|
|
Post by codystarbuck on May 1, 2023 22:16:09 GMT -5
The original mini was great, if lacking in subtlety (the visitor uniforms and emblem make Starship Troopers look vague), though there is some dodgy acting. I liked Final Battle well enough (Michael Ironside!), though the hybrid girl seemed a bit too much. Neither the Visitors nor humans had abilities anywhere on that scale, so why did a hybrid child develop all of that? There has to be a basis for those kinds of traits to form, in one or both parents. Or course, they are different species (one reptilian and alien and one mammal and Terran); so, they shouldn't be able to breed; but, sci-fi!
The tv series was not good, though. Too low budget in look and it kind of dumped what had happened for plot convenience.
Hard to believe that Robert Englund, as the "good Visitor," would go on to be Freddy Krueger and so synonymous with evil that you couldn't cast him as a sympathetic character.
I still think they should have had the Earth liberated by Martians, to keep up the WW2 theme, since Earth was so easily conquered. I didn't know the whole planet was Holland!
Sorry to our Dutch friends; but, France gets picked on a little too much on that one.
Scrap that, we'll make Earth Luxembourg; no one likes them. Well, know one knows much about them, other than tax havens.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on May 1, 2023 22:31:33 GMT -5
I couldn’t imagine there’d be a daily need for cops to search canals and rivers. You would if you'd grown up in North Jersey. Especially once they built the stadium in the Meadowlands. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2023 12:02:05 GMT -5
The tv series was not good, though. Too low budget in look and it kind of dumped what had happened for plot convenience. Agreed. I hated how the distinctive Visitor voices were gone in the TV series. Budget cuts or ignorance? I don’t know. So many great characters were killed off in The Final Battle, such as John, Brian, Steven, etc. Obviously, that meant they couldn’t transition to the TV series. We gained some new characters such as Kyle, but something was lacking. Also, remember Martin (Frank Ashmore)? Killed off in the first episode of the TV series, but the actor returned as Martin’s twin brother, Phillip. Well, I guess when reptiles disguise themselves as humans, and two of them happen to be twins, they may as well make their human disguises match, too. The TV series was all over the place. |
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on May 3, 2023 13:20:33 GMT -5
So I'm close to 1/2 way through my re-watch of Mad Men. Still a great show. Insanely good writing. Great acting. But I had forgotten that most of the characters are overgrown children. So many of them just have astonishingly arrested development.
|
|
|
|
Post by berkley on May 4, 2023 0:14:43 GMT -5
So I'm close to 1/2 way through my re-watch of Mad Men. Still a great show. Insanely good writing. Great acting. But I had forgotten that most of the characters are overgrown children. So many of them just have astonishingly arrested development.
Pete comes to mind in that regard- I hated him the first few seasons. But almost all of them are like that at times. Roger, for example, in a more amusing and (usually) likeable way.
It's a bit too soon for me to re-watch it but definitely one of the best shows of its era - which makes it one of the best of any era, since there's so much good tv now. Apart from the pure quality in every aspect of tv production, I think one of the reasons it's so fascinating to viewers around the age of a lot of members here - born in, say, the mid 1950s to mid '60s - is that it covers so much that came along from around the time we were born through most of our early childhood. For me, it wasn't until the later seasons that it covered things that I actually remember - the Apollo moon-landing, pop culture things like Planet of the Apes or Puzo's Godfather novel - but even the stuff that came before was part of my worldview at the time because it continued to reverberate for years afterwards.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,207 
|
Post by Confessor on May 4, 2023 7:13:33 GMT -5
So I'm close to 1/2 way through my re-watch of Mad Men. Still a great show. Insanely good writing. Great acting. But I had forgotten that most of the characters are overgrown children. So many of them just have astonishingly arrested development. My wife and I are planning a re-watch of this at some point this year. There's so much good stuff in the series, but I agree that most of the main characters exhibit fairly immature behaviour on occasion (with perhaps Peggy as the only exception?). But then, the series was always about its character's flaws and, let's face it, many of them are rather spoilt or cosseted, with way too much privilege -- this is especially true of Betty Draper and Pete Campbell. Even Don, despite his tough start in life, is usually pretty pampered and showered with praise at work, leading to a "Golden Boy" mentality, which often results in fairly immature conduct both at work and outside. In that regard, the program can be viewed as a fairly damning critique of the urban and suburban post-war white population of the U.S. |
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on May 4, 2023 9:13:27 GMT -5
