|
Post by Dante on Jan 2, 2019 16:11:30 GMT -5
I thought this was a very strong start to the series.
Like others, I felt that the freaks' deaths were jarring. But I only felt it in retrospect, because in the moment, I was absolutely certain that it was a fake-out, and they'd meet up with the other departing troupe members on the road (and Brucie, even), or we'd later get a cutaway to them on their farm saying words to the effect of "good thing we ran for our lives". It's difficult to say exactly why, but something about them being picked up as troupe members in one episode and then being killed off in the very next episode feels unusually casually cruel for ASoUE; the comic fakeout I think would've been more in keeping.
The sinister duo were spectacular. Positioning them as Olaf's evil substitute parents worked thematically, narratively - even comedically. There's a strong theme running throughout the series of the unreliability of guardians and mentors, and of disappointing and being disappointed by authority, and the relationship of Olaf to the sinister duo plays right into it. It reinforces the idea that Olaf's grudge against the Baudelaires is intensely personal; while the sinister duo are as Satanic as they always were, figures of pure unmotivated evil who don't want to change only a few people but want to change the world, the consequences of whose triumph is shown more devastatingly than the books ever did. And it gives us hilarious moments of Olaf in the model of a moody teenager muttering "you're not the boss of me," or pathetically doing his best to earn some genuine affection.
I agree that Quigley being whacked away by a branch lacks the tragedy of him being swept away as in the original text; and in fact I'm not sure why they went to the trouble of changing it, given that it was only a matter of the ice cracking at a slightly different moment. Perhaps they thought that the characters being swept away in a river would be difficult to film; that I could appreciate, I suppose.
All other cast members are charming throughout; there's nothing else I particularly feel the need to draw attention to - save that I suspect that they originally intended to go through with the bank robbery in full rather than reducing it to a brief joke, which may have something to do with the absence of Sara Canning as Jacquelyn; and also, that having the theme of Anna Karenina be shared between the two elder Baudelaires and explained very explicitly as a code seems to misunderstand the fact that Klaus reeling off this long moral as if that particular string of words is the only possible interpretation is very obviously meant to be a joke. Taking things which are meant to be jokes or otherwise brief and overexplaining them is something I think happens quite a few times this season. But TSS I think is a triumphant opening note to the season, with only shallow lows and great mountainous highs.
|
|
|
Post by Violent BUN Fortuna on Jan 4, 2019 12:19:32 GMT -5
Right, I've finally got round to typing up my thoughts on each episode (or rather, each pair of episodes). Partly just because I loved these episodes so much, I wrote most of my thoughts in a sort of list/note format because I just wanted to get everything down, so here is my very long list of thoughts:
Things I Loved:
The sets were just stellar. The waterfall, the forest ... Brilliant stuff. I love how stylised everything is and what a storybook quality it gives everything. Similarly, the costumes are great Lemony's old Snow Scouts costume was a standout for me and had great comedic value. I would have liked to see the fire dress as it is described in the book, but other than that, yeah, I loved the costumes.
The moment when they emerged into the ruined headquarters was heart-wrenching as well as visually stunning. For some reason this seemed more touching than the Baudelaires in their ruined home in TEE; this had more pathos, I think.
The line about 'Late series backstory' was superb. As many others have said (though I haven't had a chance to read everyone's thoughts yet) the Sinister Duo were incredible. I especially love Richard E. Grant's portrayal of TMWABBNH, and I'm still not over the actual moustache in TWWHBNB's hair.
I really appreciated how much these episodes kept faithful to the book. Obviously there were changes, and there were things missing, but overall it felt very in keeping with the book and I'm glad about that.
I was glad the white faced women took their stand and left, although given the directions the characters have been taken in the show, it would perhaps have made more sense for HOIG to be the one to instigate the rebellion. The Bald Man leaving seemed a bit odd, but no major complaints there.
