell apart at the last minute. I'm not sure how much I wouldhave enjoyed it, but it was probably a smart thing to do with the franchise instead of trying to make the central conceit work. (On the other hand, as much as I hated a lot of some of the later seasons of the US show, it undeniably came into its own when they ran out of remaking the plots of the UK version, for good and bad. Watching the US pilot and seeing much of the UK script replaced with some terrible one liners, etc, didn't give me much hope.) I suppose if you wanted to sustain the basic setup you had to make the characters more forgiving of Stuart/Brian. But like I said, the fact that he didn't even seem to have any real passion for life, sex, drugs or whatever in the US version made that hard for me to take. When I was briefly pursuing theatre at university here, the actress who played Lindsay (I won't use her full name just cuz I hope this doesn't pop up on her google search or something ) moved to Victoria because her husband became the new head of theatre at the university here. He has a big background, but also was always a bit creepy and high on himself (and MUCH older, she met and fell for him when he was her theatre prof, before that he was married to a popular Canadian character actress who has had leads on various Canadian shows like Corner Gas and Riverdale the Canadian attempt at a Coronation Street soap.) I did some work with her and I will say she's pretty awesome in person and did a production of Streetcar Named Desire here where her Blanche was, much to my surprise, phenomenal. I never really got that from her one note character on QAF (I won't even critique her acting on the ridiculously bad Dante's Cove which has a number of Victoria people in it because she was probably one of the better actors on that.) For the record Creators and some actors aside the US QAF probably was more Canadian, with much ofthe cast and writing team (I mentioned in the other thread one of my fave Canadian playwrights, Brad Fraser joined later on) being Canadian, and it was always fun to see the Toronto locations. The show was such a huge hit in Canada that apparently the Canadian cable network Showcase that co-financed it wanted it to run at least one more season, but that was nixed at the last minute.

Woot (and what, True Dick hasn't been renewed yet officially?)

That's exactly how I saw it. Obviously Frank seemed to be doing it more for Auggie (another of his "art" projects?) at first, but then when he was really into it Aug was completely on the outside and might as well have not even been there (unlike how when CJ was filming Aug and Frank, Auggie was obviously playing up for the camera.) I hate to just always link AV reviews, but I thought they were pretty spot on in their observations this week-- While perhaps not a shocking insight, I liked this paragraph from avclub's review--I liked the episode more than them (they gave it a B, one of the lower ratings if not the lowest) but I agree some of the few issues I do have are symptomatic of having to do all this in just 8 episodes "The problem with having eight episodes to tell this much story is that one week Patrick and Richie are showing every other romantic hero on television how it’s done and the next Patrick’s falling in their footsteps. After the disastrous picnic, Patrick tries to prove to Richie that he isn’t embarrassed of him. So this is what he says: “What are you doing two weeks from now?” He’s trying to invite Richie to his sister’s wedding, but Richie understandably isn’t having it. So he keeps kissing him. Notice the pattern yet? “Looking In The Mirror” is about people using sex to solve non-sexual problems. But they aren’t solving them. They’re distracting from them. When Dom kisses Lynn, it’s because that’s the kind of relationship he’s used to. Frank just wants to make Agustín feel better, but Agustín needs a different kind of support. Now Patrick is so desperate to keep Richie that he makes a big leap without considering if that’s what he wants, if that’s fair to Richie, and if that really addresses the issue at hand." http://www.avclub.com/tvclub/looking-looking-in-the-mirror-201399

I think this was a problem with importing the character from the UK version. Look, I certainly have friends in my life who I feel loyalty to and even love towards, and have known forever, but have some of Brian's issues (emphasis on some.) I just had a hard time that going into your thirties they still would frankly call him out on his crap so rarely. I didn't feel quite that way towards Stuart in the UK version, where I got that. Some of that may have been that the actual dialogue writing was more nuanced. A lot of it probably was due to the fact that we just saw those characters for--what a year of their life? Not 5 or 6, so it was easier to buy. I also think Gale played Brian much more one dimensionally (but again that may be the writing, and I do think he improved as an actor) even if many people who prefer the US version go on about how Brian is, in a model type way, better looking he comes off as more vacant and less charismatic to me. As Diva says, he just seems so bored with everything for so much of the show. Even sex (which Stuart never was bored by--well not mostly.) I mean seriously, for as handsome as I do find Gale, how boring did sex with Brian seem to be most of the time? I would say that could have been the point, except with Cowen and Lipman or whatever the headwriters' names are (those Sisters guys ) they wanted to have it both ways.

