TV/Movies Megathread

[Eddie Teach]

The lights.   

[Habbaku]

Peggy has the best line of the show, of course: (seriously, major spoiler ahead if you haven't seen any of Fargo, season 2)

[spoiler]It's just a flying saucer, Ed; we gotta move![/spoiler]

[Sophie Scholl]

I gave Turn a shot, back before it got the secondary title.  I wanted to like it, but... no.  It was just too one sided for my tastes.  It also randomly changed interesting historical facts to fiction for no logical reason.  If it helps get people interested in the Revolutionary War, then I support it, but I won't be watching it.

Awesome username/post combo. 

Yeah, it is pretty one-sided at the start (it gets less so as it goes, though). Certainly it was highly fictionalized. That did not, I think, make it unwatchable - I still enjoyed it. It is I think too much to expect of Americans that they make a series on the Revolutionary War that really gives the Loyalists a fair shake. 

I do what I can.   I'd love to see a series based on my neck of the woods/job/area of some expertise:  The Mohawk Valley during the Revolutionary War era.  You have such interesting personalities, constant action, and an incredibly grey and murky sense of right and wrong there.  It would make for amazing television, especially if they stuck to historical fact.

[celedhring]

I gave Turn a shot, back before it got the secondary title.  I wanted to like it, but... no.  It was just too one sided for my tastes.  It also randomly changed interesting historical facts to fiction for no logical reason.  If it helps get people interested in the Revolutionary War, then I support it, but I won't be watching it.

Awesome username/post combo. 

Yeah, it is pretty one-sided at the start (it gets less so as it goes, though). Certainly it was highly fictionalized. That did not, I think, make it unwatchable - I still enjoyed it. It is I think too much to expect of Americans that they make a series on the Revolutionary War that really gives the Loyalists a fair shake. 

I do what I can.   I'd love to see a series based on my neck of the woods/job/area of some expertise:  The Mohawk Valley during the Revolutionary War era.  You have such interesting personalities, constant action, and an incredibly grey and murky sense of right and wrong there.  It would make for amazing television, especially if they stuck to historical fact.

A friend of mine pitched just that to HBO 4-5 years ago, sadly they didn't pick it up.

[viper37]

Any of you guys watched Turn? It's a Revolutionary War spy series, based very loosely on fact (the "Culper Ring"). I enjoyed it, though the love triangle stuff tacked on was trying.

It had the predictable psychopathic Brits, but overall, not entirely horrible and one-sided, as these US Revolutionary War things often are.  The lead fellow looks like a weasel though - he's miscast as a romantic lead: it is hard to believe he has two hott women after him. 

I've talked about it.
Not the greatest show, but good enough for me around the time it comes.
The psycho brit is the first lieutenant governor of Ontario, credited for being an abolotionist.  Of course, Wikipedia doesn't tell us if he was a real psycho.  Typical canadian propaganda, I guess

As for historical truth, I've dropped the towel on that for any tv show.  That seems like too much to ask.

[viper37]

It is I think too much to expect of Americans that they make a series on the Revolutionary War that really gives the Loyalists a fair shake. 

I have fond memories of that Marion tv show from Disney I used to watch as a kid.

[Valmy]

Awesome username/post combo. 

Yeah, it is pretty one-sided at the start (it gets less so as it goes, though). Certainly it was highly fictionalized. That did not, I think, make it unwatchable - I still enjoyed it. It is I think too much to expect of Americans that they make a series on the Revolutionary War that really gives the Loyalists a fair shake. 

Well for people like me who DO care about history, it just makes it too painful and unpleasant to watch. That's ok. I have long since gotten over the delusion that period pieces were made for people who like history

[viper37]

Just like it's too much to expect of Canadians that they make a movie that doesn't suck.

Our best talent is working in the US.  As soon as they become good, they move to the US.  Have you noticed how Denis Villeneuve makes very good movies now that he's a US movie maker?  Not our fault if you still how guys as soon as they are about to achieve greatness 

[viper37]

I gave Turn a shot, back before it got the secondary title.  I wanted to like it, but... no.  It was just too one sided for my tastes.  It also randomly changed interesting historical facts to fiction for no logical reason.  If it helps get people interested in the Revolutionary War, then I support it, but I won't be watching it.

Awesome username/post combo. 

Yeah, it is pretty one-sided at the start (it gets less so as it goes, though). Certainly it was highly fictionalized. That did not, I think, make it unwatchable - I still enjoyed it. It is I think too much to expect of Americans that they make a series on the Revolutionary War that really gives the Loyalists a fair shake. 

I do what I can.   I'd love to see a series based on my neck of the woods/job/area of some expertise:  The Mohawk Valley during the Revolutionary War era.  You have such interesting personalities, constant action, and an incredibly grey and murky sense of right and wrong there.  It would make for amazing television, especially if they stuck to historical fact.

there is this old movie, apparently taking place in this part of the world, but just before the Revolutionary War, "Unconquered", have you seen it?  Is it worth watching?

[Malthus]

Any of you guys watched Turn? It's a Revolutionary War spy series, based very loosely on fact (the "Culper Ring"). I enjoyed it, though the love triangle stuff tacked on was trying.

It had the predictable psychopathic Brits, but overall, not entirely horrible and one-sided, as these US Revolutionary War things often are.  The lead fellow looks like a weasel though - he's miscast as a romantic lead: it is hard to believe he has two hott women after him. 

I've talked about it.
Not the greatest show, but good enough for me around the time it comes.
The psycho brit is the first lieutenant governor of Ontario, credited for being an abolotionist.  Of course, Wikipedia doesn't tell us if he was a real psycho.  Typical canadian propaganda, I guess

As for historical truth, I've dropped the towel on that for any tv show.  That seems like too much to ask.

