Jon Bernthal's The Punisher premiered in season 2 of Daredevil, where he was one of the highlights. He brought new energy to the iconic character while giving him his own touch of humanity. With the acclaim he received it's no wonder that he soon received his own series, one that even ran for two seasons. Critics were somewhat mixed on it, but the fan consensus seemed a lot more positive, so I dived in. While I loved the first season, in spite of some of the liberties it took, I had many issues with the second that I will discuss now.
Your usual Punisher storyline would see him at the street-level, butchering criminals whose horridity would have you questioning if he really isn't doing the world a favour. The first season largely strays away from that however, instead pitting Frank Castle in a government conspiracy that is entangled with his own history. I give it a pass, as I can see why it is necessary to give a kind of origin story for newcomers - not everyone will have seen Daredevil Season 2. I loved this season as it dealt in-depth with trauma and had a very balanced viewpoint of its controversial themes. It particularly made me sympathetic to its veterans, while showing the reality of many's mental state and the dependence they develop from being on the battlefield. The overall plot is engaging and I like that it ties up very well at the end, something that Season 2 obviously had to undo. But I'm not a fan of the way it did so. It rushed through Frank's needed development and had no idea where to go with him throughout its entire run. Was he an unstable extremist or a wounded soldier with a shot at redeeming himself? A particularly awful moment in Season 2 was having an inconsequential and pointless sideplot with Frank showing mercy that was for some reason started off by having him spare a person that 99% of viewers would have likely shot themselves - a child porn producer. This stems from the horrible decision to give him a teenage sidekick as well, whose relationship with him has its strengths, but the dynamic is just too silly most of the time. A much better companion to Frank was Micro from Season 1, with the dynamic between those two always hanging on a thread as they slowly grew closer. Even then, tensions existed. Overall, while I do like Season 1's unique, if somewhat trite by Hollywood standards, take on its protagonist, Season 2 was a mash of two storylines that did not mesh well, with the more interesting one being thrown to the side (John Pilgrim). The final episode was great at least - I always love seeing Frank enact justice, it's simply too satisfying.
One thing "The Punisher" misses when compared to the rest of the Netflix series is atmosphere. "Daredevil" and "Jessica Jones" were excellent in this regard, and "Luke Cage" did a fantastic job as well. But this show definitely missed a particular tone that I could latch onto. It certainly tried. The level of violence was off the charts and genuinely made me cringe at times, it was wonderful to watch. A primal part of me just lives to see Frank Castle execute scum. There's also the choice of country/folk music as a more upfront choice besides the ambient electronic pieces that run. While I did like the music, Season 2 had very bizzare and immersion-ruining licensed additions, excluding a certain amazing track in its finale.
Even though Netflix's The Punisher is far from a definitive version of the character, it does tell a genuinely meaningful and well-written story in its first season, in spite some flaws. The second was a mess however, and it was clear the direction was lost, or that it was simply too afraid to delve into Castle's psyche further. The Punisher is not a symbol of optimism, quite the opposite - he's near the definition of nihilism, being a defining representative of the term anti-hero. I enjoyed what I watched, but would recommend you stick to the first season as it is quite complete anyways. I hope we do get to see Jon Bernthal give his wonderful flavour to the character again in the future.
"The Defenders" was an anticipated show for me that I only got around watching now. I'm a big fan of Daredevil and Jessica Jones, like Luke Cage, and didn't have much of an opinion on Iron Fist (besides hearing how horrible the first season was), so I was excited to see them all get a mini-series. I've heard mixed opinions on it, but generally more positive than elsewise. I can see why that is having watched it now.
The Defenders' plot revolves around the clan of ninjas knows as the Hand, who played a big part in Daredevil Season 2 and Iron Fist Season 1 from what I can presume. As such, Matt Murdock and Danny Rand are at the centerfold of the story. As villains, I can't say I was too ecstatic about The Hand, especially with how great some of the antagonists were in the Netflix series (Kingpin, Punisher, Kilgrave), but they weren't bad either. I found them largely uncharismatic, though the return of a certain character, Elektra, added the necessary tension and kept me invested in what was going on. The conspiracy itself was kooky, but certainly interesting. Overall, "The Defenders" gets pretty crazy, yet somehow manages to make this work with its grounded superheroes. It takes itself a little too seriously at times, but works for the most part and has its share of fun and comedy.
