![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Blood, meth and tears
Feb. 4th, 2014 07:58 amI don't have time for analysis or introspection this week, but:
1) We finished "Breaking Bad" last night. You can color me still impressed, whichever of their many gorgeous backwashes and filters and highlights that is. It's very seldom that a TV show pleases on so many levels, so consistently, for such a long time: the character development, the continuity and callbacks, the tenseness and the tenderness, the pinpricks of humor, the raw realism, the expansive scenery and the intimate glowing interiors. Just all so good, so integral, so true to itself. Wow. (Now let's do the same thing, but with women as the main characters. Yes?)
2) Also have watched all three episodes of S3 "Sherlock" and - they were okay, even very good in spots, though it strikes me even more now that three is an insufficient number (of episodes per season, not of focal characters, though perhaps that too). I just think the plot arc would have worked better stretched out a little. It especially seems that a lot of effort was expended to have very little happen in the second episode (I mean, a lot happened emotionally, but I want plot!). And yes, clues and callbacks, but the impact is considerably less when you'll calling back to something that happened last week. Bury it and resurrect it! (Or maybe I've just been watching too much "Breaking Bad.") I do like Mary; I'm still fond of the cinematography and the acting (Martin Freeman continues to do "gutted" really well), and I think I like what they're doing with Molly; but I can't help noticing the bits of Moffatitis and the weird "we're doing fanservice!" touches and they annoy me. All in all, though… okay. I'll watch the next set of episodes, I guess, whenever they manage to produce them.
3) Speaking of fanservice… by Michael Emerson's wiggly eyebrows, I hope I can count on POI to do it right tonight. Bow ties are cool, Mr. Reese.
1) We finished "Breaking Bad" last night. You can color me still impressed, whichever of their many gorgeous backwashes and filters and highlights that is. It's very seldom that a TV show pleases on so many levels, so consistently, for such a long time: the character development, the continuity and callbacks, the tenseness and the tenderness, the pinpricks of humor, the raw realism, the expansive scenery and the intimate glowing interiors. Just all so good, so integral, so true to itself. Wow. (Now let's do the same thing, but with women as the main characters. Yes?)
2) Also have watched all three episodes of S3 "Sherlock" and - they were okay, even very good in spots, though it strikes me even more now that three is an insufficient number (of episodes per season, not of focal characters, though perhaps that too). I just think the plot arc would have worked better stretched out a little. It especially seems that a lot of effort was expended to have very little happen in the second episode (I mean, a lot happened emotionally, but I want plot!). And yes, clues and callbacks, but the impact is considerably less when you'll calling back to something that happened last week. Bury it and resurrect it! (Or maybe I've just been watching too much "Breaking Bad.") I do like Mary; I'm still fond of the cinematography and the acting (Martin Freeman continues to do "gutted" really well), and I think I like what they're doing with Molly; but I can't help noticing the bits of Moffatitis and the weird "we're doing fanservice!" touches and they annoy me. All in all, though… okay. I'll watch the next set of episodes, I guess, whenever they manage to produce them.
3) Speaking of fanservice… by Michael Emerson's wiggly eyebrows, I hope I can count on POI to do it right tonight. Bow ties are cool, Mr. Reese.