I loved the symbolism of Violet’s frozen glove, and I'm glad they kept Violet and Quigley's moment private. It was understated and sweet, and I think that's just right.
Sunny has so much agency now!! Also her expressions are always great.
The very fake salmon was hilarious.
The conversations between Sunny and Fernald are always great value.
Seeing Violet, Klaus, and Quigley pulling Esmé up the waterfall at a 90 degree angle was PERFECT.
The recitation of the pledge and particularly Violet's reaction to it were great. I was also really happy at how true to the book, with only minimal changes, Violet's inventions were. The acting was great, as always. I loved the line about Mr Poe's ‘Out of character return’. They kept the discussion about raw toast!! I'm so happy that made it in.
Violet and Sunny’s conversation on top of Mount Fraught was so so sweet and touching. I absolutely loved that scene.
Count Olaf's interactions with his troupe were as good as always, as was Esmé's desperation for the sugar bowl.
I did like the Sinister Duo killing the freaks, although I would have preferred them to live for their role in TPP. Still, as a way to emphasise the Duo's villainy, this was very nicely done.
Things I didn't like:
Sometimes it felt a bit rushed? I just would have liked longer to dwell on some things because I love how contemplative the books are, but I do recognise that a) it's a tv show and things are different for different media, and b) Barry Sonnenfeld's style is to be fast, not slow.
I wish the stream hadn’t all been frozen over because I felt the rush and panic of the water made Quigley’s separation from the Baudelaires, and from Violet in particular, more dramatic and emotional in the book.
I didn't like that Violet appeared to be struggling more than Quigley with the climb. She led the way in the book.
I really wish they had shown Violet remembering The World Is Quiet Here song.
|
|
|
Post by gliquey on Jan 5, 2019 18:23:50 GMT -5
One thing I didn't understand here is why Violet and Klaus couldn't jump out of the caravan. It seems much easier than slowing it down, not making an effort to leave it even after it's clearly about to fall off the cliff and then scrambling up the cliff edge as the caravan starts to strain the rope and topples to its doom. It hadn't really occurred to me before now just how unrealistic the lengthy scene in the first chapter of TSS is, as the caravan would have to be perfectly centred and faced with a path which didn't reach a corner for quite a long way. But in translation to the screen, I didn't feel it worked. The deaths of the freaks is very curious to book-readers - it took me a while to believe that they had really died. But I think to a Netflix-only viewer, it would work. It is a little unsatisfying to me how little weight this event is given, though. Are they ever mentioned again? I was unsatisfied with the sinister duo's first appearance. They need a big build-up before they arrive to establish their aura of menace. However, the rest of their scenes were excellent. Making the sinister duo parent figures in Olaf's life is such a satisfying and obvious idea that I'm astounded it had never occurred to me. One of the best improvements of the Netflix series over the books. However, their final scene in which they have apparently started dozens of fires simultaneously seems a bit disingenuous. Perhaps they have many people who assisted them in the fires, and their only jobs were as the makers of the scheme and the Snow Scout kidnappers. The scene between Violet and Quigley is interesting. Here, it has almost no impact - the characters aren't built up enough. I absolutely hated Quigley's delivery of the line about the view being lovely, and there's just no real chemistry. The only question is: is there any chemistry between them in the books, or has it just been built up so much by the fandom that the books had the same initial problems anyway? (Later episode spoilers:) Since they bring Quigley back in later episodes, it a poor decision not to explore any further the very strong potential for awkwardness given that Violet has fallen in love with a boy who looks identical to the boy she had a crush on since TAA. The Esme-trapping storyline has always felt slightly pointless to me from a narrative perspective, but at least it serves as a moral quandary and a precursor to the decisions the Baudelaires make in escaping Hotel Denouement with Olaf and questioning whether to push him overboard. In the Netflix adaptation, without the malice of forethought and as part of a quickly-paced storyline, this Esme-trapping doesn't work at all. I don't think we even got the Nietzsche quotes, and they didn't have the masks. If they were not going to give it the time to do it properly, I'd rather have had this bit eliminated entirely and replaced with a different storyline. The ending in which they lose Quigley to a branch was terrible. It looks like the Baudelaires could have quite easily gone back for him but they just go "Oh no! He's lost forever! Guess we'll never see him again." Definitely not the same as having him swept away in a different tributary of the river.
