Monday, July 28, 2014
Update
Haven't posted any after my first review, just been busy with other things. Reviews of Gravity, Lee Daniel's The Butler, and From the New World will be up over the next couple of weeks to a month.
Thursday, July 3, 2014
TV Series review: True Detective (Season 1)
Gotta start somewhere. Might as well go here.
Matthew McConaughey and Woody Harrelson star as detectives Spencer "Rust" Cohle and Martin "Marty" Hart in this unique feeling neo-noir/southern gothic series.
What makes it unique compared to other mystery series? Well, its story structure is a good starter. It tells the story of detectives Rust and Marty in 1995 as they track a suspected serial killer, but the story is as told by the two of them seventeen years after the fact as they are questioned separately by police after copycat killings occur.
But while it has a well-done mystery that suitably concludes by the show's end, it focuses on the lives of these two detectives across these timelines. Rust is a nihilist and an outsider disconnected with much of society, Marty is a hotheaded and often unpleasant man who desperately tries to stop his family from slipping away from him.
Because we skip from 1995 and 2012, we see perspectives from the two of them on the things that have happened. Marty has a lot of little moments in this series that make him interesting, even if he's an often bad person. Rust is different - if anything, we see his mental condition and his attitude deteriorate by 2012, whereas Marty shows signs of regret with the decisions he had made.
These two men often conflict in 1995. Rust has a tendency to go on his nihilistic rants and his pessimistic observations on society, while Marty wants to hear none of it. Marty is also a much more conventional detective than Rust is; Rust is perfectly willing to break the law and do dangerous and reckless things in order to the solve the case he's been assigned to.
His persistence with the case is one element that leads to conflict between them, but their shared interesting of finding the serial killer brings them to be close as friends of sorts. It makes the inevitable fallout that's alluded to in the 2012 timeline all the more sad when you see it play out.
The mystery that spans across those seventeen years isn't especially complex, but the series is directed and written in such a way that many scenes are wonderfully atmospheric, creepy, and sometimes intense. One particular scene involves a six-seven minute long tracking shot that's probably one of the best directed moments of television I've ever seen.
The above elements that I noted also can all be at least partly attributed to the setting. The swamps of Louisiana and the structures therein that you see invoke a sense of helplessness and feeling of creeping darkness. The fear of the unknown is often in full force even in daytime, where many of the most intense scenes in the show take take place.
The show ultimately manages to do an impressive amount of things in just eight episodes. With how important the characters and plot are, you never get a feeling that what's going on is filler or could've been skipped over. It's chock-full of memorable and interesting scenes, and I never felt like it was plodding or buying time.
The fact that it's an anthology series owed to how intense and atmospheric it was at times - these characters and this story are only for a season, and the second season will feature something completely different in terms of cast and plot lines. This especially made the final episode one of the more compelling episodes of television in recent memory.
To anybody that enjoys dark noir series, I recommend this. I should give an obvious content warning, but given it aired on HBO I think most people would get that. The TV-MA VSL rating is more than just earned.
I intend to do a spoiler-filled analysis of this series at some point, but my rating of the show is a 9/10. I think it's the best new series this year, and has tons of potential going into next year when they get a new cast. Props to Nic Pizzolato, Cary Fukunaga, and the cast and crew for creating such an impressive piece of work.
PS: I wrote this on a whim late at night, pardon any potential typos I made.
Matthew McConaughey and Woody Harrelson star as detectives Spencer "Rust" Cohle and Martin "Marty" Hart in this unique feeling neo-noir/southern gothic series.
What makes it unique compared to other mystery series? Well, its story structure is a good starter. It tells the story of detectives Rust and Marty in 1995 as they track a suspected serial killer, but the story is as told by the two of them seventeen years after the fact as they are questioned separately by police after copycat killings occur.
But while it has a well-done mystery that suitably concludes by the show's end, it focuses on the lives of these two detectives across these timelines. Rust is a nihilist and an outsider disconnected with much of society, Marty is a hotheaded and often unpleasant man who desperately tries to stop his family from slipping away from him.
Because we skip from 1995 and 2012, we see perspectives from the two of them on the things that have happened. Marty has a lot of little moments in this series that make him interesting, even if he's an often bad person. Rust is different - if anything, we see his mental condition and his attitude deteriorate by 2012, whereas Marty shows signs of regret with the decisions he had made.
These two men often conflict in 1995. Rust has a tendency to go on his nihilistic rants and his pessimistic observations on society, while Marty wants to hear none of it. Marty is also a much more conventional detective than Rust is; Rust is perfectly willing to break the law and do dangerous and reckless things in order to the solve the case he's been assigned to.
His persistence with the case is one element that leads to conflict between them, but their shared interesting of finding the serial killer brings them to be close as friends of sorts. It makes the inevitable fallout that's alluded to in the 2012 timeline all the more sad when you see it play out.
The mystery that spans across those seventeen years isn't especially complex, but the series is directed and written in such a way that many scenes are wonderfully atmospheric, creepy, and sometimes intense. One particular scene involves a six-seven minute long tracking shot that's probably one of the best directed moments of television I've ever seen.
The above elements that I noted also can all be at least partly attributed to the setting. The swamps of Louisiana and the structures therein that you see invoke a sense of helplessness and feeling of creeping darkness. The fear of the unknown is often in full force even in daytime, where many of the most intense scenes in the show take take place.
The show ultimately manages to do an impressive amount of things in just eight episodes. With how important the characters and plot are, you never get a feeling that what's going on is filler or could've been skipped over. It's chock-full of memorable and interesting scenes, and I never felt like it was plodding or buying time.
