?

Log in

I might need to extend my "don't read Facebook, don't read Twitter" emotional self-care program to "don't leave TV news as background while I work, even on mute."

Tags:

1) Really?

2) You probably want to ask somebody to tell you what parts of yesterday's episode to avoid.

3) Always remember that Moffat wants you to believe there's a god and it's name is the Doctor, but Gatiss wants to tell you that there is no god, and the world is a dust bowl of ashes haunted by the cold ghosts of our good intentions. The words might or might not have been his, but he was talking not only to his brother, but to and through the fourth wall, when he said and warned and mocked that all hearts break, and caring is not an advantage.

Just saying.

Tags:

It's... different. There's a minimal amount of plot, really simplified characters, everybody's so chirpy, and about 85% of the time there's a fight going on (the episode sequence is also of order, which aside from a couple of details doesn't really matter, which tells you how absolutely episodic it is). It's basically about ten minutes of SKWP (Superhero Kapow Without Plot).

It did have a few moments I laughed at (Tumblr gifsets of the ones I remember here, here, and here, spoilers to be expected), but I think I'm not going to keep watching.

YMMV, of course! If you're looking for pure angst-free Saturday morning kapow fun (and who amongst us doesn't, at one point or another?) this is probably it.
This morning I remembered, randomly and for no apparent reason, that in Sanctuary vampire Tesla nicknamed the male POV character "The Concubine" of his older-as-an-actress-and-waaaaaay-older-as-a-character female protagonist boss.

Tags:

But I just watched the CW crossover and I'm quite happy with it. The Supergirl/Flash dynamic is just so fascinatingly... *nice*. And I like Green Arrow more often than not.

It was definitely a by-the-books crossover, and it even included some non-crossover classic tropes, but, without being brilliant or tightly plotted, it was fun.

Tags:

It very much grows on you. It begins goofy, and then it gets weird, then it's about relationships, and then science-fictional. Then you have tragedy, more science-fiction, and finally as kick-ass an animated fight as I've ever seen; it had that early Jason Bourne-y quality when it's not martial artists fighting, but hypercompetent (and in this case, cybernetically enhanced) experts trying to kill each other.

It doesn't stop being funny (although, caveat, there's a whole thread of stereotypical gay jokes that are probably unnecessary), but it does get more... existential over time.

Tags:

Finished my Leverage rewatch. Knowing how it ends gave me a renewed appreciation for its series-long arc. It isn't Hannibal by any stretch of the imagination, and I didn't find myself much invested in Nate's random walk through the 2x2 matrix of (absolute vs relative assholery) and (sobriety vs alcoholism), never mind his father issues, but it is a story about mid-life personal change, for all of them, that has nothing to do with "getting more badass," and I can appreciate that.

Also, I found myself constantly comparing the Leverage crew with Dominic Toretto's; both are composed of assembled criminals becoming exponentially more powerful through synergy, but the aims with which they use this power couldn't be more different. The Toretto crew becomes both a family and a Family; the Leverage crew becomes a family and a force for good. A good, by the way, that is more nuanced, realistic, and humanistic than in most other fiction. They both punish evildoers (and they are awfully explicit about, and totally unfazed by, not all crimes being illegal) and help victims — Nate is usually the only one who engages in revenge for the sake of revenge, what I think is why he eventually takes himself out of the picture — and that's something, I think, key to who they are.

And of course there's one of the most explicit and canonical OT3s in the history of OT3s. I'm not convinced that Elliot's relationship with Parker and Hardison is sexual (and I'd have found it believable for Parker and Hardison's relationship not to be, or only sort-of), but that's as utterly irrelevant as to whether Will Graham and Hannibal Lecter will or would ever bone each other (if anything, Hannibal's motto should be Mary Rakow's quote “Some people underestimate how erotic it is to be understood”; not as leading to sex, but as a form of eroticism parallel to and no less strong than (and something that, yes, I very much relate to)).

