Faulkner

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by RYAN HARDEN (@ryanhardenn)

Now watching The Chair on Netflix with Sandra Oh, Holland Taylor, Bob Balaban, and Jay Duplass. I’m reminded of my ex, who was a history professor, and not in a good way.

35 minutes ago, DramatistDreamer said:

Call me skeptical but this statement doesn't quite do it for me.

 

Tuned in for the first time in a while, and they’re doing another missing person story, this time with Abby? 

Josh is lazy af.

“Daytime” vs. “Primetime” seems like such an antiquated 20th-century distinction in this age of streaming. Most of the Daytime awards are handed out to web properties nowadays, and a lot of the Primetime awards are going to Netflix, etc.

The Daytime Emmys always felt like such a hodgepodge of genres compared to the primetime awards, but it feels even weirder now. I guess this addresses some of that by creating genre distinctions.

This guy’s name is Artem.  

I just watched the first episode. I agree that Kenya is the MVP, followed by messy Ramona.

It’s refreshing to see the women break the fourth wall and acknowledge their status as celebrities/Bravolebrities and not just “a group of friends.” I wish they did that more on the actual Bravo franchises.

The 2019 comparisons are interesting. DAYS demo numbers have basically been halved.

49 minutes ago, divinemotion said:

Now... when I watch couple of 2021 episodes and I open and watch an episode from 2007 it's like Chekhov .

When I watch an episode from 1993 it's like Dostoevsky.

Sad... really sad.

Reusable for all the soaps, but I agree re: KKL/Brooke. I feel the same way about MTS/Nikki on Y&R, who is also used as a buttinsky/glorified Gladys Kravitz, instead of the icon of soaps that she is.

At least Brooke is not playing ping-pong between Bill and Ridge, as that’s the only story Brad seems to give her.

10 minutes ago, ChitHappens said:

Love Rockmond but he has to go!

Ugh. He’s so beautiful.

1 minute ago, Vee said:

Are you ready for another longwinded DW post you won't read? I thought so. SPOILERS for Episode 4:

  Hide contents

Just okay. I was really, truly enjoying this until it got deep into the "Division" backstory stuff. A lot of the time-jumping character vignette material was great fun, even the Angel video game bit which could've been a much larger sequence in a less overstuffed episode. Dan is still a winner as is Vinder's backstory, much more interesting already than Ryan. And I always enjoy seeing the Fugitive Doctor. But the overall mythos stuff with "Division" that Chibnall's trying to force here loses me and makes the episode overall lose out considerably. I followed it all, I'm not confused, it wasn't too much for me  - it's just not very interesting. It's derived from derivatives. That's what makes the Division saga so dumb, and what speaks to Chibnall's failing in Doctor Who going back to the Tennant era.

Last week I thought they were going for full-on operatic camp with Swarm and Azure, like something out of "Enlightenment" with the Eternals (Who, not Marvel). I loved that; all the tacky, chintzy glitter and queer archness right out of the JNT '80s. This week it's back to more macho masturbation. The more Chibnall tries to turn the mythology into an adolescent riff on 2000s scifi movie/FPS games, the more he loses me. I couldn't care less about the retrofit backstory of "Division" or their Doom-esque body armor and big guns. It's all so banal and been there/done that in better movies and other media. It's beneath the franchise, strictly for guys waiting on Halo Infinite. And I say that as a guy who loves video games - but here, trying to turn the mythology of Gallifrey into that, it's just silly. It reminds me a lot of Eric Saward, who wanted DW to be something else to suit his own tryhard concept of the masculine temperament in genre fiction. I find nothing challenging, experimental or unique about it, and I always cheer Who trying to go out of the box (I like "Sleep No More," for God's sake). And that's the shame of it, because instead of any real innovation this is just Doctor Who trying to be fit into a teen-oriented lads-only video rental section from 2003.

The fatal flaw with Chibnall - dating back to his days under RTD, IMO - has been his desperate attempts to fit Who into a gritty, hard-driving action/horror framework he would like it to fit inside. And DW can certainly be dark or gritty and done well. But other men and women dating back to the '60s in Doctor Who have done it all much better. Chibnall's understanding of what makes a story dark and adult has always been extremely superficial and shallow IMO, which is what made his work then and now so often shallow, whether it was on DW or Torchwood. It's what made RTD easily top him with Children of Earth and outclass the entire run of Torchwood in doing so. Chibnall just doesn't have it to tell the kind of stories he wants to with any real unique spark. So what he's done here does not work for me, and it hurts the stuff that really does work in the episode.

It's a shame, because this is still bar none the strongest run of episodes Whittaker has had in her entire era. Watching the Flux run rampant across the universe and the ripple effects of that is quite interesting. It's just that the larger Flux storyline is constantly being unnecessarily re-directed back to center on silly macho stuff I can't take seriously and which serves the Doctor poorly. (Big mistake sending Vinder away so soon, too.) I hope it rights itself, and the vignettes worked well, but if the central axis of story remains all about the secrets of Division, big guns, the Doctor is a Cop Actually, and Are We 2000 AD Yet, the less I care.

I did like Barbara Flynn though, who was introduced a bit late. (She must be the White Guardian.) And a great cliffhanger.

 

I read them, although I’m so out of the loop with watching DW these days. A little burnt out. Haven’t really watched consistently since the first Peter Capaldi season.

Sabalenka is a mess. She just unravels at the worst moments.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Rico Bozant (@rico.bozant1)

8 minutes ago, Errol said:

Frank Valentini is an avid photographer, plus the Disney tie-in. So it's not that odd.

Feels like an odd tonal/stylistic fit IMO. The synergy I get. 

I’m curious what the day-to-day audience will think.

Cross-promo between two Disney properties (NatGeo and GH) but an odd fit.

20 minutes ago, amybrickwallace said:

Agreed!! Bleak is the operative word.

I wish I were happy with GH, as it has many of the ingredients to be good, but I find it a frustrating, disjointed, misguided, deeply unsatisfying show that could theoretically be decent but chooses not to be. None of these shows have the momentum for me to “tune in tomorrow.”

I’m waiting for the next crop of streaming soaps or for the existing network shows to move to streaming permanently.

2 minutes ago, Darn said:

Fs, Fs, Fs across the board!

I can’t give any of these shows a passing grade these days either. It’s a bleak, uninspired landscape IMO.

I know a four-part reunion seems excessive for Potomac, but these women deliver.

If Askale wanted another season from that reunion performance, she failed. She doesn’t seem like a reality-TV personality anyway, so it’s all for the best.

Team Wendy. 

What happened to Berrettini? Seeing tweets that he really injured himself in the Zverev ATP Finals match….

Ok he retired and Sinner (another Italian) will replace him, which I guess is good for the home crowd:

9 minutes ago, carolineg said:

There are Stacy Haiduck stans?  Lol

Alan Sarapa, the soap podcaster, seems to rally the few I’ve seen on Twitter.