Current Shows & Movies

The one show I'm still watching is My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic. I've been trying to catch the newer episodes of TMNT 2012 after falling behind.

Black Sabbath, Led Zeppelin, and My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic fan

I remember the My Little Pony series from the late 80s when I was little. Had no clue they had made a new version.

Being a boy, I was more familiar with Thundercats, He-Man and the like (but especially anything that had to do with Nintendo characters like Super Mario Bros. and Link in the early 90s.) My parents never quite approved of the Ninja Turtles for some reason, but they were cool; it was a good start to learning the Renaissance artists' names at any rate.

Adventure Time.

Look- it's trying to think!

by kjnics;

"I caught up with Game of Thrones and still feel rather ambiguously about it, some of the story-lines being much more interesting than others (not to mention the violence being a bit over the top). Still, it has some intriguing ideas/themes (not to mention beautiful scenery). I just think they could have toned down the violence for some of the non-gamer crowd. It does have some very good characters and actors, but I could never feel comfortable watching it with family (or recommending it to them)."

I'm also ambivalent about Game of Thrones.
Even for adults once the series (in season 4) got involved with graphic torture and brutality, it became iffy whether I could keep watching it. I just streamed the last couple of seasons for one viewing and don't have a desire to see them again.

Another problem is that the story feels very stretched out; often very little happens to move the main plots along.
I had a similar problem with the second George RR Martin Ice & Fire novel and just gave up in the middle of it.

* I watched two fantasy series on Netflix and Amazon streaming just to find more from that genre;
- The Legend of the Seeker; very campy and in the end, it fell apart after two seasons (which is as long as it lasted).
But overall I enjoyed viewing it.
- The other fantasy series I saw was The Chronicles of Shannara; kind of Twilighty / The Hunger Games ish.
Some familiar faces were in the cast like John Rhys Davies.
It had some different twists on fantasy (like blending it with a post apocalyptic era).
One suggestion is to stay with episode one no matter how bad it seems. The series gets better after that with lots of standard fantasy stuff.

As for Jackson's Hobbit, anything you want to toss around with that is fine with me.
All I know about it recently is that Warner Brothers is so pleased that they forced Jackson to make 3 films instead of 2.
Because the studio got about another 1/2 billion of profit out of that. Artistry be damned I guess and in the end it's a business.

BB ;-)

it is just in my opinion - imo - 🌈

I'm also ambivalent about Game of Thrones.

Even for adults once the series (in season 4) got involved with graphic torture and brutality, it became iffy whether I could keep watching it. I just streamed the last couple of seasons for one viewing and don't have a desire to see them again.

I haven't read the books, nor do I plan to.

But I think graphic torture, brutality, etc. are very different on page than they are when depicted on screen, and there are different ways of handling such depictions. Even stories like Martin's could be handled with a little more subtlety and less in your face exploitation. I don't know, I feel that the violence (along with the graphic nudity and sex) is there for fanboys (or fangirls) to see "how much they can take" sometimes, to the detriment of the rest of the story and regular audiences.

It somehow cheapens it, shocking audiences for shocks' sake. And, unlike Tarantino, where the violence is cartoonish, this story asks one to care for some of the characters and take it somewhat seriously (as it has serious themes); thus one feels somewhat of a somber sort of guilt watching the brutality (and many of the characters certainly do). It's not gleeful fun like Kill Bill. (Well, I did chuckle a bit with Theon/Reek, but there was only so much I could stomach after a while).

As for Jackson's Hobbit, anything you want to toss around with that is fine with me.

All I know about it recently is that Warner Brothers is so pleased that they forced Jackson to make 3 films instead of 2. Because the studio got about another 1/2 billion of profit out of that. Artistry be damned I guess and in the end it's a business.

Ah, yes, the recent films which one easily forgets. They weren't the worst, but they certainly could have done a better job. As we discussed with Kip, Corsten and others back in the day, the love and care for the actual story was trumped by the desire to make big bucks (and deliver something fast and easy to consume to the multiplex hordes everywhere from Guangxi to Ohio).

As you yourself said, it was a pity Philippa Boyens wasn't given more of a voice in keeping the story true to the spirit of the books. (Although, I did enjoy the last installment in its own way, and Tauriel personally never bugged me). They could have been so much better though (at least they weren't as bad as the Disney "sequels" they used to come out with when I was a kid, like the Return of Jafar).

to kjnics;

"I feel that the violence (along with the graphic nudity and sex) is there for fanboys (or fangirls) to see "how much they can take" sometimes, to the detriment of the rest of the story and regular audiences...