Elliot and Sophie, on the other hand, I can definitely see as having a physical friendship. They are probably the sanest ones when it comes to sex, as well as the most emotionally mature, and we have scenes that show them connecting on that level. It wouldn't be romance, but it would be fun; if they didn't, I think it'd be due to both of them considering it'd lead to problems with th group's dynamics. By that I mean Nate being an idiot, which is about 93% of all the problems with the group's dynamics.

So apparently I still have Thoughts and Feelings about Leverage. But, c'mon, in how many shows does the series' arc finish — in a mostly organic and slowly developed way &madsh; with the middle-aged male lead proposing marriage and the young female badass becoming the undisputed leader and mastermind of a crew-slash-family unit that includes a psychologically insightful ex-assassin/chef who'd rather hit than kill, and rather *cook* than hit, and a soft-hearted relationship-oriented black male polymath genius whose earliest crime we saw was having a bank paid for his Nana's medical bills, all of them taking on the freaking worldwide financial system one victim seeking help at a time?

Tags:

Just finished watching a couple of Leverage episodes. I had forgotten how much I love that team and their unnecessarily convoluted and oftentimes comedic shenanigans.

The final scene, Parker saying "we provide... leverage" is, of course, everything I could ask for, but I'm not sure Nate knew... Nah. I think he knew very well that Parker's Leverage will be much more, well, "ruthless" isn't quite the right word — Parker's heart is huge, they are all sweet people, which is why they fell in together so easily — but dangerous might be. Because Nate was an essentially lawful person lashing out for revenge and redemption, and very good at it, but with a certain holding-back. Doing a good job, a necessary job, and sort of enjoying it, but not always comfortable with the fact that he enjoys it.

Parker — Parker has never been what Nate was. She doesn't run Leverage because she got broken, she runs it because she got better, and, for the kind of people and systems they are going to go after now, her mind and her spirit are going to be a much better fit. For Nate it was always personal, there was always a face behind things, somebody to punish. Parker feels more in terms of systems to crack. Marks get their painful due, yes, but &madsh; and I'm probably over-reading, and certainly haven't had enough sleep lately &madsh; Parker's gesture as she said that last "leverage" was exactly right in its (very properly unsettling) difference.

I still got all the Nate-to-Parker transition feels, apparently.

Tags:

I can't even

I continue going through the Poirot tv series. The Poirot-Hastings-Japp dynamic is a joy to watch; most of the time it's a low key, deeply amiable version of the Holmes-Watson-Lestrade archetype, and some days that's precisely what I want.

Right now I'm watching a bit of The A.B.C. Murders where Hastings is washing up the tea service the victim's relatives have just used during their interview at Whitehaven Mansions, while Poirot stands next to him wearing the tidiest white apron you've ever seen, drying things up as Hastings passes them over, but passing them back if he seems something wrong with them.

You can tell they are already used to this by the way this is done automatically while they discuss the murders, and how Hastings doesn't complain or even makes a face as Poirot returns the same saucer for the third time (and Hastings spends about 17% of his time making faces at Poirot), he just takes him back and re-washes it without even looking at it.

If that's not domesticity, I don't know what is.

Tags:

Unbidden, but not unwelcome

Seemingly out of nowhere, I remembered the first seconds of Jesus Walks — not the song per se, but the Gunn fanvid, which I just watched for the first time in years.

It's still a great vid, and, damn, I miss Angel now, the endlessly depressing and at times very funny story of how a motley crew of secondary characters got their own show and went off to save Los Angeles with admittedly very mixed results. I think that at its core it was simply an object lesson on the ubiquity of unintended consequences, a meditation on the nature and costs of heroism when stripped of the false possibility of a final victory, and, more than anything else, it was about this:

Read more...Collapse )

Tags:

Profile

cass, can you not
__marcelo
__marcelo

Latest Month

April 2017
S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30      

Tags

Syndicate

RSS Atom
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow