Also supernatural is not a show with good depictions of women, if that's a thing you care about. iirc one of the leads called the show "gratuitously misogynistic" which is enough for me to give it a pass.
kal-elk, November 12, 2013, 07:34:19 pm
For the record, if that's something that you care about and you still aren't watching Sleepy Hollow, the main female characters are all bad ass (and also the cast is predominantly people of color, and Amandla Stenberg, who played Rue in The Hunger Games last year, is set to play Orlando Jones' daughter.)
On Topic: I love Once Upon A Time despite it's horrible cheesiness, awful depiction of the way adoption works, heavy reliance on Disney, and general melodrama. The plot is just weirdly engaging enough for me to be entertained, and certain of the characters are really fascinating.
Same with Once Upon a Time In Wonderland, although the first episode's timeline is beyond confusing. It also doesn't lean heavily on family dynamics as plot points, so if you dislike family melodrama, Wonderland's probably more up your alley. Also, Naveen Andrews is playing Jafar.
sherlockian, November 13, 2013, 01:43:25 am
I haven't heard too much about Sleepy Hollow; I'll definitely make the time to check it out. I tried to get into Once Upon A Time on multiple peoples' recommendations but it didnt really work for me. I can see how it would for other people, though!
Also Battlestar Galactica (the remake, not the original) is fantastic and hits my sci fi nerves just right.
re: reviewchat - I understand the desire to be entertained by a movie/TV but that's usually not enough for me. I like seeing reviews of movies which give me better technical understanding of the excellence (or not) in the movie's crafting that a lay viewer might not see.
Now, I agree that a lot of the criticism that's out there is not very good (in fact, is abysmal). Number ratings have replaced brief essays, and while this answers the question 'am I likely to enjoy this movie', it forgets entirely the question of whether or not the movie is any
good. I thought The Avengers was a bad movie. I also had a good time watching it; these are not inconsistent viewpoints.
Movie critics led me to see films I might never have heard of if it hadn't been for them. Tree Of Life is a fantastic movie that I can't really picture being 'hey, let's go to the theatre today' fodder. My best friend and partner, who knows more about movies than I think I will ever know about any one subject, consistently points me towards new viewing experiences that she thinks I'll enjoy not just watching but
having watched. To me, that's what critique is for. I posted in the Movies thread a little while ago about having watched the film Room In Rome. If I hadn't been looking for directorial intent ('this movie is about the lies we tell ourselves and others') I think I would have been very frustrated with it and thought it was pretentious bullshit. But because I was looking to be entertained not just by what went on onscreen but the obvious effort and work of the people who
created the film, I had a really great time.
Rotten Tomatoes and IMDB aren't, typically, good places to go looking for critique. But there are gems out there; reviewers who will shine light on greater interpretations of cinema and television and make the viewing experience better, not worse. I'm really fond of both SA Current Releases and FILM CRIT HULK for sharing their greater understanding of genre conventions and what it means when certain films buck them (discourse on the hero's journey, superhero movies in general, the link between the supernatural in horror and the mundane it underscores). When I read their reviews of movies and television, I parse their respect and adoration for an incredibly deep art form into a greater understanding and admiration for films or tv as a whole and the piece being reviewed specifically.