I did chuckle a bit with Theon/Reek, but there was only so much I could stomach after a while"

Dani or Cerscei being nude for dramatic effect at the end of an episode made sense.
The fairly graphic brothel fornication was unnecessary and just slowed the story down in an already slow series.

As for the torture; with chit chat about castrated genitalia and showing skinned bodies;
after a while I'm wondering, why do I need hours showing Ramsey Bolton's guide to sociopath torture?
Ramsey has dogs tear apart a victim. Ramsey rapes his wife.
Do I need to see more of this?

But I soldiered on through several unsettling and boring episodes to finally see the main story move forward.

And now the TV series has gone beyond the published books. Will George RR Martin finish this thing? Or will it have to be done by the show's producers?

"the love and care for the actual story was trumped by the desire to make big bucks"

Yes. The more I know about the production, that seems to be the story of the Hobbit films.
Jackson did not have control of the final cut. The studio were complete jerks to force him, at literally the last minute, to stretch two movies into three films.

The entire project suffered because of that.

"Tauriel personally never bugged me"

It was the Tauriel / Kili intense romance which bugged me but chalk that down to my putting the Tolkien purist hat on and insisting that Elves and Dwarves would not fall in love and have a relationship.
Without the romance, I liked warrior Tauriel in Desolation of Smaug quite a lot.

"at least they weren't as bad as the Disney "sequels" they used to come out with when I was a kid, like the Return of Jafar"

You are quite right. It's a matter of perspective with the glass half empty / full thing.

If I compared Jackson's Hobbit movies with Bakshi Tolkien or the Rankin/Bass Hobbit / Return of the King, then they are all about at the same level of taste.

What pushes me to be cranky about Jackson's Hobbit is that I still watch his 3 excellent Extended Edition Lord of the Rings movies and yearn for what might have been.

But such is life.

* Other TV shows I've watched recently or am watching are comic book series on Netflix; Daredevil, Jessica Jones, Arrow, The Flash and Supergirl.
- I also watch some things with my wife which are more costume drama romantic. Such as the first season of Poldark.
Besides seeing that style of BBC period drama (including Downton Abbey) my wife and I watch a lot of different TV series from The Good Wife, Scandal and Justified.

BB ;-)

it is just in my opinion - imo - 🌈

* Other TV shows I've watched recently or am watching are comic book series on Netflix; Daredevil, Jessica Jones, Arrow, The Flash and Supergirl.
- I also watch some things with my wife which are more costume drama romantic. Such as the first season of Poldark.
Besides seeing that style of BBC period drama (including Downton Abbey) my wife and I watch a lot of different TV series from The Good Wife, Scandal and Justified.

I haven't seen any of those shows, BB, including Downton Abbey. I was thinking of watching The Wire for a while, but, feeling somewhat blue as of late and with the cold, dark, rainy weather setting here in Kraków again, have been trying to stick to things that make me smile or laugh (lately, SNL's cold opens or some of Tracey Ullman's and Catherine Tate's parodies). 

I recall something another user posted here a while ago regarding being tired of shows with anti-heroes as protagonists. Though they can be excellent shows (ala Breaking Bad and House of Cards), one does want to see regular heroes now and again (or more balanced dramas with worldviews that are not so bleak and dog-eat-dog, which do not seem quite "realistic" to me or as complex as many fans claim; at the very least, they are decidedly dystopic, if not completely nihilist, in nature).

Speaking of which, and this is very on-topic (it deserves a thread of its own, really), I disagree with many of Martin's GOT fans' claims that Tolkien's Middle Earth universe is "too simplistic" with its good vs. evil themes (too existentially optimistic or absolutist in its morality) compared to the Westeros/Essos one. I think Tolkien's universe and characters did demonstrate a lot of ethical and moral complexity, both in the Silmarillion and later in the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings, as well as cast some existential questions and doubts, and its nature was not all sugar and spice.

It did take more definitive stances on good and evil than some of these more post-modern tails, which I think in itself is a very human (or elvish, dwarvish and hobbitish) trait , and indeed had Biblical-like deity figures such as Ilúvatar, Morgoth, etc. Yet it still allowed us to understand the corruption and complexity of certain characters (Sauron, Saruman and even Morgoth), took pity on those who had lost their way (Smeagol, Denethor, Thorin, etc.) and showed how others, such as Galadriel or Elrond, or even Treebeard, were not perfect or had never erred.

Despite the apparent triumphs over Morgoth and Sauron, the outcomes were never perfect, and the resolutions always had bittersweet elements (the ents' or elves' diminishing, Frodo not healing completely, etc.)