So I'm close to 1/2 way through my re-watch of Mad Men. Still a great show. Insanely good writing. Great acting. But I had forgotten that most of the characters are overgrown children. So many of them just have astonishingly arrested development. My wife and I are planning a re-watch of this at some point this year. There's so much good stuff in the series, but I agree that most of the main characters exhibit fairly immature behaviour on occasion (with perhaps Peggy as the only exception?). But then, the series was always about its character's flaws and, let's face it, many of them are rather spoilt or cosseted, with way too much privilege -- this is especially true of Betty Draper and Pete Campbell. Even Don, despite his tough start in life, is usually pretty pampered and showered with praise at work, leading to a "Golden Boy" mentality, which often results in fairly immature conduct both at work and outside. In that regard, the program can be viewed as a fairly damning critique of the urban and suburban post-war white population of the U.S. Peggy easily has the best growth arc in the show. And really so does Joan, though I've only watched the later seasons once. Pet and Betty are the poster children for arrested development on the show, but also Roger and, as you pointed out, Don never really does much to overcome his early life. What really raised it to mind was him finding out about Anna's cancer only to abandon her and go back to New York to play with Layne and hookers. The post war U.S. was generally a great place...if you were a straight white male without any handicaps. For everyone else, not so much. |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on May 4, 2023 11:32:58 GMT -5
With Betty I think there was also a subtle portrayal of her unconscious rebellion against the same ingrained cultural misogyny that Joan and Peggy opposed in a more conscious and direct manner. With Betty, throughout her marriage with Don, it manifested itself in mental illness, odd break-outs of strange behaviour, etc, until later in the series in her second marriage to the political big-shot, it becomes more conscious with her finally taking the step of going back to university. I think this saved her character from being a nearly entirely unsympathetic privileged stick in the mud and made her one of the more nuanced creations of the series.
|
|
|
|
Post by berkley on May 7, 2023 16:48:47 GMT -5
There was some talk about Three's Company in another thread which naturally brought up the (I think much more enjoyable) UK show it was based on, Man About the House. One thing I'd forgotten until I looked up Man ABout the House on wiki to see the years it aired, was that there was a sequel, Robin's Nest, about a married Robin running a small restaurant, and a spin-off, George and Mildred, which as the title implies features the Ropers as the lead characters.
What surprised me was to see that Robin's Nest lasted quite a few series, because I only remember seeing it for one season or so. I think it was the same for George and Mildred but can't recall for sure after all this time. Anyone remember these spin-offs? I remember liking them at the time but I don't seem to remember them as well as I do Man About the House, and that's pretty hazy itself in my mind.
|
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on May 7, 2023 17:54:48 GMT -5
There was some talk about Three's Company in another thread which naturally brought up the (I think much more enjoyable) UK show it was based on, Man About the House. One thing I'd forgotten until I looked up Man ABout the House on wiki to see the years it aired, was that there was a sequel, Robin's Nest, about a married Robin running a small restaurant, and a spin-off, George and Mildred, which as the title implies features the Ropers as the lead characters. What surprised me was to see that Robin's Nest lasted quite a few series, because I only remember seeing it for one season or so. I think it was the same for George and Mildred but can't recall for sure after all this time. Anyone remember these spin-offs? I remember liking them at the time but I don't seem to remember them as well as I do Man About the House, and that's pretty hazy itself in my mind. I was only aware of the connection to Man About the House; but never saw that series; only Three's Company and The Ropers. My PBS station never broadcast the British show and I have never seen it on home video. Same with Til Death Do Us Part, vs All In The Family. |
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on May 7, 2023 18:41:59 GMT -5
I just finished watching the excellent first season of the Batman tv series, from 1966, with Adam West & Burt Ward (I bought the complete set, from Walmart, for a song, to replace my bootleg dvds). You tend to forget how good those first season episodes are, compared to the following two seasons. It mostly sticks to established villains, with a few exceptions and plays it straighter. They are more innovative with the look of things and there is a deadlier sense of peril, in the cliffhangers. Also, they demonstrate real insanity and menace, not just the silly insanity that followed. For instance, the death of Riddler's moll, Molly, in the second half of the first story (played by Jill St John). The look of the city and the nightclub, where Batman dances with Molly (the Batusi) is amazing, then the death has a real emotional element to it. Also, the Riddler has an air of menace around him. Same with the Joker and Penguin, in the following episodes. When Penguin returns, he has Batman and Robin strung up, gagged, behind a carnival tent shooting gallery and hands Commissioner Gordon and Chief O'Hara umbrella rifles to shoot them. It is pretty creepy and scary, before they get their feet up, to lift themselves out of target range. Meanwhile, they are nearly torn apart by turbines, in the Riddler's return appearance. Mad Hatter is suitably deadly, as his motivation is revenge against the jury that convicted him, not just stealing hats. Even a one-time villain, like False Face (who did appear in the comics, once, before the tv series) comes across well, based on how they play it. Roddy McDowell is suitably scary, when he nearly smashes a large book over his moll's head, in a fit of anger and insanity.