My biggest issue might really be the overload of drama that is present throughout the 8 episodes. It makes sense and is necessary, even good when properly timed, but there is so damn much of it. Matt is far too secretive, a personality trait that has been set up and is an important character flaw. As such, he is often in conflict with the rest of the group, but the frequency of this gives the show a tonal inconsistency that takes away from the fun. Jessica is an asshole, that is a big part of her charm, so I don't really have any gripes with her. Luke isn't too argumentative either. Danny, on the other hand, being such a vital part of the plot, brings a lot of annoying arguments with him as well. Thankfully, there are many other interactions between these characters that make up for this. Some of the best relationship include Matt and Jessica's, Luke and Jessica's, and Luke and Danny's. Besides the four, we get a lot of cast members coming from across the shows. Stick had a very strong presence here and an important role; Trish was enjoyable to watch, no matter how small her role might have been; Foggy had some great moments as well.
"The Defenders" suffers from some objectively bad writing. My least favourite scene would be Jessica following Matt, who at first senses her and decides to swerve down a back alley, then parkours his way out, somehow completely oblivious to what he just noticed. I cannot make any sense of the scene, it barely had a reason to even be there. Unfortunately, there are other missteps in logic throughout.
The action scenes were good, even great at times. They could also be lazy, but I think the show did a good job altogether with managing 4 characters, each having their own distinct fighting style. Nothing as ground-breaking as Daredevil, but of quality and entertaining.
Truly, the biggest strength of "The Defenders" is how damn fun it is. The pacing is said to be an issue and I would agree, particularly with how much time it takes to actually gather the team. It left me a tad dissatisfied with how little time we got to spend with them, when this was the biggest draw. Still, I like that each of them had their time to shine. Matt had a great arc here and in spite of some of my issues with how he was written, he was one of my favourite characters to watch. Tied with Jessica, who was probably the most out of place and as such one of the most relatable and down-to-earth heroes on the team. Every scene she was in was good in my opinion. Luke contributed a lot and had great charisma. Danny was honestly not as bad as I anticipated. His edge was definitely tacky at times, but most of the time he had this naïve charm to him and was even funny on occassion.
Overall, "The Defenders" was a very flawed, but very entertaining mini-series. While the plot itself might not have been the most engaging and there were plenty of other flaws, I had a lot of fun simply watching each of the characters interact and their stories develop. I wouldn't call it a must-watch, but I wouldn't mind watching it again. As much as I have issues with it, "The Defenders" is just that damn fun.
"Daredevil" and "Jessica Jones" are both shows I love, so another acclaimed series off of Marvel & Netflix's run of shows was meant to be right up my alley. Unfortunately, "Luke Cage" left me rather lukewarm (sry for the pun). I meant to drop it after the first season, but reading some opinions online convinced to continue with the second one and finish it, and truth be told, I did enjoy the second season more, but it still had plenty of issues for me.
Pacing is the biggest enemy of LC. The 13-episode seasons never really bothered me in "Daredevil" and were not a big issue in "Jessica Jones" as I can watch Krysten Ritter be a sassy asshole all day. It's a major problem in Luke Cage though. While there aren't many flaws otherwise to speak of, the show is so slow that it's hard to watch a lot of the time. There are great moments that make this worth it, particularly in the second season, but there's a whole lot of nothing happening most of the time. If each season was half as long, I honestly think this would have been a great series, on par with the previously mentioned Marvel/Netflix series.
Luke Cage's roster of villains is a mixed bag. Cottonmouth didn't do a lot for me, but he got quite interesting towards the end. And then he got immediately killed off... Diamondback was not good. His backstory was somewhat interesting and the general concept of his character provided potential, but what we got was an unbelievable cartoony whacko. Black Mariah manages to have some of the worst and best moments in the series. Shades is someone I liked, though I wasn't enjoying his presence for a good half of Season 2. But then there is one antagonist that throws every other villain, no, every other character, Luke Cage included, out the window - Bushmaster. A bloodthirsty, eccentric Jamaican man with a thirst for vengeance, his motives and development made him the most captivating presence on screen. Of course, Mustafa Shakir's performance cannot be understated.
More positive characters would include the titular character, portrayed by Mike Colter, who carries the role with a great deal of charisma. I have no gripes with Luke and like a lot of what the show has done to solidify him as his own superhero. Misty Knight is someone else with a very prominent role. I liked her, but do think that I was intended to be more involved in her story. Simone Missick acted well, but her performance was just too repetitive to me. Other notable characters would include recurring MCU Netflix nurse Claire Temple, whose arc in Season 2 I actively dislike and is one of my biggest dislikes of that season. Relationship drama that comes out of nowhere and spirals out of control like that is a superhero cliche I absolutely loathe. Bobby Fish was a charming fellow. D.W. is great comic relief, but he brings a lot of heart to the story as well. Pop is a captivating person. Have to say that Luke's father contributed a lot, and that Reg E. Cathey did great at bringing the complexities of this character to life.
The action is solid, though not exceptional like in "Daredevil". Nonetheless, I never got sick of seeing some ignorant soul shoot Luke, only for the bullets to bounce off him. Then he went and dealt with thugs like they were nothing. He's quite powerful, but that never stops suspense from factoring in, whether it's a weakness he has or something that he cares about being threatened. While battling, hip hop is the most common choice of music. A lot of Wu-Tang in particular (Method Man even makes an appearance). A big theme of Luke Cage is celebrating blackness, and while hip-hop is the dominant form of music, even in the main theme, plenty of other genres come in and out as well. Funk, blues, jazz. In fact, reggae is quite big in Season 2.
On the topic of blackness, it's only fair for the series to dive into its characters' more socially conscious roots and explore topics such as racism, gang violence, corruption and more. It takes unashamed inspiration from "The Wire", which would be clear to any fan of the drama as three actors from it appear in the first few episodes. I have to say "Luke Cage" never comes even close to the greatness of "The Wire", but I do enjoy its more laid-back approach to some of the serious topics it covers. The tone in general is quite campy, but there are times when it will get more serious and it somehow works. Focusing more on its characters is perhaps the truly progressive move, using those blaxploitation roots as a backdrop to build its world more than anything.
I grew attached to "Luke Cage", but those two 13-episode seasons were a slog to push through. I was waiting for most episodes to end, though I was glad whenever something more interesting occured. I wouldn't recommend it as a must-watch, but if you want a longer show and don't mind the slow pace, it might be worth giving a shot.
"jeen-yuhs: A Kanye Trilogy" comes right after the release of a career-revitalising album "Donda" by Kanye West and a whole new wave of controversies his name is attached to. It's been quite the stream of news and content when it comes to the legendary rapper, but it can't quite prepare you for the sheer scope of this documentary. In the making for more than two decades, we get a very intimate look at Kanye's rise to stardom through the eyes of old friend Coodie.
The intimacy truly sets this series apart. Coodie started shooting this footage years before Kanye released his acclaimed debut album "The College Dropout". His efforts in getting signed and sheer hustle are the most engaging and inspiring parts of the documentary. What's more, there's years of work before Coodie started shooting that we don't get to see. So it's clear that Kanye earned his place in the industry by fighting tooth and nail. The reality of the footage paints a true picture of an underdog story, one where there isn't a special event past which his whole life turned around. No, challenges continued to emerge for Kanye, but failures only served to motivate him.
Donda West, Kanye's mother, is one of the most important figures in his life and it's beyond apparent in the documentary. The wisdom and support she provided for him is heartwarming. Her presence took over each scene she was in.
I'm a little more mixed on act iii compared to its two fantastic predecessors. Without delving into spoilers too much, it follows some later events in Kanye's life. It tries to do so as best as it can, but the life situations of both Coodie and Kanye make the story flow somewhat inconsistently. Worse yet, we get to see the more toxic side of Kanye's personality, to the point where it's insufferable to watch at times. Coodie is not at fault here and I'm impressed with how good the third act was in spite of this, and his ability to present the humanity of Ye in spite of the growing distance between the two.
Coodie occassionaly shifts the narrative to his own life; an odd, but necessary choice. I'm certain this is an aspect of the series that would be better appreciated on a rewatch. I do believe that the connection between the two is a fundamental drive of the documentary and that the focus only shifts away from Ye when necessary. There are lessons to be had in Coodie's tale as well, some of which relate well to the relationship he and West have.
I loved jeen-yuhs and would immediately recommend it to all fans of the rapper. It might be a little harder to enjoy for others as it delves into his career with great detail. What I love the most about jeen-yuhs is the even greater context it gives to "The College Dropout" and how inspirational it is to see this unfiltered view of a man who never gave up and accomplished his dream. The aftermath is a little more rough, but it goes to show that the man might not have changed as much as one might think.
I watched the first Jessica Jones season about a year or two after it came out. Afterwards, I put the series on hold and ended up finishing what I started recently. Back when I first saw it, I even read the comic series the first season adapted - "Alias". The dark tone and cynicism of that story form a great basis for the TV series to build upon,
Jessica Jones is a superpowered private investigator who thrives off of neo-noir clichés in the best way possible. Her life is a consistent trainwreck, she's got a major drinking problem, everyone around her is a toxic asshole and so is she. Krysten Ritter gives an absolutely iconic performance as the titular character and owns every moment of the role, they could not have picked a better actress. Her charisma is off the charts, I could watch an entire episode of Jessica being herself and would be thorougly entertained. Beneath her nihilistic attitude though lay layers of tragedy that unfold themself as we see her grow past them and the new difficulties she faces with each season.
A superhero (or whatever Jessica is) is only as good as their villain, and the series does provide a good cast of them, particularly in the first season (a major reason as to why it's the best). David Tennant is as masterful in his role as Purple Man as Ritter is in Jessica's and their opposition against one another. There's always the question of how Jessica will be able to take them down, and the show does well to subvert the viewer's expectations when the climax is reached.
The cast of side character is a bit of a mixed bag for me though. Rachael Taylor is fantastic as Trish Walker and while I had a few issues with some sudden changes to her character, I overall liked her arc and found her engaging to watch. Malcolm was a charming sidekick, but I grew to have very mixed feelings about him and found his screentime unearned. The same might go for Jeryn Hogarth. Carrie Anne-Moss is able to wonderfully humanise someone as despicable as this comptetitive attorney. There's a lot of complexity to Jeri, but that doesn't change how nonessential her plots are. They barely connect with the main threads going on and are great at showcasing a major flaw in the latter seasons - to pad out episodes, side characters take over far too often, which is apparent whenever Jessica gets the focus.
The atmosphere is fantastic, props must be given to the crew when it comes to music and cinematography. The title screen is always a blast to watch; engaging colour pallete, while the absolute banger of a theme builds up. The music running through the course of episodes is wonderful too. As for the shots, they are a joy to look at. The lighting and angles do a lot to set a vibe.
I love the "Jessica Jones" series, and while I find that it has its issues in Season 2 and 3, I would still wholeheartedly recommend it. Even if just for Season 1, which is some of the best content Marvel and Netflix have put out. The end might be a little abrupt, but there's no cliffhangers left dangling at the end of Season 3. I hope we get to see Ritter reprise her role someday, and if not, I can always rewatch this.
"The Wire" is touted as one of the greatest masterpieces the medium of television has to offer, and it deserves all of this praise. Broadcast between 2002 and 2008, it did not receive the appropriate acclaim it deserves during its run, but ever since it has achieved a legendary status. Truly, this series was ahead of its time, most notably in its approach to the sheer variety of social and political issues it tackles, always doing so with maturity and complexity.
What begins as a straightforward crime drama turns into a in-depth exploration of the Amerian City, in this case Baltimore. It details the fractured relationship between individuals and institutions, something that sadly also rings true to me as a foreigner. No one could have been chosen as a better lead then than Dominic West in the role of Jimmy McNulty, a rebellious detective who is fed up with the incompetence of bureaucracy and often sets off the plotlines for each season. "The Wire" is not a naïve, hopeful look that a rebel or two will change anything. It can be quite fatalist. Characters who go against the grain often pay a price for it, and may end up worse than those who simply chose to play along. A crushing reality, one that I see remaining true in the centuries to come.
