|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Apr 25, 2024 1:15:36 GMT -5
Star Trek's last episode "Turnabout Intruder" thoroughly dispelled any misconceived notion I may have had that this was some sort of culturally enlightened for its time series - a giant F You to anyone who might have even briefly considered the possibility that a woman should have the same rights as men. Turnabout Intruder is a thoroughly awful episode mostly due to Shatner's over-the-top scenery chewing. Ye gods, is he bad!
Cei-U! I summon a clothespin for my nose!
|
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Apr 25, 2024 10:08:22 GMT -5
Star Trek's last episode "Turnabout Intruder" thoroughly dispelled any misconceived notion I may have had that this was some sort of culturally enlightened for its time series - a giant F You to anyone who might have even briefly considered the possibility that a woman should have the same rights as men.
I don't remember which episode that is (I'm pretty sure I've seen them all but I've never watched them from start to finish in order of broadcast) but my feeling about the series in general is that of course it didn't get everything right: there are many, many examples of inadvertent sexism, racism, and (probably not so inadvertent) American jingoism. What made it special - apart from the iconic characters, compelling stories, beautiful set and (also sexist, arguably) costume designs, etc - was that the show made repeated attempts to rise above these attitudes that were part of the very air they breathed and very occasionally even succeeded. Of course they didn't get it right most of the time but at least there was a glimmer of enlightenment from time to time, much more often than on most things of the era.
It's been a long, long time since I've watched any Star Trek, so it's quite possible I'll find myself reacting in the same way you did to this particular episode next time I see it. Even when I was watching the re-runs in the 70s I found I had problems with certain episodes that I had enjoyed uncritically as a very small kid in the late 60s. But it didn't lead me to condemn the whole series or even that particular episode: I just saw it with an added level of awareness
I know that Roddenberry initially intended to have a strong female presence in the form of a capable Number Two when he did "The Cage" but was pressured out of the idea by network executives. For that, I applaud him, but man, once he lost that battle, I have no idea what happened (with the series as a whole since I know that Roddenberry wasn't writing/overseeing everything). Kirk lecturing a woman on her decision not to take part in an arranged marriage - but don't worry about feeling bad for the woman - the shows made sure to make her as shrewish and horrid as possible so you'd cheer when Kirk broke her spirit. A planet of women chanting "Brain, brain, what is brain?" Does Uhuru really need to utter "Captain, I'm scared?" in "City on the Edge of Forever"? Well, yes she does if you're looking to remind viewers that Harlan Ellison's outsider character of strong, outspoken Edith Keeler doesn't speak for all women who are generally in need of rescuing. And, of course, "Turnabout Intruder". I don't think this an occasional lapse in judgement slipping through the cracks - I think this was a group of writers who cheered for civil rights, mixed marriage, the anti-war movement... and looked at the rise of feminism during the 60s and said, "Now hold on just a second there, missy..." and used episodes and moments such as these to put women back in their place. |
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Apr 25, 2024 10:08:53 GMT -5
Now...
What did everyone think of the final episode of The Prisoner?
|
|
|
|
Post by driver1980 on Apr 25, 2024 11:17:57 GMT -5
Now... What did everyone think of the final episode of The Prisoner? Didn’t really explain anything (perhaps that was the point?), and I did read that ITV’s switchboards were jammed with complaints after the final episode aired. |
|
|
|
Post by impulse on Apr 25, 2024 11:46:14 GMT -5
Side note, and this is not directed at anyone in particular, but a trend I've noticed in culture at large recently is a binary "good or bad" judgment on many things, especially when looking up past cultural or media pieces through a modern lense. I wish there was more nuance and context in the general discourse to view things as products of their time and allowing for appreciating the good while being able to acknowledge flaws and shortcomings now.
Basically, let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater, let's not let perfect be the enemy of good, and let's accept that things can be products of their time yet not without merit, and finally, let's be grateful that we know and do better now rather than mercilessly dumping on past things for not being perfect then.
A recentish example is the general discourse and presentation of LGBTQIA+ identifying folks and issues in media. Looking at two iterations of the same show, the original Queer Eye for the Straight Guy. At the time, it was a great net new representation and normalization of gay men and culture in mainstream media. Compared to the thoughtless casual baked-in homophobia of the times (everything being casually called "gay" as a generic insult, rampant casual use of the f slur, etc), it was a huge step forward. Looking at it now, it perpetuated many gay man stereotypes of the time, and even then presented the gay men as a novelty of sorts.