The actors all seem to understand how to play things. Frank Gorshin and Cesar Romero get away with being broad, because of their insane characters and they make it seem like part of the character, through little things in their performance. The mustache even ads to the Joker's creepy smile, under the make-up. George Sanders is actually kind of tragic, as Mr Freeze, even though he is pure criminal, which sets up the BTAS version, wonderfully. King Tut works because of Victor Buono, who could always walk the tightrope between broad and believable. Plus, the Egyptian stuff is played for mystery and even terror, thanks to the camera angles. The first Catwoman episode has some real terror, with the tiger and in the cave sequence, at the end of things. Plus, Newmar was always note perfect as Catwoman...flirty, vain, sexy, funny and deadly.
After the movie, they up the camp and start creating roles for guest stars, with no real mystery or even menace. Several have no clue how to play the comedy. The regular villains still stand out more and those end up being the second and third season episodes I enjoy. The third season has way more duds; but, Yvonne Craig, as Batgirl, rescues several; or, at least makes them palatable.
Also enjoyed seeing Batman with a future Batman. In the second half of the King Tut episode ("The Pharaoh's In A Rut"), there is a tv broadcast, viewed by King Tut, where Olan Soule, voice of Batman on the Fiilmation Adventures of Batman and the Hanna-Barbera Super Friends shows (and New Scooby Doo Movies), plays a newsman, in a television broadcast.
There are a few things that yo raise an eyebrow at, with the passage of time. In the final Riddler story, Batman captures the Riddler's moll, Pauline (as in Perils of, since the episode revolves around silent films and features Francis X Bushman), but she won't talk. Batman decides to take her to the Batcave for more intense interrogation! Commissioner Gordon agrees to this, despite being a clear violation of her civil rights (damn Lefties) and also consents to going along and being gassed to hide the location of the Batcave. So, Batman gives Pauline the Bat-Roofie, which knocks her out, then does the same to Commissioner Gordon, loads them into the Batmobile and takes them to the Batcave. he wakes up Commissioner Gordon, then Pauline and uses a Truth Mask on her and asks questions. It's all very creepy, in hindsight (and played a bit creepy then) and even makes reference to some people never leaving the Batcave (Molly, in part 2 of the first story), which is pretty darn threatening. There are also several instances of them using intimidation tactics on criminals, including scaring a henchman into trying to flee police custody and running headlong into a wall and knocking himself out!
I love the film (still one of the best Batman movies, ever); but, it is a real demarcation line where the more serious underpinnings give way completely to the camp comedy and deliberate winking to the audience. It gets worse in the third season, with people like Rudy Valley and Milton Berle either overdoing it or just being miserable and unfunny jerks, behind the scenes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Batflunkie on May 8, 2023 9:08:03 GMT -5
Was watching Me-TV last night. They had an All In The Family marathon on and they aired the episode "Archie Is Branded", where Archie discovers that he has a Swastika painted on his door in a case of mistaken identity
Man, I honestly could not believe that they were even allowed to air that ending, especially in 1973
|
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on May 8, 2023 23:18:20 GMT -5
Was watching Me-TV last night. They had an All In The Family marathon on and they aired the episode "Archie Is Branded", where Archie discovers that he has a Swastika painted on his door in a case of mistaken identity Man, I honestly could not believe that they were even allowed to air that ending, especially in 1973 You could do a lot more in 1973, which is how so many powerful statements got on the air. 1983 was a different story. |
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on May 31, 2023 13:32:36 GMT -5
Finished up my rewatch of Mad Men. Excellent show that really was unlike almost anything before or (as far as I can tell) since. I think it's even more introspective than The Sopranos (though I don't think it's quite as good). I will say that I don't love the last season. The show is particularly impressive in that it has two very strong female characters who have by far the best character growth arcs on the show in Peggy and Joan. The one thing I'll say is that most of the characters come out of the last season just a little better than they were before. Certainly not all. Harry Crane is still an unrepentant dirt-bag. I'd forgotten that Pete had a bit of a redemption at the end of the show.
|
|
|
|
Post by berkley on May 31, 2023 17:38:09 GMT -5
just realised I put this in the wrong thread
|
|
