[SHT L Joined: Feb 7th, 2017 Topics: 11 Posts: 1623 View Predictions]

#1202852579

IMO, this show started out as one of the best shows on television and somehow nosedived into a really boring (and cheap looking) show where it seemed the effort into writing quality songs and stories and such went downhill and they were just rushing into a finale even though they wasted so much time with a needless love quadrangle and filler. I was angry at some of the direction they went with the characters (for one in particular, it was very mean spirited and had been that way since Season 2 just excuse Rebecca’s criminal and sociopathic tendencies). I guess I’ll always have Season 1 to remember.

The finale was super disappointing because I don’t think this season properly focused or paced Rebecca to come to this realization, so it felt unearned. Paula being the one to show Rebecca the way and encouraging her to turn her music into a show was sort of lame in how they executed and nearly so sweet it made me need insulin. Also, the whole thing was so boring to watch unfold and cliche that I predicted all of this back in Season 3 but was hoping it’d be fun to watch. I felt like I wasted my time with Season 4 and honestly, a good portion of Season 3 as well.

Reply

[SHT L Joined: Feb 7th, 2017 Topics: 11 Posts: 1623 View Predictions]

#1202837808

I caught a few of Oh’s skits on YouTube and I have to say the level of acting from her in those skits seem to be a step above most hosts, especially in that BBC “The Duel” skit. The opening cinematography and her crying and gasping while running in period clothing with her posture was so spot-on.

Reply

[SHT L]

#1202837801

syrus80 wrote:

I wish they would’ve cast Nicole Scherzinger instead of Jennifer Hudson

Both the filmmakers and Hudson are hoping for lightning to strike twice and that a song will give her awards attention.

Awardsfan1990 wrote:

Three-time Tony winner Andy Blankenbeuhler will serve as the film’s choreographer. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/andy-blankenbuehler-choreograph-cats-musical-film-adaptation-1163694

So I expect spazzy cats with lots of starts and stops as opposed to original choreographer Gillian Lynne’s more balletic line.

• This reply was modified 1 year, 7 months ago by SHT L.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 7 months ago by SHT L.

Reply

[SHT L Joined: Feb 7th, 2017 Topics: 11 Posts: 1623 View Predictions]

#1202837685

Fosse’s joke may have been half-serious. He was very self-deprecating and always had this feeling of being a fraud even with his stage work. That was one issue he had with his wife Gwen Verdon who really elevated everything she did. Her having that quality doing his choreography and staring in his shows didn’t help with that despite her undying faith in his talent and abilities.

Reply

[SHT L Joined: Feb 7th, 2017 Topics: 11 Posts: 1623 View Predictions]

#1202832636

I didn’t say anything about you not following an argument. I’m responding to  your post regarding a character with my disagreement of your assessment.

Reply

[SHT L Joined: Feb 7th, 2017 Topics: 11 Posts: 1623 View Predictions]

#1202832357

Judging by the mixed reviews talking about some highs and lows, I think I’m going to love it. I’ve been finding myself out of step with critics for a while, especially some television critics. I mean some of the stuff that gets good reviews and some of the ambitious stuff that gets middling reviews or ho-hum reviews confuse the heck out of me at times. I think I’m going to appreciate that this is pretty unapologetic about being about “theatre folks” that most probably don’t know and it’s attention to authenticity. The fact that it has two raves on Metacritic and two mixed reviews with those authors critiquing more substantive things regarding the type of story this is telling rather than less important stuff means this will probably something at least interesting to watch. I usually find movies/shows that have that sort of polarized reception to be more interesting than ones that have the approval (or disapproval) by consensus because that just reads “safe” to me.

Reply

[SHT L]

#1202831660

Randall is super manipulative. Beth hit where it hurts too, but Randall really does not take push back well at all. This was one of the best written episodes and cleverly tied in past threads and episodes. Bravo to the writer of this one and to the writers who set it up. Paralleling Randall to Jack in that flashback was brilliant.