Reality - this is a defining feature of the series. It is so dedicated to presenting its events away from typical Hollywood thrills that I think it occassionaly does so at the expense of satisfying storytelling. It's the only real issue I have here, most notably in Season 5 (ironically the one season that pushes its believalibility to the limit). Some arcs stutter at points. Season 2 is probably my least favourite season as its setting is simply not as interesting as the urban environment most of the show takes place in, but it's still incredibly tight plot-wise and tells a worthwhile tale. It's just the least essential one. My biggest issue with Season 4 and 5 is the major role Marlo takes on. He's a one-note character who literally has a single expression on the whole time. Such a let-down after how incredible Barskdale and Stringer were. The man is actually wholly incomptent and is able to go as big as he did only due to luck/plot convenience. This negativity pretty much encompassed all bad things I have to say about the series. Trully, I love the aprroach otherwise. Every character is threatened in some way, everyone suffers. No one is bigger than the world around them, no matter their ego. As much as it hates the system, "The Wire" concurs that you can't competely disavow it, as you'll only hurt yourself in the process. The best an individual can do is focus on making a meaningful change, however small it might seem. That's my takeaway at least. Even still, things don't always work out and you have to accept it.
The acting is fantastic and never ceases to amaze me. Every character is portrayed with gravity and feels human. "The Wire" pushed boundaries as to what your average viewer might expect. A predominantly black cast is featured, accurate to the Baltimore we see portrayed. Michael Kenneth Williams pllays my personal favourite - Omar Little, who along with Sonja Sohn's Kima Greggs set a precedent for outstanding LGBT representation that a lot of media still fails to follow on. Andre Royo is central to the heart of the series as Bubbles, giving this junkie a great deal of humanity. Idris Elba absolutely killed it as Stringer Bell, introduced as soon as we enter the show alongside Dominc West's Jimmy McNulty. Both have incredible arcs and function as pivotal main characters. Lance Reddick is convincing as Cedric Daniels and goes through much growth , especially in the first season. Clarke Peters is charismatic as Lester Freamon. Even seemingly smaller roles like J.D. Williams' Bodie go on to be central in Baltimore's story. Amazing are also the child actors who drive the fourth season, every single one of them. While I wouldn't quite call it my favourite for reasons stated above, I found it to be the most gut-wrenching and that is no small part due to their work.
Much can be said about "The Wire" as it continues to make me think on the questions it set forth. It makes no light of the heavy themes it deals with, while at the same time maintaining its charm throughout. The comedy can be quite underrated, as it packs quite a punch in a world so grim. It doesn't spend too much time moping around either, just as much as it needs. Things are grim, very few born on the lower steps of society get a happy ending, and many born near the top won't bother with those below. It's not about hope, it's not about hopelessness - it's just how things are. Simply showing that can be more telling than any predefined message. "The game is the game".
"Rome" was honestly a disappointment to me and I did not even want to continue with the second season, but my mother wanted to so I decided I might as well. To my surprise, the second season was genuinely good and I have to say that the first was able to find its charm by the end. My issue has to do with the beginning of the series, it's below mediocre. This is, of course, my opinion and it does not seem to be the most popular one, so fair warning.
Character writing appears to be the series' biggest issue and only becomes acceptable around the second season. Before that, characters range from passable to horrid, and I don't mean just ethically. For indeed, "Rome" is quite the cynical drama, rightfully so. I was wrong to assume this was a series that came after the success of "Game of Thrones" in an attempt to fill the void left in between seasons. Quite the opposite, "Rome" paved the way for GoT to eventually take over the mainstream. Political intrigue, a great deal of nudity, and obscene violence. Unfortunately, these thrills are fairly surface-level. When your characters serve as simple vehicles to the plot, it's hard to have anything beyond decent TV. As mentioned above, things get better around the second season, and I genuinely think that Octavian is a solid character minus a few storytelling errors. Titus Pullo and Lucius Vorenus serve as the glue for all sub-plots and a connection with your everyday Roman, away from the world of nobles. Their arcs were inconsistent for sure, but I thought their chemistry, aided by the performances of Kevin McKidd and Ray Stevenson, carried their tales. Plenty of characters suffered from poor writing though - Servilia was so obnoxious I wished for her to die horridly everytime she appeared on the screen; Atia was a pretty basic controlling mother, not enough depth to justify the role she plays; Brutus was no more than a wimp and his arc was wholly unconvincing.