|
|
|
Post by veryfakedonkey on Jan 5, 2019 19:11:26 GMT -5
One thing I didn't understand here is why Violet and Klaus couldn't jump out of the caravan. It seems much easier than slowing it down, not making an effort to leave it even after it's clearly about to fall off the cliff and then scrambling up the cliff edge as the caravan starts to strain the rope and topples to its doom. It hadn't really occurred to me before now just how unrealistic the lengthy scene in the first chapter of TSS is, as the caravan would have to be perfectly centred and faced with a path which didn't reach a corner for quite a long way. But in translation to the screen, I didn't feel it worked. In the show I agree, they should have jumped out there. (If this was realistic, where if it would they would have just ran away instead of actually going to jump into a lion pit because their name was called). In the books I found it super funny how they just had the time to name a huge list of every single sticky food over and over again.
|
|
|
Post by Violent BUN Fortuna on Jan 6, 2019 19:16:18 GMT -5
The scene between Violet and Quigley is interesting. Here, it has almost no impact - the characters aren't built up enough. I absolutely hated Quigley's delivery of the line about the view being lovely, and there's just no real chemistry. The only question is: is there any chemistry between them in the books, or has it just been built up so much by the fandom that the books had the same initial problems anyway? An interesting question. I agree that in the show, the chemistry was lacking, and the his delivery of Very Lovey Indeed was not excellent. However, I absolutely think that it is a different story in the books. Certainly the fandom has speculated wildly on their private moment, but I think the reason people became so invested in them is because they really did have good chemistry. I think in the show they made the mistake of making Very Lovely Indeed not only a pivotal moment for them, but also the first indication that they shared romantic feelings for each other; in the book, it's clearly hinted at before this moment, so you get a better, slower build up. And I enjoy their conversations together, they're interested in each other in a really charming way. I'm glad that they kept this moment fairly faithful to the books in essence, and so for that I enjoy it, but it feels very dull compared to the original version. I think one of the crucial things about their relationship is that it's very subtle. If you look at it in comparison to Klaus and Fiona, for instance, it's much more understated; Klaus and Fiona kiss in public and it's all quite ... dramatic, I guess. But with Violet and Quigley, it's so much more private. Obviously they have this big moment which we aren't allowed to see, so it's private from that perspective, but everything else about their feelings for each other is presented in a very subtle way as well, and it's developed piece by piece over multiple books. They share small, secret smiles, and we know from TGG that Violet feels like she's been whispering Quigley's name to herself for days. Their feelings are clearly very strong, but they're kept very much to themselves and we learn about them not through public declarations of love, but through these quiet, delicate explorations of emotions (mostly Violet's, for obvious reasons), which are mostly carried out in the narration. And so I think the development of their feelings for one another (which I love), is very well suited to a literary format, but perhaps translates less easily to the screen, perhaps particularly in the fast paced style with which Sonnenfeld likes to work. I did like the frozen glove though; I thought that was a really nice way to connect their moment to Snicket's narration. So, to sum up: I don't think the show did justice to their relationship, which was presented very elegantly in the books, where I believe they had very good chemistry. The thing I've always really enjoyed about the Esme trapping plot is that it's such an extended moral quandary, so you're right that without that ... it just didn't work in the same way. I love Violet remembering the The World Is Quiet Here song, so I really missed that in the show, and the general discussions about fighting fire with fire, which we only got in the briefest form. I wouldn't particularly have wanted a different storyline to replace it, and I'm not sure what that could have been anyway; I just wish they had given this subplot the care and attention it deserved. Perhaps it was a side effect of giving so much screen time to secondary and tertiary characters instead of the Baudelaires. I agree, the ending was so, so much less compelling than the book's ending. I don't know if it was simply easier to film this way, but it was a real shame.