Compare to the recent iteration which is much more socially conscious and empathetic. It's not that the original show had no value in its time, but if that same show were to come out today unironically it could come across much differently.
Ramble over.
|
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Apr 25, 2024 11:52:51 GMT -5
I don't remember which episode that is (I'm pretty sure I've seen them all but I've never watched them from start to finish in order of broadcast) but my feeling about the series in general is that of course it didn't get everything right: there are many, many examples of inadvertent sexism, racism, and (probably not so inadvertent) American jingoism. What made it special - apart from the iconic characters, compelling stories, beautiful set and (also sexist, arguably) costume designs, etc - was that the show made repeated attempts to rise above these attitudes that were part of the very air they breathed and very occasionally even succeeded. Of course they didn't get it right most of the time but at least there was a glimmer of enlightenment from time to time, much more often than on most things of the era.
It's been a long, long time since I've watched any Star Trek, so it's quite possible I'll find myself reacting in the same way you did to this particular episode next time I see it. Even when I was watching the re-runs in the 70s I found I had problems with certain episodes that I had enjoyed uncritically as a very small kid in the late 60s. But it didn't lead me to condemn the whole series or even that particular episode: I just saw it with an added level of awareness
I know that Roddenberry initially intended to have a strong female presence in the form of a capable Number Two when he did "The Cage" but was pressured out of the idea by network executives. For that, I applaud him, but man, once he lost that battle, I have no idea what happened (with the series as a whole since I know that Roddenberry wasn't writing/overseeing everything). Kirk lecturing a woman on her decision not to take part in an arranged marriage - but don't worry about feeling bad for the woman - the shows made sure to make her as shrewish and horrid as possible so you'd cheer when Kirk broke her spirit. A planet of women chanting "Brain, brain, what is brain?" Does Uhuru really need to utter "Captain, I'm scared?" in "City on the Edge of Forever"? Well, yes she does if you're looking to remind viewers that Harlan Ellison's outsider character of strong, outspoken Edith Keeler doesn't speak for all women who are generally in need of rescuing. And, of course, "Turnabout Intruder". I don't think this an occasional lapse in judgement slipping through the cracks - I think this was a group of writers who cheered for civil rights, mixed marriage, the anti-war movement... and looked at the rise of feminism during the 60s and said, "Now hold on just a second there, missy..." and used episodes and moments such as these to put women back in their place.
I am very much in agreement that anti-misogyny has lagged far behind anti-racism in the feelings of progressives as a whole - especially in American culture, where the problem of white vs black racism has taken such a hold on the mindset that everything else gets pushed back into second place, including other forms of racism.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Apr 25, 2024 12:10:24 GMT -5
To your point, berkley, the obit of Helen Vendler, one of the most perceptive and original writers on poetry of the twentieth century and beyond, contained this vignette: "After earning a bachelor’s degree in 1954 she was awarded a Fulbright Scholarship to study mathematics at the University of Louvain in Belgium but changed her concentration to French and Italian literature. On returning to the United States, she took English courses at Boston University to qualify for the doctoral program at Harvard. Ms. Vendler’s first week at Harvard was daunting. She was informed by the chairman of the English department, as he signed her program card, 'You know we don’t want you here, Miss Hennessy: we don’t want any women here.' In 1959, she became the first woman to be offered an instructorship in Harvard’s English department, a year before she received her doctorate, having submitted a dissertation on William Butler Yeats that was published in 1963 as 'Yeats’s ‘Vision’ and the Later Plays.'" I hope that chairman spent the rest of his life grinding his teeth in frustrated anger. Ms. Vendler died, appropriately enough, on April 23. |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Apr 25, 2024 15:12:46 GMT -5
Now... What did everyone think of the final episode of The Prisoner? I found it very frustrating the first time around, but it might simply have been too unconventional for me. When I later read a few reasonable interpretations for the confusing conclusion, I thought it was pretty clever. Not outright explaining things and leaving the reality of certain events up in the air is something Dean Motter and Mark Askwith also did quite successfully in their Prisoner comic for DC. All in all, I think the ending fit the series; we were left in the dark, and the story really didn't go the way we expected! Be seeing you. |
