|
Post by Hermes on Feb 4, 2017 11:30:59 GMT -5
I think it's significant that Sherlock is run by people who came from (transformative) fandom (as is Doctor Who). In the old days, canon was concerned with saving the world, solving crimes or whatever, while fandom focused on the lives of the characters. When fandom takes over canon, the whole thing becomes about the lives of the characters.
(I don't think it does apply to Star Wars in the same way, as he claims: it still is about saving the world. It's also a family saga, but then it always was a family saga. Luke being Anakin's son was significant from the start.)
|
|
|
Post by Charles Vane on Feb 4, 2017 23:39:34 GMT -5
caring about the lives of characters makes it fandom? whatever you say, old white man.
|
|
|
Post by Charles Vane on Feb 4, 2017 23:47:01 GMT -5
the final problem was the laziest most self indulgent piece of bs i have ever watched i actually watched it! i heard so many people complaining about it and i thought its probably not actually that bad. it was terrible but it was kind of fascinating too bc eurus is just so the epitome of how he views women. they are these terrifying creatures that he doesn't understand that use their mysterious ways to perplex, astound and torment men.
|
|
|
Post by Charles Vane on Feb 4, 2017 23:51:51 GMT -5
i mean, she could like mind control people? because she was just so smart? that makes sense? because like, women are scary and dangerous.
|
|
|
Post by Charles Vane on Feb 4, 2017 23:55:37 GMT -5
oh and i know that mary dies in the source material but i do not believe for one single second that mary would throw herself in front of sherlock and get herself killed like it made sense in that her and molly hooper only exist as props for the men, but it did not make sense whatsoever that a new mother would risk her life for her husband's bff and leave her young daughter without her. like nope, let him die girl.
|
|
|
Post by Reba on Feb 5, 2017 0:09:03 GMT -5
Here's an interesting article. I agree with the author, except that I'm not as bothered by the phenomenon as he is. The idea that it's a sign of a narcissistic culture is valid and interesting, but I don't feel entirely sure of it. This definitely looks like a thing that's happening, but it's not necessarily a bad thing. i think it's as simple as contemporary criticism focusing really hard on character development. plot and character development usually merge by showing how the plot had actual consequences & affected the character, but lazy writers don't want to worry about a clever plot, they just want the obligatory character development; so, they show how the plot didn't actually matter, and they can replace whatever the plot's climax would have been with an emotional gimme.
|
|
|
Post by Charles Vane on Feb 5, 2017 0:14:17 GMT -5
in summary, bbc sherlock is a salsashow that's so caught up in its own hype and how ~special~ sherlock is. elementary is pretty boring for me but i still love it bc their sherlock is just a man, and being super smart does not make his life more important than anyone elses or allow him special treatment and the whole show is better for that.
|
|
|
Post by Charles Vane on Feb 5, 2017 0:19:32 GMT -5
Here's an interesting article. I agree with the author, except that I'm not as bothered by the phenomenon as he is. The idea that it's a sign of a narcissistic culture is valid and interesting, but I don't feel entirely sure of it. This definitely looks like a thing that's happening, but it's not necessarily a bad thing. i think it's as simple as contemporary criticism focusing really hard on character development. plot and character development usually merge by showing how the plot had actual consequences & affected the character, but lazy writers don't want to worry about a clever plot, they just want the obligatory character development; so, they show how the plot didn't actually matter, and they can replace whatever the plot's climax would have been with an emotional gimme. well sherlock focused on a personal story but i didn't really notice much in terms of character development. moffat just jams a bunch of cool ideas together into comprehensible nonsense that lack both plot and character progression.
|
|
|
Post by Reba on Feb 5, 2017 0:39:35 GMT -5
that's the point, it's not real development, it's a cheap facade of development created so the show can seem smarter than it is.
|
|
|
Post by Charles Vane on Feb 5, 2017 1:12:31 GMT -5
but wouldn't the smartest thing be for it to actually make sense and be good
|
|
|
Post by Charles Vane on Feb 5, 2017 1:12:45 GMT -5
or to at least accomplish one of those things
|
|
|
Post by Reba on Feb 5, 2017 1:19:12 GMT -5
but then dumb people wouldn't like it ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
|
|
|
Post by Linda Rhaldeen on Feb 5, 2017 18:18:25 GMT -5
For the record the final problem was my favorite of season 4 but that's mainly because nothing happened in the last ten minutes to made me spitting mad like the other two eps did; leave out the fridged woman trope and Moffat's acephobia coming out of John's mouth and I quite liked the serial killer storyline. Also it had Toby Jones and I kind of like him? Like, as an actor; he's not much to look at but he always plays interesting characters.
|
|