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Jan 7, 2019 4:45:10 GMT -5
In retrospect, I do wonder if it might simply have been more challenging to film the characters being washed away down river rapids; or perhaps they came up with the cliffhanger idea with the Queequeg rising from the ice, and became too committed to the idea to change it.
|
|
|
Post by Uncle Algernon on Jan 7, 2019 6:11:35 GMT -5
I agree, the ending was so, so much less compelling than the book's ending. I don't know if it was simply easier to film this way, but it was a real shame. You know, about that ending. I suspect Dante is right, but there's also the fact that it appears inspired by the famous sled chase at the end of the James Bond film On Her Majesty's Secret Service — which, being a famous feature about a hero from a secret organization fighting the evil leader of another, evil secret organization at the top of a snowy mountain, and falling in love with someone in the process… does seem like a movie they might have turned for inspiration, in the same way that they went Shining with THH.
|
|
|
Post by Shelly on Jan 8, 2019 5:41:25 GMT -5
The scene between Violet and Quigley is interesting. Here, it has almost no impact - the characters aren't built up enough. I absolutely hated Quigley's delivery of the line about the view being lovely, and there's just no real chemistry. The only question is: is there any chemistry between them in the books, or has it just been built up so much by the fandom that the books had the same initial problems anyway? (Later episode spoilers:) Since they bring Quigley back in later episodes, it a poor decision not to explore any further the very strong potential for awkwardness given that Violet has fallen in love with a boy who looks identical to the boy she had a crush on since TAA. I agree - I reckon there was more chemistry leading up to this moment in the book. Though like comparing any relationships, no two are the same. I wonder if the magnitude of danger in TSS acted as an extra ingredient - perhaps electrified Violet/Quigley in a way that didn't for Violet/Duncan's comparatively chaste interactions at Prufrock. I have to admit I'm not exactly neutral here - I spent most of my time around here being a hardcore Quiglet fan after all.
|
|
|
Post by Uncle Algernon on Jan 8, 2019 7:17:51 GMT -5
The scene between Violet and Quigley is interesting. Here, it has almost no impact - the characters aren't built up enough. I absolutely hated Quigley's delivery of the line about the view being lovely, and there's just no real chemistry. The only question is: is there any chemistry between them in the books, or has it just been built up so much by the fandom that the books had the same initial problems anyway? (Later episode spoilers:) Since they bring Quigley back in later episodes, it a poor decision not to explore any further the very strong potential for awkwardness given that Violet has fallen in love with a boy who looks identical to the boy she had a crush on since TAA. I just want to report that my sister (with whom I watched the Netflix series althoug she hasn't yet read the books) found the romance between Violet and Quigley satisfying rather than forced, and was rooting for them to be reunited later on.
|
|
|
Post by Violent BUN Fortuna on Jan 10, 2019 16:21:49 GMT -5
I agree - I reckon there was more chemistry leading up to this moment in the book. Though like comparing any relationships, no two are the same. I wonder if the magnitude of danger in TSS acted as an extra ingredient - perhaps electrified Violet/Quigley in a way that didn't for Violet/Duncan's comparatively chaste interactions at Prufrock. I have to admit I'm not exactly neutral here - I spent most of my time around here being a hardcore Quiglet fan after all. I like that thought, because of course really strong relationships are often forged between people who have shared extreme experiences of one sort or another, and the circumstances under which Violet and Quigley meet are certainly extreme. I'm also a diehard Quiglet fan so this idea pleases me.
|
|
|
Post by Christmas Chief on Jan 14, 2019 1:03:23 GMT -5
I recently finished watching the series and was eager to see 667's thoughts, which, as always, have been illuminating.