I still disagree with the previous two posters rundown on Zoe. It reads too much like a ship you don’t like because you ship Kevin with Sophie. Zoe is who she is and is fighting against her self-protective shell. She’s working a lot out of her own comfort zone to take the risk with being with Kevin. You’re mistaking Zoe’s issues with selfishness when everything you raised, Zoe fought against. Sorry, but I don’t see what was so great about Sophie storywise. I mean she’s white like him, but my God her storylines with Kevin were boring AF. I was so glad when they broke up. You could tell the writers having trouble making Sophie interesting. She might be a good person in real life, but she is never going to be interesting enough for this show and for Kevin especially. Zoe at least provides something interesting and someone who isn’t just going to bend to Kevin just because. Kevin tends to get what he wants too easily, and Zoe is giving him some challenges and people are painting it like Zoe is getting whatever she wanted. In fact, the opposite is true. Zoe is afraid of commitment. Kevin wants commitment. Boom. He gets it. Zoe thinks they’re moving too fast and has issues with intimacy and sharing space. Kevin wants her to move in. Boom. She moves in. Zoe still has issues with after moving in and Kevin goes on a rant about not fully moving in. Boom. Zoe fully moves in. Zoe basically turned from a commitment phobe with a history of running away from relationships and breaking hearts to a committed housewife who is sticking by an alcoholic who just relapsed and lied to her about what he’s been doing in L.A. and who drank vodka at the hospital while waiting for his sister to give birth in a dangerous pregnancy, put up with the ridiculous, overwrought Pearson family drama in one of the worst written and directed episodes of primetime television, and made a declaration to Beth that she’s sticking by him and supporting him. I think you guys got this in reverse.

I also disagree with the idea that people can’t have amazing parents and decide they don’t want children. I think that’s an issue you’re having. Some people still can’t understand that there are perfectly normal people who don’t want children. I’m not convinced Kevin is one of those just because it’s THIS show and you know it’s going to come up again. I mean would you guys have felt Kevin was selfish if he had strong-armed Zoe into having children if she said she didn’t want any if it came with some overdone monologue about the beauty of parenthood and having children and how there’s life to be lived among the messiness of it? Probably not because you want Kevin to have kids.

• This reply was modified 1 year, 8 months ago by SHT L.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 8 months ago by SHT L.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 8 months ago by SHT L.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 8 months ago by SHT L.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 8 months ago by SHT L.

Reply

[SHT L Joined: Feb 7th, 2017 Topics: 11 Posts: 1623 View Predictions]

#1202830048

Atypical wrote:

Great episode that really moved the narrative forward. Not really here for Randall and Beth breaking up, but I’m used to dramatic television where your characters can never be too happy for too long without impediments standing in their respective ways. That’s just his things go and how this show rolls. There has to be a “build-up” to the season finale. Randall’s verging on character assassination, but at least it’s a different note for Sterling to play. Chrissy Metz has been fantastic in this and last week with Baby Jack’s birth. She’s earned a returning Emmy nomination after last year’s snub. Same goes for Justin Hartley, who is just killing it this season with the relapse and Nicky’s storyline. Was kinda #TeamSophie tonight. Zoe just annoys me with her selfishness. Didn’t care to see the kids’ first dance or Jack and Rebecca as chaperones. I wanted the narrative to immediately go elsewhere in those scenes. I don’t like seeing Jack in the background after Milo’s stunning Vietnam arc that should make him the Emmy frontrunner for Lead Actor Drama. Anyways, fine episode otherwise.

Last episode, I was so #TeamSophie that I was ecstatic she had a fiance and was moving on. She deserves better than to be dragged down by that family and the next trauma. Is a helicopter going to crash on them now? Is Kate going to visit Randall in “the inner-city” and be a victim of a drive-by?

Anyways, I don’t know if what Zoe did was selfish because if someone truly does not want kids, it’s good to let their partner know as soon as possible. This isn’t something someone chooses just because. They really feel that way, and yeah it’s a bit selfish, but people are selfish when making their life choices and how they want to live. I’m glad the show painted it in a way that it was a valid thing someone wants and the the decision of whether to have a child isn’t something to you just say you’re ok with but don’t mean. My biggest fear with this storyline is that Kevin was just saying that but he’ll change his mind later on thus causing another subplot in season 5 or 10 or whatever if Zoe and Kevin last that long. Which is why my biggest problem with the bomb drop was it seemed just a plot device for Kevin and I fear it’ll come back again.