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Apr 25, 2024 23:54:25 GMT -5
Now... What did everyone think of the final episode of The Prisoner? Didn’t really explain anything (perhaps that was the point?), and I did read that ITV’s switchboards were jammed with complaints after the final episode aired. Apparently, McGoohan felt that he had to leave the country for a few days after the finale since angry fans were showing up at his house demanding answers. I haven't watched "Fall Out" in quite a while but remember feeling that it ended the way the series had to. "Who else could Number One be?" asked McGoohan rhetorically. I still think he's right and that his answer is brilliant, but man, does it ever feel rushed. Speaking of controversial endings - though it was by no means awful, the last episode of Seinfeld seemed based on the premise that these were awful people whom the audience would love to see get their comeuppance. Was I the only one who never felt that way (other than about George Costanza, of course, who by series end had become something of a monster)? Was I supposed to be repelled by these characters? |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Apr 26, 2024 1:11:00 GMT -5
Didn’t really explain anything (perhaps that was the point?), and I did read that ITV’s switchboards were jammed with complaints after the final episode aired. Apparently, McGoohan felt that he had to leave the country for a few days after the finale since angry fans were showing up at his house demanding answers. I haven't watched "Fall Out" in quite a while but remember feeling that it ended the way the series had to. "Who else could Number One be?" asked McGoohan rhetorically. I still think he's right and that his answer is brilliant, but man, does it ever feel rushed. Speaking of controversial endings - though it was by no means awful, the last episode of Seinfeld seemed based on the premise that these were awful people whom the audience would love to see get their comeuppance. Was I the only one who never felt that way (other than about George Costanza, of course, who by series end had become something of a monster)? Was I supposed to be repelled by these characters?
I agree about Seinfeld: I liked the characters from the beginning. Their occasional mild selfishness and pettiness struck me as very human and was one of the refreshing things about the show as opposed to the usual moralistic posturing of so many US sitcoms. But there was a point where I think the show-runners and writers began to over-emphasise that aspect and that emphasis slowly but steadily grew over the years until by the end it must have seemed to them that the final episode they came up with was the only logical conclusion. And hence the idea - in my view entirely mistaken - that Friends was "Seinfeld done right" or "Seinfeld with heart!" whereas I've always seen it as a regression to the conventional American sitcom that had burned itself out years before. I've just recently started re-watching the series for the first time since the original run, so I'm waiting to see if I have the same reaction this time around. I'm only up to the earlier part of the 3rd season so far.
The Prisoner I have an odd, fragmented history with as a viewer: I didn't see it in its original run in the 1960s but saw most of it when it was re-run in the late 70s on one of our Canadian channels, probably CBC, on Sunday nights. I missed the first one or two episodes - I'd have to look it up to find exactly where I came in but I definitely missed at least the first one - but from then on never missed a one - until the finale, which I didn't get to see until a few years later, and under less than perfect viewing conditions (at someone's house where I'd slept over after a late night). So I've never really assimilated the final episode into the series as a whole, but with that limitation in mind, my feelings are roughly in line with those expressed by RR in his post . Of course I've long had plans to watch the whole series from start to finish but have yet to put them into effect.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Apr 26, 2024 3:51:58 GMT -5
I never could stomach Seinfeld. The characters were all obnoxious and I never found their antics funny. I don't like "cringe" comedy (one of the reasons I loathe The Office) and avoid it as much as I can. I enjoyed the first couple of seasons of Friends but burned out on it after that (I wanted to beat Ross with a nail-studded baseball bat). No matter what genre a given show is (sitcom, police procedural, medical drama, etc), I have to like the characters if I'm going to tune in week after week. Thus I've had no incentive to watch shows like Breaking Bad, Dexter, House of Cards, The Sopranos, Boardwalk Empire, et al, that wallow in their characters' vices and criminality. I don't have a problem with anyone who does enjoy such shows. They're just not my cuppa.
Cei-U!
I summon my quirky TV habits!