Ilúvatar aside (whose full purpose was not known), even the Valar and certainly the Maia were subject to corruption and/or mistakes, apart from Middle Earth's races.

And speaking of deities (I don't know, maybe I'm rambling here, but I find it relevant to discussion on modern drama  ), if Martin's universe lacks a clear Ilúvatar or Valar, it certainly has some sort of deity-like characters in it (manifest in Jon Snow's resurrection, the White Walkers, etc.) I read an article about a month ago comparing the "Lord of Light" R'hllor from that show to demigods or deities from Manichean and/or Gnostic beliefs elsewhere (like Seth the Egyptian god or Lucifer - as a non-evil bringer of knowledge and light instead of the Biblical Satan-like depiction of him, etc.)

However, Martin's deities, whoever or whatever they are (and whether "good or evil" or morally ambiguous), seem to be further removed from his human characters' ethics, actions and outcomes than the Valar. (Maybe he himself doesn't have the nature of his deities quite as figured out as Tolkien did his? That could be an explanation for his taking so long to end his books, beyond deciding whether to make the "Mary Sue" Dany character and her dragons Stalin-like, one authoritarian figure from the east fighting another in the west, or redeemable.) 

to kjnics;

"I haven't seen any of those shows, BB, including Downton Abbey. I was thinking of watching The Wire for a while, but, feeling somewhat blue as of late and with the cold, dark, rainy weather setting here in Kraków again, have been trying to stick to things that make me smile or laugh (lately, SNL's cold opens or some of Tracey Ullman's and Catherine Tate's parodies)."

I enjoy some bits from SNL which I watch on YouTube.
Keep warm.

"one does want to see regular heroes now and again (or more balanced dramas with worldviews that are not so bleak and dog-eat-dog,.. decidedly dystopic, if not completely nihilist, in nature"

Yes, I'm tired of anti-heroes on TV and the negative moments used for shock value which are often not realistic.

" I disagree with many of Martin's GOT fans' claims that Tolkien's Middle Earth universe is "too simplistic"

George RR Martin has made comments like; 'I wish Tolkien had written more about Umbar' (or another part of Middle Earth).
Imo a big problem with Game of Thrones is that it goes into too much detail about side stories / events which do not move the main plot along.
Frankly I find much of Martin's mythology boring.

"And speaking of deities (I don't know, maybe I'm rambling here, but I find it relevant to discussion on modern drama ), if Martin's universe lacks a clear Ilúvatar or Valar, it certainly has some sort of deity-like characters in it (manifest in Jon Snow's resurrection, the White Walkers, etc.) I read an article about a month ago comparing the "Lord of Light" R'hllor from that show to demigods or deities from Manichean and/or Gnostic beliefs elsewhere (like Seth the Egyptian god or Lucifer - as a non-evil bringer of knowledge and light instead of the Biblical Satan-like depiction of him, etc.)

However, Martin's deities, whoever or whatever they are (and whether "good or evil" or morally ambiguous), seem to be further removed from his human characters' ethics, actions and outcomes"

I agree with a lot of that.
Game of Thrones (Fire and Ice) has real flying/fire breathing dragons, a real army of zombies, people who can raise the dead, human like beings who can live hundreds of years and yet none of these miraculous things seem to factor much into the main story of Game of Thrones.
- This is where I think that Tolkien's myth makes more sense.
Tolkien's Dragons can control kingdoms. Martin's dragons are a side show.
A being who can live hundreds of years (Saruman) controls a fortress. Martin's long lived beings hide in the north.
An army of orcs with their leader control an Empire. Martin's army of zombies with their immortal leader are still stuck north of the wall.

Tolkien's universe works much better for me.

"Maybe he himself doesn't have the nature of his deities quite as figured out as Tolkien did his? That could be an explanation for his taking so long to end his books,"

That sounds about right.
Martin's world doesn't have a clear understanding of where his wondrous beings fit in terms of power.
Tolkien borrowed ideas from Greek, Finnish, Anglo Saxon, Celtic myths.
He has a much more coherent mix of the realistic and the mythical based on what was written before.

Martin by contrast is often just making an alternate history of the Middle-Ages based on the War of the Roses and other historical events.
And the mythical creatures / beings are layered on top and don't organically blend with the story imo.

And since Martin is making an alternate history, he is just letting the story flow where it's difficult to say, 'when is it done'?
Beowulf kills Grendel, his mother and fights a dragon. Done.
Odysseus returns home Done.
Frodo destroys the Ring. Done.
The Valar defeat Morgoth. Done.

But when is an open ended history ever done?

BB ;-)

it is just in my opinion - imo - 🌈