- Files: GIF, JPG, PNG, Maximum:4000 KB, Thumbnails: 600x600 pixels
- Currently 1658 unique user posts. View catalogue
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]
Posting mode: Reply [First 100 posts][ Reply ]
26 posts omitted. First 100 posts shown.
Expand all images.
|>>|| No. 23181
What's worth watching on the telly these days?
|>>|| No. 23182
I don't know if it's just me getting older or what, but it seems like a lot of telly is just fucking shit these days. I genuinely barely watch anything, which may undermine my opinion a bit. The odd series online but that's about it. People always recommend stuff to me and occasionally I'll give stuff a go but I almost always just get bored after a few episodes and fuck it off. Last series I genuinely really enjoyed was the new Twin Peaks, so maybe I'm just a fussy hipster twat.
Find the majority of new films barely hold my attention either tbh. I mean maybe my attention span is just shot to shit, but then I'll spend hours watching some random fuckers youtube channel coz they're doing something odd or interesting or really really dull even but for some reason it's nice to watch. Been watching a lot of twitch streams as well recently, quite nice to have on in the background and you can generally dip in and out of streams and that.
So in answer to your question, fuck knows.
|>>|| No. 23183
Year of the Rabbit with Matt Berry looks pretty funny.
|>>|| No. 23184
I started watching Nathan For You recently and I'm really enjoying it. If you're not into cringe comedy you'll hate it, but the eponymous Nathan does have some very entertaining turns of phrase, and the premise is enjoyable.
|>>|| No. 23204
I watched 'The Plot Against America' recently. An alternate history set in the early 1940's. A bit of a slow burner, but I think that is intentional.
It's pretty good if you have a passing interest in history.
Both of the main writers from 'The Wire' were involved in this as well.
|>>|| No. 23205
Might be a shot in the dark but can anybody recommend anything light/easy going? Have watched a bit of Year of the Rabbit and will probably continue with that, Toast of London too. I'm just having a lot of mental health struggles at the moment and find I can't watch anything dark or unpleasant as it sets me off down a spiral, and weirdly it's been hard to find things that don't dip into darker subjects and depressing realities.
|>>|| No. 23206
It might be ancient now but it's always a feel good watch, for me anyway.
|>>|| No. 23207
Yeah it's still good, problem is I've watched it through hundreds of times now. Probably should've said, all that stuff like Black Books, Father Ted, etc, I've seen to death. It'd have to be something recent I suppose.
|>>|| No. 23208
I fairly enjoyed Gangs of London. They're not really gangs though they're oligarchs. The cinematography and fight choreography is all good.
|>>|| No. 23210
I bought Year of the Rabbit after this post >>23183. It's good but not Matt Berries best work in my opinion - probably because it's a comedy crime drama with an actual story arc, but some of the characters are a little grating too. At points Matt Berries telltale style doesn't fit well with the setting, but it's still worth a watch and i'll keep an eye out for series 2.
|>>|| No. 23212
Inside the Bruderhof was alright. It felt like it only scratched the surface but I suppose that's all they were allowed to do.
|>>|| No. 23213
It was a mostly typical documentary with some text on slides at the end that sort of undermined the rest of it.
|>>|| No. 23226
Not telly per se, but I've been thoroughly enjoying this YouTube series on building a budget racing car.
|>>|| No. 23231
A Lancashire flag? I'm confused. Shouldn't these Bradford lads fly the Yorkshire flag?
|>>|| No. 23239
Taskmaster is back with an excellent lineup: Johnny Vegas, Daisy May Cooper, Katherine Parkinson, Richard Herring and some other bloke. Daisy May's big pregnant belly is giving me the horn.
|>>|| No. 23240
They are really promoting this show heavily - doesn't seem funny enough to justify it though. It's just watchable Dave, like Scrapheap Challenge.
|>>|| No. 23241
Taskmaster depends heavily on the line-up. I thought last night was quite poor and that fat lass was painfully unfunny. I LOVE DRINKING WINE! ISN'T ALCOHOL GREAT? ALCOHOL, YEAH!
|>>|| No. 23242
It wasn't the best, but a big improvement over last series. I thought Baddiel and Brand sucked the energy out.
|>>|| No. 23582
If you want 10 minute segments of an autistic man talking to you about obscure subjects and getting interrupted by mundane events and misunderstandings (calmly) then I have just the show for you:
Really nice to watch before bed.