Holy shit. I had no idea he was *that* Simcoe. 

Well, they have us Ontarians pegged - villians to a man, we are. 

[For our American friends, this is roughly equivalent to depicting George Washington as a psychopathic rapist  ).

[KRonn]

I gave Turn a shot, back before it got the secondary title.  I wanted to like it, but... no.  It was just too one sided for my tastes.  It also randomly changed interesting historical facts to fiction for no logical reason.  If it helps get people interested in the Revolutionary War, then I support it, but I won't be watching it.

Awesome username/post combo. 

Yeah, it is pretty one-sided at the start (it gets less so as it goes, though). Certainly it was highly fictionalized. That did not, I think, make it unwatchable - I still enjoyed it. It is I think too much to expect of Americans that they make a series on the Revolutionary War that really gives the Loyalists a fair shake. 

I do what I can.   I'd love to see a series based on my neck of the woods/job/area of some expertise:  The Mohawk Valley during the Revolutionary War era.  You have such interesting personalities, constant action, and an incredibly grey and murky sense of right and wrong there.  It would make for amazing television, especially if they stuck to historical fact.

If I remember right, the Revolution wound up splitting the Iroquois Federation. Some tribes sided with the Colonists, others with the Brits and as a result after the war the Federation was a lot less powerful. And they had been one to fear by the Colonists for a good long while prior to the this.

I do like Turn. I think they do show both sides well enough, the good and bad of each. It seems pretty balanced. If anything you'd think they'd show the Brits as being the "bad guys" in an American show of the Revolution. For instance, they show the Brits behaving honorably and intelligently, such as the Major in Seatucket and the Major Andre the spymaster. They show the tories of Seatucket to be loyal to the Crown and don't show them in a bad light. Then too I feel it shows the dynamics of both sides who live in such close quarters in the same towns, though of course the rebels don't let on who they are.

[Malthus]

I do like Turn. I think they do show both sides well enough, the good and bad of each. It seems pretty balanced. If anything you'd think they'd show the Brits as being the "bad guys" in an American show of the Revolution. For instance, they show the Brits behaving honorably and intelligently, such as the Major in Seatucket and the Major Andre the spymaster. They show the tories of Seatucket to be loyal to the Crown and don't show them in a bad light. Then too I feel it shows the dynamics of both sides who live in such close quarters in the same towns, though of course the rebels don't let on who they are.

They do a serious hatchet-job (to excuse the pun) on the historical Simcoe. 

In the TV show, he's portrayed as a barely under control falsely-affable psychopath who delights in murder (including soldiers on his own side, like the attempted murder of the Major), who creepily fixates on - and stalks - the female lead.

In real life, Simcoe went from commanding the Queen's Rangers (a regular army unit, not mercenaries) and rose to prominence in "Upper Canada" (now Ontario) and is credited with, basically, being one of the founding figures of the province here: all sorts of stuff is named after him, and he gained credit for (among other things) pushing through abolition of slavery. In short, he's widely regarded as a "good guy".

Hence, it is somewhat analogous to a British show on the Revolution making Washington have such a character, which I think Americans would find a trifle rich. 

That said - I enjoyed the show nonetheless.

[KRonn]

Well then, apparently the show's 'historical documents' are showing the real story of Simcoe.  Not the heroic and watered down Canuckian version.     Seriously though, on the show he is an entertaining villain, quite nasty. The actor does a great job. Or maybe they should have given him another name rather than confuse him with a real person. I figured many of the minor characters were fake names but based on some real venues like the spy processes on both sides.

Speaking of 'historical documents', I saw Galaxy Quest recently. That's a great show!   

[Malthus]

Well then, apparently the show's 'historical documents' are showing the real story of Simcoe.  Not the heroic and watered down Canuckian version.     Seriously though, on the show he is an entertaining villain, quite nasty. The actor does a great job. Or maybe they should have given him another name rather than confuse him with a real person. I figured many of the minor characters were fake names but based on some real venues like the spy processes on both sides.

Speaking of 'historical documents', I saw Galaxy Quest recently. That's a great show!   

Heh, now that I know that it was intended as the "historical" Simcoe, I can see that the show's creators actually went out of their way to add in details that are kinda-sorta call-outs to Simcoe's actual personality - only, putting a 'villainous spin' on them. 

Examples: Simcoe is well-known to have pushed hard for abolition of slavery in Upper Canada. In the show, he's shown as promoting a Black dude to second in command, and emancipating him, to secure his loyalty.

Another example: the real-life Simcoe was a well-known romantic. He's credited with introducing the Valentine letter into North America . In the show, he's shown writing romantic poetry - but as part of his creepy stalking of the female lead. It puts an edge of insanity on his villainy.    In one scene, when he's sidelined to an office, a clerk makes fun of his poetry - and regrets it. 

The real life Simcoe was surprisingly 'modern' in attitude in some ways:

The principles of the British Constitution do not admit of that slavery which Christianity condemns. The moment I assume the Government of Upper Canada under no modification will I assent to a law that discriminates by dishonest policy between natives of Africa, America, or Europe.

— John Graves Simcoe, Address to the Legislative Assembly

... though in others, not so much: he's blamed for supporting a British-style "patronage" system here.

[viper37]

Well then, apparently the show's 'historical documents' are showing the real story of Simcoe.  Not the heroic and watered down Canuckian version.     Seriously though, on the show he is an entertaining villain, quite nasty. The actor does a great job. Or maybe they should have given him another name rather than confuse him with a real person. I figured many of the minor characters were fake names but based on some real venues like the spy processes on both sides.

Speaking of 'historical documents', I saw Galaxy Quest recently. That's a great show!   

it would have been problematic given he takes command of the Roger's Rangers.