I honestly think Zoe has taken a back seat and been extremely patient with Kevin after his relapse and all the lying and her really seeming like she’s treating him with kid gloves because she’s taking a big emotional risk with him after behaving in a very self-preservation way for so long. She even patiently handled Kevin insensitively questioning her not wanting a child thing attributing it to her abuse in the hands of her father in a much better way than I would have. I fear her taking that chance on Kevin will bite her in the ass and if this was real life she’d end up closing herself off again this time indefinitely.

Reply

[SHT L Joined: Feb 7th, 2017 Topics: 11 Posts: 1623 View Predictions]

#1202829848

I think we all know the answer to this one, including the Academy members who followed studio line and nominated Ali in and then voted for him to win in the Supporting category.

Reply

[SHT L Joined: Feb 7th, 2017 Topics: 11 Posts: 1623 View Predictions]

#1202829842

If the show had premiered now instead of 10 years ago, do you see it being more successful or would it have more of a Spartacus or Starz show type of success? I guess it being on HBO would make all the difference.

Reply

[SHT L Joined: Feb 7th, 2017 Topics: 11 Posts: 1623 View Predictions]

#1202829830

As curious as I am to see an actually good adaptation of this piece, probably by somebody who understands New York of that era and the characters better, I don’t think it’s really “worth it” to remake again. The material is really dated even in theatre circles, and I think the whole whining artists thing wouldn’t be appreciated today. In the film, the only “real” part I liked was when the homeless woman was getting harassed by the NYPD and Mark was filming it and then the homeless woman saw him and started taking him to task for doing so. The rest of it just didn’t hit a chord with general audiences in 2005, and it definitely won’t in 2019 where it seems that the characters who are “suffering” for their art seem to be mostly harassing working class people. It takes a lot for me to be sympathetic to the “villain” who really was pushing people out of neighborhoods, but this movie did it. I don’t know if it was the directing or what, some how Taye Diggs’ character became the most sympathetic one for me as he for some reason kept hanging around people, whom were at first benefiting from him giving them a place to live for free (though he was still a slum lord), who just ganged up on him for moving on financially. Although he was the most sympathetic, he wasn’t really sympathetic to me since he took part in blackmail and turning Manhattan to what it is now. Which says a lot about how I view the other characters.

Reply

[SHT L Joined: Feb 7th, 2017 Topics: 11 Posts: 1623 View Predictions]

#1202828770

Speaking of The Turning Point, I wonder how they convinced Shirley Maclaine to be in it. Her character is such a thankless role who IMO is super unsympathetic who just whines. Like I understand the whole retired dancer moving on but still having regrets thing, which I am sure is a very compelling story (add in jealousy and possessiveness of daughter going into the same field and connecting more with your friend/rival who became a successful known dancer) if told right as so many athletes and others go through that, but my gosh I applauded when Anne Bancroft threw her drink at her. I also don’t know how Mikhail Barishnikov got an Oscar nomination for it. Was it like a Cold War thing celebrating a famous defector?

[SHT L Joined: Feb 7th, 2017 Topics: 11 Posts: 1623 View Predictions]

#1202828760

This just doesn’t seem like a movie that Oscar will reward no matter how good Moore is in it.

Reply

[SHT L Joined: Feb 7th, 2017 Topics: 11 Posts: 1623 View Predictions]

#1202828756

How come nobody talks about about Emily Watson’s performance in Hilary and Jackie? I thought she was outstanding and the film itself was really compelling.

Reply

[SHT L Joined: Feb 7th, 2017 Topics: 11 Posts: 1623 View Predictions]

#1202828700

I bet Mirren will change her mind. They’ll convince her it’s truly the last time. Seeing the Queen transition from Colman to Mirren will be pretty jarring though, moreso than Foy to Colman. However, the Brits are really good with hair and make-up creating the illusion so maybe the transition won’t be so bad.

Reply