|>>|| No. 23583
It's incredibly difficult to tell if he's playing a character. I'm sure he accentuates it for his show and his stand-up, but I cannot find a single video online where he's not speaking in that slow, calm monotone.
|>>|| No. 23584
Isn't that what most comedians do? Just play an exaggerated version of themselves?
|>>|| No. 23585
I can find hardly any videos of Gilbert Gottfried speaking normally, doesn't mean his voice is 'an exaggerated version' of his normal voice, does it? It's just a funny voice.
|>>|| No. 23587
If you don't know who Gilbert Gottfried is you're not under eighty, you're just ignorant.
|>>|| No. 23590
I don't think it's especially ignorant to not know who Gilbert Gottfried is. I only found out last year by chance, before that I just I had vague knowledge of an alliterative name.
|>>|| No. 23591
I can't work out if I actually like The Mandalorian or not.
|>>|| No. 23594
You might want to check out this hot new comedian called Gilbert Gottfried.
|>>|| No. 23598
I've watched a couple of episodes of Solar Opposites but I can't get into it. It feels too much like a bit from Rick and Morty, like at some point it'll just cut to Ants in my Eyes Johnson or Jan-Michael Vincents.
|>>|| No. 23600
Try watching some footage of someone playing that game he voiced, Trover Saves the Universe. Roiland's entire schtick is starting to feel very forced, very lazy and very thin.
|>>|| No. 23601
It was feeling that way four episodes into the first season of R&M for me, but everyone just told me I was just being a contrarian cunt when I said that three or four years ago.
|>>|| No. 23603
Rick and Morty has a bit of philosophical depth and mystery to it and occasionally some very clever writing. Solar opposites doesn't have that. It makes up for it with a faster pace and more focused story. The result is something you can watch while you eat your sad bachelor meal when you've nothing else to watch.
|>>|| No. 23605
It's just a TV show, it's allowed to have those elements without being the second coming.
Thinking that Rick and Morty can't have *any* depth is like, the inverse of all the 'high IQ writing' folk.
|>>|| No. 23606
Personally I like it because despite some asinine parts and jokes that they've pushed way to far to stay funny, for the most part it's been a welcome change from all the tired old sci-fi tropes and mary-sue characters in absolutely everything else.
If you take the professor from back to the future as a typical caricature of an eccentric genius, R&M turns that on it's head where the genius has became an alcoholic as a coping mechanism for being unable to relate with anyone else at their level. Again where Marty Mcfly is a "normal" person saving the professor from his absent-mindedness, Morty is an abusee who is enabling Ricks destructive behaviours.
|>>|| No. 23607
I like the show and I don't disagree with you. Dan Harmon tends to bring a level of Nihilism and deconstruction of storytelling to the writing which I think is why people think it is clever, that and it is about science and everyone knows having science (even if it used and justified like magic) as a topic makes things by default for clever people, and you are clever for liking it.
Edgy Nihilist jokes were very vogue online when Rick and Morty came out so that immediately won over the reddit crowd.
The deconstruction would be clever except he is a writer there is nothing clever about a writer knowing how to write, the same way there would be if he say deconstructed shadow banking or critiqued the inherent bias created by funding grants in academic research, or talked about musical harmony. It might be fresh information to an audience but anyone who has ever taken any sort of creative study course or works in the industry already knows that. It appeals to people who think they are terribly clever when they point out a TV show isn’t realistic or has contrivances (as if the people who made the TV shows didn’t know) so a TV show that does that about it self must also be clever like them for not insulting their intelligence by inviting them to just enjoy the moment without over analysis.
It might be a crude and reductive way of putting it, but I have never learned anything new from watching the show.
|>>|| No. 23608
On the subject of (potentially overblown but also quite good) animated TV shows: I enjoyed Bojack Horseman. The worst I can say about it is that occasionally it had moments where it got far too self-indulgent, and others where it was far too "right on", but overall it was a really ambitious series with a great portrayal of a genuine fuck-up trying to be better.