|
|
|
|
Post by impulse on Apr 26, 2024 8:33:41 GMT -5
I never could stomach Seinfeld. The characters were all obnoxious and I never found their antics funny. I don't like "cringe" comedy (one of the reasons I loathe The Office) and avoid it as much as I can. I enjoyed the first couple of seasons of Friends but burned out on it after that (I wanted to beat Ross with a nail-studded baseball bat). No matter what genre a given show is (sitcom, police procedural, medical drama, etc), I have to like the characters if I'm going to tune in week after week. Thus I've had no incentive to watch shows like Breaking Bad, Dexter, House of Cards, The Sopranos, Boardwalk Empire, et al, that wallow in their characters' vices and criminality. I don't have a problem with anyone who does enjoy such shows. They're just not my cuppa. Cei-U! I summon my quirky TV habits! I hear what you're saying, but if I may offer a partial counter regarding Breaking Bad. One of the interesting things about it is that some of the characters are likeable in various ways and at various times. Early on, Walt is a very sympathetic character, and it's interesting seeing his journey unfold. Almost no one in the show is a "good" person, though, and nearly everyone is flawed, so if you don't enjoy that at all, you are right to skip it. I also struggle with cringe/vicarious embarrassment humor. I could never watch Modern Family with my wife because of it. It was well-written and the characters were good, but they always ended up in situations so embarrassing it hurt me to watch. |
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Apr 26, 2024 9:40:06 GMT -5
I never could stomach Seinfeld. The characters were all obnoxious and I never found their antics funny. I don't like "cringe" comedy (one of the reasons I loathe The Office) and avoid it as much as I can. I enjoyed the first couple of seasons of Friends but burned out on it after that (I wanted to beat Ross with a nail-studded baseball bat). No matter what genre a given show is (sitcom, police procedural, medical drama, etc), I have to like the characters if I'm going to tune in week after week. Thus I've had no incentive to watch shows like Breaking Bad, Dexter, House of Cards, The Sopranos, Boardwalk Empire, et al, that wallow in their characters' vices and criminality. I don't have a problem with anyone who does enjoy such shows. They're just not my cuppa. Cei-U! I summon my quirky TV habits! My wife is a fan of Sons of Anarchy which is the epitome of wallowing in people with almost zero redeeming qualities. They all were either killing or [use your imagination]. And she would sometimes watch that before I would go to bed when her insomnia was bad. And I would have to literally sleep with headphones and music in my ears just to drowned out the sounds coming from that TV that I didn't want to hear. I have no idea how people can enjoy things like that. It was like it was directed by Quentin Tarantino who made an entire career with movies like that. Which is why that one scene is my favorite part of Desperado. |
|
|
|
Post by driver1980 on Apr 26, 2024 9:47:01 GMT -5
I never could stomach Seinfeld. The characters were all obnoxious and I never found their antics funny. I don't like "cringe" comedy (one of the reasons I loathe The Office) and avoid it as much as I can. I enjoyed the first couple of seasons of Friends but burned out on it after that (I wanted to beat Ross with a nail-studded baseball bat). No matter what genre a given show is (sitcom, police procedural, medical drama, etc), I have to like the characters if I'm going to tune in week after week. Thus I've had no incentive to watch shows like Breaking Bad, Dexter, House of Cards, The Sopranos, Boardwalk Empire, et al, that wallow in their characters' vices and criminality. I don't have a problem with anyone who does enjoy such shows. They're just not my cuppa. Cei-U! I summon my quirky TV habits! My wife is a fan of Sons of Anarchy which is the epitome of wallowing in people with almost zero redeeming qualities. They all were either killing or [use your imagination]. And she would sometimes watch that before I would go to bed when her insomnia was bad. And I would have to literally sleep with headphones and music in my ears just to drowned out the sounds coming from that TV that I didn't want to hear. I have no idea how people can enjoy things like that. It was like it was directed by Quentin Tarantino who made an entire career with movies like that. Which is why that one scene is my favorite part of Desperado. While I did enjoy 24, by the time the series ended, I was mentally exhausted at the sheer nihilism of it all. No character in that show appeared to have much of a personal life or anything positive going for them. Not that it needed to be that way. It wouldn’t have worked having Jack Bauer cracking jokes in a coffee shop at the end of each season, or having scenes where a CTU chief said, “Right, well I’m off on holiday, see you when I get back.” The nature of the show, and the real-time aspect, meant it was going to be nihilistic, and I knew that going in. But it was mentally exhausting to follow each season. By the end of it, I was ready to watch some lighter shows. |
|
|
|
Post by mikelmidnight on Apr 26, 2024 10:34:03 GMT -5
Now... What did everyone think of the final episode of The Prisoner? I thought it weird, but it didn't bother me ... I could appreciate why they felt a non-standard conclusion was impossible. Actually, my biggest source of irritation in the episode was the casting of the 'young man' using an actor who'd appeared in an earlier episode but didn't seem to be the same person at all! I'm sure I'm not the first person to think of this, but could The Prisoner have been ... Double-O Six? So when he's labeled Number Six at the Village he's being told, "You don't get to just retire." |
|