With boring characters, you can't expect your plot to maintain interest. No matter how much politics and sex the show threw my way, it did not change the fact I had no reason to care for the people that led the tale. Not until some of them finally gained on some semblance of two-/three-dimensionality. Even in Season 2, a fair amount of characters could only rouse my annoyance, but thankfully many of them began dying and the focus could shift ever so slightly on those that justified their presence.
The setting might be the strongest point of the series. "Rome" is famous for being one of the most expensive productions in the history of television. Let me repeat that this series paved the way for "Game of Thrones"; "Rome" came out in 2005. And frankly, it looks better than most series released since (January 2022 as I'm writing this). The props are stunning to look at and what more there is to appreciate is the extended focus on the Roman city beyond the royal districts. You get to see the slums and all the life that booms there, scum or not. Unfortunately, the series had to be cut short due to the sheer excession in its price; somewhat ironic, a parallel to the end of the Roman empire perhaps. I'll give props for the fact that it is able to wrap up in a conclusive manner.
"Rome" is good TV and I would recommend it to people who need something to watch, but I will go against the grain and say it is absolutely not necessary viewing. It looks like it's much deeper than it really is. Few of the themes feel like they really make a point, and as I said, it takes a while before I got around caring for these character-barren historical figures to drive the plot. Nevertheless, I enjoyed it and am positive enough after seeing it.
l watched Daredevil back when it had 2 seasons, but postponed my watch of the third one for several years. Not for a particular reason, just poor scheduling I would say. It's a shame too, as the show was more-or-less cancelled - my favourite superhero TV series. A lot of time passed and I wondered if my fascination with "Daredevil" would hold up; I was a teenager who had much to see and was more easily impressed, whereas I am currently a growing adult who has a relatively stable grip on his tastes. I had fond memories of "Daredevil", but not quite that same adoration that I used to. Well, I am glad to state that it has gotten even better with the years, and is no doubt one of my favourite TV series of all time. An absolute masterpiece front-to-back, that sadly had even more potential to unleash.
Lawyer Matt Murdock, portrayed by Charlie Cox, stunts as masked vigilante Daredevil during the night in Hell's Kitchen. The gritty atmosphere is perfect for his character to shine. Daredevil is very much an antihero, and the series never tries to hide it. No one in their right mind would set out to do what Matt Murdock does, no matter how pure his intentions. Religion is a central aspect, and I applaud the complexity with which Matt's catholicism is represented here. The parallels between being the Devil of Hell's Kitchen and a man of God elevate the show to an artistic level of genuine humanity. If you wish to find symbolism done right, look no further. The dillemas Daredevil faces, his struggles maintaining all facets of his life, his past - everything haunts him, yet he finds ways to cope after many failures. This is why I love Daredevil, the same reason that he and Spider-man are my favourite superheroes. No more than regular people with superhuman abilities trying to make the world a better place, though Daredevil lacks the naivette a Spider-man story might have. Which makes its messages of hope and perseverance all the more poignant when they are present.
A superhero is only as good as their rogues' gallery, for the contrasting beliefs bring out extremes and hypocricies to the front. The amazing adaptation of Wilson Fisk, embodied by Vincent D'onofrio, serves as the primary antagonist of Daredevil. He's a cold, ruthless, calculating, occassionaly unhinged crime underlord with a stout build. His use of his physical prowess is rare however. Instead, it is his strategising abilities that fuel much of the show's suspense. Other great antagonists include John Bernthal's Punisher, who even got his own Netflix series due to the quality of his role; the threatening Bullseye, played by Wilson Bethel. These are only ones I can name off the top of my head. The second season delves more into comic book mythos and occassionaly veers off into some of the series' few weaker points (which are still incredible), but in general it is able to greatly compliment the realism with comic book spice.
The rest of the cast are nothing to scoff at either. Everyone has their own lives and beliefs, which will often clash and lead into many of the series' conflicts. Were it not for his friends, Daredevil could not be Matt Murdock. Foggy Nelson (Elden Henson) brings some light to the dark tone of the show, and serves as the most consistently grounded figure in a story filled with so many tormented souls. Karen Page sees great development along the course of three seasons, and I find Deborah Anwoll's performance quite great. I just wish the writers would cut down on her trauma somewhat; being on the verge of a mental breakdown 90% of the time gets a little exhausting to watch at some point. Still, I enjoy her character arc a lot and think she has much to bring here. Besides that, city officials, police officers, FBI, medics - people from many corners of society play a role here and build a much larger world for the plots to unfold.