Weirdly, I'm not sure I really liked the whole L.A./Hollywood/entertainment industry parody aspect, even though that forms a big chunk of the premise of the show. I think it's just a bit too easy for pop culture to write about itself, and those sort of satires have already been done a lot. It honestly might have worked just as well for me if the characters were transposed into another setting.
|>>|| No. 23609
I'm watching "Justified". It's ten years old but I don't think I can tell the difference any more. Tim Olyphant going around shooting rednecks. It's not the most mindblowing viewing but it's definitely above average. Everything about it is competent at the very least, if the alternative is clicking on random shows to see what they're like then this is a better choice.
Lots of good roles in it for ugly actors who usually just get bit parts in seppo films, if the choice of leading man didn't make that obvious.
|>>|| No. 23610
I didn't mean to say Tim Olyphant was ugly, that would be stupid, but the rest about bit parts.
|>>|| No. 23611
Having good source material helps. Elmore Leonard was a very good storyteller, I'm about a quarter of the way through Tishomingo Blues at the moment, and Justified is based on some of his Western novels.
|>>|| No. 23612
I found Bojack Horseman to be rarely if ever funny, it felt far more like an examination of depression than anything.
|>>|| No. 23613
It made me blub a couple of times, which is quite impressive for a cartoon about an anthropomorphic horse.
|>>|| No. 23614
It had its moments, but unless you're the kind of person who has spent entire nights reading TVTropes most of it will probably miss the mark, I reckon.
|>>|| No. 23615
I don't read TVTropes and still really quite enjoyed the show. It's hardly unique in this aspect, but the way it's presented that shows none of the characters as "the good guys" and instead giving each one their own hang ups and flaws kept me coming back. Who your favourite character is, which ones you find annoying and which ones you reflexively hate can tell you at least a little bit about your outlook on life.
|>>|| No. 23616
I found I enjoyed the wordplay and a lot of incidents with Mr Peanutbutter. The forced wackiness of Todd wore a bit thin after a while. It's a good show and commendably ambitious for a cartoon but really did reinforce my view that America is a truly horrible country to live in.
|>>|| No. 23617
Thanks for reminding me of this. I've followed nearly everything that David Simon and Ed Burns have done since The Wire.
On that note:
- I can highly recommend Generation Kill, the title is totally misleading, and it's a good examination of the futility and fuck-ups of the Iraq war.
- Treme was a great little musical/culture worship series, with some similarly sharp political observations. You don't need to like Nee Orleans jazz, even just a passing interest in music and a tolerance for slow-burning character drama will make it worth seeing.
-Show Me a Hero is probably his best short series, and I binged it once on a long flight (back in the distant past when that was possible). Feel like I actually learned about something about the history of New York and American cities generally.
- The Deuce was a bit shite. I get why it interested Simon and his usual co-writers, but James Franco was pretty unbearable and it felt a lot more "fictional" and speculative than his other works.
I guess I might not like The Plot Against America so much, because it's counterfactual history if I remember right?
Fuck it, will give it a go anway.
|>>|| No. 23618
> I found Bojack Horseman to be rarely if ever funny, it felt far more like an examination of depression than anything.
I agree with this 100% and I watched it from release all the way through to the last episode. It's not a show that I ever go back and re-watch though, something about it is just too raw for me. I don't think I ever found it laugh out loud funny, I just idenitified with it. Which is a depressing thing to say about a cartoon about an alcoholic horse. It's like that shitty Facebook meme "I'm in this and I don't like it"
|>>|| No. 23619
Annotation 2021-03-10 021057.jpg
If I like the Expanse books quite a lot, is the TV series worth watching? I'm not one of those people that moans they did things differently to the books (though I'd be very impressed if they managed to make the Hub Station stuff look not terrible), but I'd like it to at least have the same general feel as the novels, if it's all american explosions and gunfights and they cut the character stuff down, I'd rather not.
|>>|| No. 23621
One of the best I have watched in its genre. It made me pick up the books.
|>>|| No. 23622
I didn't like it, it seemed like a weird mishmash of genres. Yes, you might have people who, in the future, fulfil roles like that of a PI, on a mining colony, but they'd have to be complete bellends to wear fedoras. Hard sci-fi with zombies. Yeah, right.
|>>|| No. 23623
Miller is a complete bellend, that's the point. And the zombies are from a bioengineered alien replicating parasite, which is at least not impossible in real life, though I get why you don't like it, plus what happens after that is self described as 'breaking physics', though at least they leave room for it being wormhole stuff. The most unrealistic thing in the books is that they 'spun up' ceres to 0.3G and it didn't just tear itself apart.
|>>|| No. 23624
He's not a fedora-type bellend though. He's a bellend in the way that a hard boiled PI would be a bellend. It's stupid.