Aog? LOL I dunno, I thought, as mad as much of that Patrick/Richie stuff made me, it felt realistic. He really is "slow" as he says and I think doesn't realize what he's doing until after the fact--things like trying to make Richie's job sound more exciting to his boss, etc. I could sorta see myself, I hate to say, doing that... when i was 19 years old. Not at 30, but like I said, slow. Ha, I was thrilled, I hate to admit, at how miserable poor Auggie looked when it was obvious CJ and Frank were having the more intimate sex in their threesome. Misery loves company. Augustin seems deeply unhappy with everything in his life, really (and is he just stealing this $220 an hour from Frank to hang out with CJ? When that comes out it won't be good...)

I admit I had a hard time believing that Brian's friends would stick by him for as long as they did...

I said as much in the Looking thread but I agree completely. Love the UK series. I admit maybe I'm a bit too hard on the remake--I did watch it all as it aired, but I don't think I could be convinced to sit through it again...

The AVClub critic claims that the screener copies sent out are in general too dark (he did a comparison of one shot) but I assume you're not watching those I found the lighting fine on my set... http://www.avclub.com/tvclub/looking-for-the-future-107072

I pretty much agree with everything the AV Club said in their review. http://www.avclub.com/tvclub/looking-for-the-future-107072%C2"'> Great stuff (not surprising that Haigh wrote and directed since it did play a lot like Weekend, except we already know these characters somewhat well by now which in some ways made it work better for me.) And a rimming scene on tv! I actually found it interesting how they brought up the whole "bottom shame" thing--I don't remember the QAF remake doing that

I FINALLY caught up (I was forcing myself to finish an essay before watching, as a sort of reward, though that didn't stop me from wasting hours on forums and even commenting on here already) so am back reading the comments I skipped over. I don't have much to add, but... I think the Augustine/Frank thing was foreshadowed by the fact that when they DID open their relationship up to a threeway (for the first time, I think) happened to be the day they were moving in together. Aug clearly does have feelings for Frank, but he's not willing to let go of his other life yet. Add in the callboy, and I think he feels like he's missing out, or yet to experience some mythical amazing experimental life (if that makes ANY sense) and is still searching for that. It's a bit more complex than the same old grass is always greener thing. Haigh's first film, before the excellent Waiting, was Greek Pete which I thought was interesting but not really that great. It was a half docu half fiction piece following a London male prostitute (basically the "actors" were all real people playing themselves but the scenes were staged albeit based on real scenes.) I know Haigh is exec producer and the head director but not officially a writer, but I can't help but think he instigated this storyline.

You have excellent taste!

This Sunday's episode climbed up to nearly 500K viewers in its first showing alone, as well as having not as big a drop-off from Girls as previously, which is good news. Maybe a second season will happen (Enlightened had two seasons, and never got half that many viewers and I can see Looking catching on more with DVDs since its short season and episode length would encourage binge viewing.)

Exactly. But maybe Looking does share something else with Girls -- some people just can't get into a show with "unlikeable" characters (I've already seen people calling August the Jessa of Looking...) I admit, I never get this argument when it comes to shows, movies, books, plays, whatever. I tend to actually like works best where many complain that the characters are too unlikeable... Annoying, or unmotivated is something else, but I don't watch shows because the characters are likeable.

We had one... somewhere. I assume you mean Jessa? Man they've made her hard to root for this year. Some have said that it's a reaction to critics complaining Hannah was so unlikeable last year, so they made her look even less so with Jessa (and Adam's sister...) I need to catch up with Girls (and Looking) this week.

Ha I suppose it depends on who you read--I did a quick look and it seems divided. I really liked last season, but I do remember at the time a number of people getting down on it being too heavy, so you probably have a point. But a number of critics have called this season, especially the early episodes, too "sitcom-y"

Absolutely agreed on both points. At first Girls was some sort of "indie" version of Sex and the City (because everything is compared to SatC) and now everything is compared to Girls. I think they share some superficial similarities, sorta (Looking and Girls I mean) at least more than any other show I can think of currently on tv -- in terms of look and style, but even there, not really all that much. Girls apparently isn't having a great year either (though I'm still enjoying it even if I *somewhat* agree with people saying it's a bit more sitcomish this year.)