The show embraces all the absurdity of the physics in TSS: Violet and Quigley's climb up the vertical waterfall with makeshift mountain gear, the children's climb with Esme on the sled, and their escape on the toboggan, which is no safer or efficient than if they had simply jumped. The straightforward presentation of these scenes recreated the ridiculousness of the books' base reality for me. This attitude is replicated in earlier episodes, but I had wondered if the makers would attempt to justify the children's various ups and downs by making the waterfall shorter or something.
The TV series in general seems intentional about not getting too scary - dark moments are usually cut off with a joke or comically juxtaposed with a lighter moment before the audience has time to get too uncomfortable. The sinister duo interrupted that trend somewhat abruptly with the freaks' death. I agree that a comic fakeout would have been more inline with the tone of the series, but I think the deaths also set the sinister duo apart from all other depictions of evil in the series. They're established as capable, confident, and competent in their pursuit of Kit, already differentiating them from other villains in the series, but the murders of both the freaks and scene with the burnt Snow Scouts mansions were surprising and probably the darkest the series overall. (Incidentally, the show is popular enough that I know several people in life who have seen it, and the "sinister duo" terminology has caught on quickly - so, thanks Dante.)
Was there a reason for changing Uncle Bruce's gender? I'm not sure it makes a difference in the context of the adaptation, but I'm curious if anyone knows of or has a guess about a specific intention.
The repetition of Fernald's "But my name is -" was good foreshadowing and true to the books' "mysterious name" motifs as well as an amusing parallel with Fiona's dubbing Phil as "Cookie." Someone in another thread pointed out that the show plays up his kindness whereas the books emphasize his villainy. I admit I am confused about why he becomes so devoted to helping Sunny and working for the good in general - I can't remember, was there foreshadowing for that in the earlier episodes? His kindness makes the character more sympathetic, and we do get glimpses of his complicated relationship with Olaf, V.F.D., Widdershins, and the like, but as a result there's really no space to flesh out the chef salad metaphor, which was book Fernald's main thing.
On that note, he was about to say "I love you" to Count Olaf, right? I thought at first that he, too, might be in love with Beatrice, thus explaining his determination to help Sunny (Snape and Harry style), but it wouldn't make sense for him to only "remember" his love in TSS, and I'm not sure the timeline works out. On the other hand, it would make sense for him to love Olaf, in line with the episode's narration about Stockholm Syndrome.
Quigley's separation on the branch was certainly less romantic, but, as others have mentioned, it was also less plausible. It seemed that he would have had time and opportunity to walk across the ice to meet the Baudelaires on the toboggan. Perhaps he tried and they had already descended into the Queequeg, I suppose. In any case, both sides gave up pretty quickly.
|
|
|
Post by veryfakedonkey on Jan 14, 2019 3:04:27 GMT -5
I can't remember, was there foreshadowing for that in the earlier episodes? Yes, specifically with just Sunny. They play poker and only he understands that she says there will be pudding in TBB. In TEE he has his moments with her as the door person, and he says "She's more of a toddler now" in TVV.
|
|
|
Post by Christmas Chief on Jan 14, 2019 3:10:05 GMT -5
That lends justification to his attitude towards her in TSS, then. If a small part of him were soft-hearted, a vulnerable baby would plausibly bring out his caring side.
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Jan 14, 2019 10:05:45 GMT -5
Usman Ally has spoken at some length on Twitter (around January 6th) about his portrayal of Fernald, but the essential points are that he agrees that Fernald was also going to profess his love for Count Olaf in the scene in question, and that his affection for Sunny comes partly from her kindness and partly because she reminds him of his own sister.
|
|
|
Post by Uncle Algernon on Jan 14, 2019 13:55:44 GMT -5
I can't remember, was there foreshadowing for that in the earlier episodes? Yes, specifically with just Sunny. They play poker and only he understands that she says there will be pudding in TBB. In TEE he has his moments with her as the door person, and he says "She's more of a toddler now" in TVV. Also, "BABY!!!!" in TAA.
|
|