>which is at least not impossible in real life
That makes it no more hard sf than Warhammer 40k, just hand waving it away by saying it's something we don't understand how it works yet.
|>>|| No. 23625
>He's not a fedora-type bellend though.
He falls in love with a girl he's never met and becomes obsessed with her. If that's not fedoraesque I don't know what is.
I don't know about in the show, but the books go to great lengths to explain the viability of it. The overarching plot of the entire series is humanity trying to understand the protomolecule and the people who created it, so saying "we don't understand this yet" in series one is just exactly that.
To me the biggest example of what you're talking about is the propulsion system that makes the travel times in the books viable. They say "yeah this one guy made engines perfectly efficient and it takes about 3 hours to get to the moon now, bye"
|>>|| No. 23626
>The overarching plot of the entire series is humanity trying to understand the protomolecule and the people who created it, so saying "we don't understand this yet" in series one is just exactly that.
Cool, so LoTR is hard science fiction because we don't understand magic yet. They walk instead of using spaceships, very hard SF. They even go out of their way to avoid getting to Mordor quickly on the eagles or whatever. If you believe that I've got an Event Horizon to sell you.
|>>|| No. 23628
You clearly haven't watched much of the show or read the books, it's apparent you're basing your opinion on not very much. I don't really feel the need to defend a piece of media in any case, but to someone this dismissive it seems a waste of time regardless. I mean you no ill will, I'm just being honest.
Remember the cant
|>>|| No. 23629
>The most unrealistic thing in the books is that they 'spun up' ceres to 0.3G and it didn't just tear itself apart.
I never thought about this, but how and why?
|>>|| No. 23630
I definitely watched as far as the first glimpses of the zombies, whether that's the end of season one or two I don't remember. Either way, someone not liking a piece of media that you like, doesn't mean they've not seen it.
|>>|| No. 23631
My point is that your argument wouldn't make sense unless you hadn't seen much past the end third of the first series, which you have confirmed you have not.
|>>|| No. 23633
Are Scott can likely explain the issues better than I can :
But among other things, you'd have to spin Ceres about 13 times faster to get 0.3G on the surface, and that'd be so fast the forces exerted on the rock would just tear itself apart.
|>>|| No. 23634
Your point was it's not hard scifi because "we just don't understand the science yet" is a cop out. My point is that as the series progresses, the people in the show learn more and more about the science, to the point that the story shifts from "how" to "why" to "who" - this is the backbone of the entire saga, and has not even begun by the time in the series you made it to. My logic is flawless. The show isn't telling you "this is hard scifi because nobody understands how it works" it's telling you "this is new science that humanity hasn't encountered before, and our story is them learning about it".
You fucking cunt.
|>>|| No. 23635
The magic in Lord of the Rings is new science that modern humanity hasn't encountered before.
|>>|| No. 23636
I think you stopped watching about three episodes before they confront the scientists who re-engineered the biophage we're talking about here in the Expanse. But it's fine, I get it. You've made up your mind. With incomplete information. Like a good scientist does.
|>>|| No. 23637
Because watching tv shows about zombies is science.
I'm sorry it's just really silly how sensitive you are about this show, I don't mean you any ill will.
|>>|| No. 23638
I still don't care if you like it or not, your point just doesn't make sense.
|>>|| No. 23639
Zombies exist in real life in nature right now, why is it so magical to you?
|>>|| No. 23640
Nobody ever called The Walking Dead Hard SF just because they heard of cordyceps.
|>>|| No. 23641
You're focusing a lot on the 'zombies' (actually just people compelled by a parasite to vomit a lot) that are a tiny, tiny part of the story and are not seen or talked about again in the books at all, apart from in the last book briefly. It's really, really not about zombies.
|>>|| No. 23642
So? I never said it was about zombies, I said it was a confused mishmash of things.
|>>|| No. 23645
It's one of the most impressive series I've ever seen. And I say that as a person on the internet.
3 seasons carefully planned and tied up with no stretch, writing with a concerted effort to make things as tight as possible, a novel view of time travel which I've not seen in anything else (future dictates past), and some incredibly immersive casting alongside a wonderful soundtrack.