The fact that it's an anthology series owed to how intense and atmospheric it was at times - these characters and this story are only for a season, and the second season will feature something completely different in terms of cast and plot lines. This especially made the final episode one of the more compelling episodes of television in recent memory.
To anybody that enjoys dark noir series, I recommend this. I should give an obvious content warning, but given it aired on HBO I think most people would get that. The TV-MA VSL rating is more than just earned.
I intend to do a spoiler-filled analysis of this series at some point, but my rating of the show is a 9/10. I think it's the best new series this year, and has tons of potential going into next year when they get a new cast. Props to Nic Pizzolato, Cary Fukunaga, and the cast and crew for creating such an impressive piece of work.
PS: I wrote this on a whim late at night, pardon any potential typos I made.
Wednesday, July 2, 2014
Perspective on Storytelling
I suppose before I go on my detailed reviews that it's best to post something on how I feel about stories. Well, I usually like stories with depth and/or personality to them.
What is "depth"?
I would say the complexity of characters involved and the complexity of the world the writer created. These aren't the only important things. If you create a world with rules and characters with their own personalities, you have to be consistent with that. A kindhearted charitable individual we see doing good things suddenly turning into a jerk for no reason is typically bad writing.
If you have a character do something out-of-character, you need to have a workable, logical explanation for it or have it suit the theme of your story in some way or another. Otherwise, it kills the consistency of the world you've made and damages your story.
Personality comes more in the form of the characters and perhaps some aspects of the world that has been created. While personality is important and often comes with character or story depth, I don't believe it can hold something expansive.
If you have a serial drama, you can't run off the charisma of the actors and the personality they have for eight seasons. You can with a comedy if the comedians involved are good and the writing is stellar, and you can hold most movies on the personality and charisma of the actors as long as you have good, consistent story writing to go along with that. Indiana Jones and Star Wars are not complex movies, but they do have personality in their characters and world. But I strongly doubt they would work as live-action 12 episodes a season series if they lacked depth. This is a difference between television series and movies.
Not to say movies can't have depth. Many, many do. But it's easier to pull off a film with more charisma than depth than it is to do the same for something that takes up twelve hours of your time. Even the patient would get tired of something like The Fifth Element if it were weekly and not just a two hour quirky sci-fi movie.
This is sort of meant as a reference for when I inevitably review bad movies or TV series and rip them apart. I like the occasional movies that breaks all the rules and turns bad, of course. I love Armageddon, but I would never defend its integrity as a story or as a film. It's objectively bad from a writing perspective, but I had tons of fun watching it.
However, I can't say the same for serials. I have never seen one poor quality television series that I ever looked back fondly on. So, uh, watch out for my rage mode when we get to Dexter's later seasons. It'll be fun to write my rage review of that show's eighth season even if I'll burst a vein in the process.
Across my many long-winded forum posts that start a debate on whatever sort of subject, I've never known how to end a post. So I end by saying that I may further elaborate or storytelling-related subjects in later posts. These are easy to write and I enjoy writing them.
Thank you for reading. My first review of a film or TV show will be up within a day or two.
What is "depth"?
I would say the complexity of characters involved and the complexity of the world the writer created. These aren't the only important things. If you create a world with rules and characters with their own personalities, you have to be consistent with that. A kindhearted charitable individual we see doing good things suddenly turning into a jerk for no reason is typically bad writing.
If you have a character do something out-of-character, you need to have a workable, logical explanation for it or have it suit the theme of your story in some way or another. Otherwise, it kills the consistency of the world you've made and damages your story.
Personality comes more in the form of the characters and perhaps some aspects of the world that has been created. While personality is important and often comes with character or story depth, I don't believe it can hold something expansive.
If you have a serial drama, you can't run off the charisma of the actors and the personality they have for eight seasons. You can with a comedy if the comedians involved are good and the writing is stellar, and you can hold most movies on the personality and charisma of the actors as long as you have good, consistent story writing to go along with that. Indiana Jones and Star Wars are not complex movies, but they do have personality in their characters and world. But I strongly doubt they would work as live-action 12 episodes a season series if they lacked depth. This is a difference between television series and movies.
Not to say movies can't have depth. Many, many do. But it's easier to pull off a film with more charisma than depth than it is to do the same for something that takes up twelve hours of your time. Even the patient would get tired of something like The Fifth Element if it were weekly and not just a two hour quirky sci-fi movie.
This is sort of meant as a reference for when I inevitably review bad movies or TV series and rip them apart. I like the occasional movies that breaks all the rules and turns bad, of course. I love Armageddon, but I would never defend its integrity as a story or as a film. It's objectively bad from a writing perspective, but I had tons of fun watching it.
However, I can't say the same for serials. I have never seen one poor quality television series that I ever looked back fondly on. So, uh, watch out for my rage mode when we get to Dexter's later seasons. It'll be fun to write my rage review of that show's eighth season even if I'll burst a vein in the process.
Across my many long-winded forum posts that start a debate on whatever sort of subject, I've never known how to end a post. So I end by saying that I may further elaborate or storytelling-related subjects in later posts. These are easy to write and I enjoy writing them.
Thank you for reading. My first review of a film or TV show will be up within a day or two.
Welcome
Welcome to my blog, where I post reviews and rants on various television series and movies. While I will warn ahead of time in the openings of specific posts, I should go ahead now and mention that some posts may contain some profanity. I want to be courteous to my readers in this regard.
Thank you to anyone who decides to read the ramblings of someone who loves storytelling and all the magic it has to offer. Or pain instead of magic if the story happens to be terrible.
Thank you to anyone who decides to read the ramblings of someone who loves storytelling and all the magic it has to offer. Or pain instead of magic if the story happens to be terrible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)