The story starts with children going missing within a small yet large town, and the suicide of the father of the protagonist. These events drive the mystery, and it's quite meaty. More importantly, it's very satisfying. It is very prone to spoilers, but mainly due to perspective - it is very interesting to watch it again with full knowledge, and quite rewarding. And for that reason I'm really looking forward to ignoring it for 10+ years and going again. I'm watching it for a second time in a few months, and it's nice to have forgotten some details but still know what to look for.
The official website is great, though I didn't find it until I'd finished. It will ask you what episode you are on, and only provide you with information you've already viewed (and forgotten).
The flaws you may notice are the moody tone of dialogue with oddly long pauses, and also a few contrivances to drive the plot, such as miscommunications. It is not perfect, but it is quite unique.
|>>|| No. 23646
My only problem with this show is that I picked it up a few episodes in with the missus, and without even knowing fully what went on, I already sussed out exactly where the plot was going. Quite predictable use of that sort of time travel plot device, but they pulled it off perfectly, I'll give them that.
It's basically just Terminator innit.
|>>|| No. 23647
No, I think they ripped off Donnie Darko, personally.
My missus got into this and watched it all the way through, but I got frustrated after a few episodes. It's slow as molasses and I didn't have the patience.
|>>|| No. 23749
I've been watching 'FASTER!' a documentary series about the time-saving inventions that underpin modern society.
That might sound quite benign but it's actually about time and how we've ended up with less of it and how really it's time at the heart of capitalism - which we seem to remain perpetually poor in despite having grown materially richer. The twist is that the inventions we have aren't actually time efficient. In the aggregate lifts are slower than stairs and 40% of the products people order online to save time are returned (which is never an easy thing). Then there's the subjective nature of time in itself and how that bombards us with waiting and stress or is exploited to keep us in a zombie-state.
|>>|| No. 23750
LOTR is science fiction because 3 foot tall halflings being called hobbits is fictitious as well as giant flaming eyes on towers.
|>>|| No. 23751
That circle the streaming sites put over the show's thumbnail with a number in to indicate how many episodes there are is unfortunate here.
|>>|| No. 23755
My lass got me into it too. Lasses like it, so I think maybe there's an emotional appeal here.
Watching it a third time, I think a lot of my enjoyment is in the pathos. If you're so inclined, there are many opportunities to feel the absurdity of what the characters are experiencing. All the silences and moodiness, provided you're already a bit immersed, is room to dwell on the thought of meeting your parents as children, or your future self.
I can see the similarities to Donnie Darko in the time loop and the motif of inevitability and sacrifice as such, but with more time and more characters, it offers different perspectives. For example, Jonas dedicates his life to changing his future and repeatedly becomes Adam, while Noah is already prepared to kill his father when we meet him, and he strives to step deeper into the role of the villain, but with 'reasons'. I suppose they're a bit similar there.
They packed a lot of detail in, it's not watertight but the effort is appreciable.
|>>|| No. 23771
Just got done with Cruel Summer, which is one to watch with the missus. Full disclosure: it contains kidnapping, grooming and noncery, emotional and physical abuse, and almost hints at rape at one point.
It's set over three years in the early 90s, with snippets of each year before and after a major event which I won't disclose for spoiler reasons.
Disappointed to see that it's been renewed for a second series already, given the finale only aired on Tuesday night. The first season is a really neatly contained story with a blinder of an ending, it's a shame networks can't just let a nice piece of art be just that, without cashing in.
|>>|| No. 23774
How have you lads found the new series of Inside No. 9? Feels like more misses than hits to me.
|>>|| No. 23775
>and almost hints at rape at one point.
I'm worried this isn't satire but I've now convinced myself that it is.
Nah, first one was fun but I think the novelty has worn off now. Might give it a shot.
|>>|| No. 23776
It shot a certain scene in such a way that leads you to speculate if there is rape going on, given the climate of the show, it's almost assumed that there is, but never outright addressed.
|>>|| No. 23783
I find it odd how Clarkson is now the spitting image of my father. Do all old men look the same or do they get their sense of style from the same source?
|>>|| No. 23791
It's the first thing I've watched in ages, saw a trailer, enjoyed it very much.
Programmes that touch on technical stuff I do and know about invariably fuck me off massively, but this (I also know a fair amount about farming) didn't so much. Although the conversion of wild area into a well manicured but joyless trout farm was a bit odd.
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]