The quality of "Daredevil" does not end with its writing, plot, and characters. The cinematography is gripping, particularly when it comes to fight scenes. As a matter of fact, this series is groundbreaking on this front. Some of its fights have become famous in their own right, notably the hallway scene. All done in one shot, featuring brutal brawls with a touch of acrobatics. It dances on the line between realism and superhero thrills, resorts to as few cuts as possible, and tells its story with each character's fighting style
The music fits rather well in here, with the Daredevil theme itself being a memorable motif. The intro is always a joy to watch as it builds up in intensity. The visuals are great as well, with a brooding red to set the tone.
Acting is at its finest, and must be complimented to no end. Charlie Cox is Daredevil, Vincent D'onofrio is Kingpin, John Bernthal is the Punisher, Elden Henson is Foggy, Élodie Yung is Elektra, so on and so forth. Intense emotions and elegant nuance feature across the entire cast, a key component to the show's success. It might just be the finest acting in a superhero adaptation; the line between actor and character is laid thin as everyone embodies who they represent.
"Daredevil" is in my eye one of the most underappreciated shows during the 10s' golden era of TV. It received rave reviews, but was a tad too niche compared to the big names of that time. Yet, I think this is the peak of the superhero genre in the medium, and an outstanding crime drama should you remove the association. I sincerely hope the team gets back and works on this show again, as it is clear they still had stories to tell in the vigilante supervision of Hell's Kitchen. If not, you have a satisfying three seasons of a broken man trying to do some good and holding on to his sanity, being very badass in the meantime. Because, ignoring all of my pretentious blabbering, this show never fails to deliver badassery. It is able to do so with a conscious approach.
"Time" follows the story of one Mark Cobden, a man regretful of his actions, thrown into a prison full of total degenerates and the occassional decent person. I did not know what to expect going on, and left mostly satisfied with what the show had to offer. It had very strong moments and explored humanity in some interesting ways.
The acting is perhaps the strongest aspect of the show, and how could it not be with Sean Bean and Stephen Graham's nuanced performances? It was hard not to get emotional during some of the series' most intense drama. It focuses on exploring the mindset of a convict, doing so in a very heartfelt manner. It seeks to understand, not so much judge. There are plenty of sympathetic characters in here, no matter the addition of the opposite. Which also does bring me to one of the show's issues - thematic consistency.
As I said before, there is a strong focus on guilt and redemption here. Mark's actions are never excused, and he is never presented as a person wrongfully incarcerated. His tale is that of prison life, where he meets others that have gone along the wrong path and face justice for their mistakes. To contrast this, Eric McNally suffers within the constraints of morality's greyness. Family or principle? While this is an interesting conundrum, and his story is interesting, I was disappointed by the poor incorporation of both in this series. The themes struggle to fit in together, mostly due to the ending's uncertain messaging. On one hand, Mark's tale ends in such a way that the challenges he faced in prison were seemingly for nothing, as he suffers no repreccusions for his goodness in there. On the other, Eric never really learns anything. He simply gets what is coming for him, without there being a point to be made. Not that it is always necessary to do so in a story, but there is a great disparity between the narrative tone of these two characters. The connection here needed to be better.
The other inmates had a lot to tell and you end up remembering each and every one as they develop along the sidelines. There's always something done to bring more to light about them. For example, I am quite fond of Paul, who never had such an important role in Mark's story, but was a great character in his own right. Many like him are humanised, but there are some who are inexcusable pieces of living waste. I think this could have been handled better; as I said, there is a focus on understanding, not judgement here, yet this isn't the entire truth, as clearly some inmates here are villanious. I understand this is an attempt at being more realistic, but in that case the idealism should have been toned down. "Time" has difficulty maintaining this balance, though it still makes for an enjoyable and affecting show.
I highly recommend "Time" to those looking for a story of guilt and how one might grow from. It stutters in its telling of this, but the genuine humanity shines through. Times change, what matters is how we carry along them.
I somewhat missed out on watching "Friends" while I was growing up. I was vaguely familiar with it, but if you had asked me to name any character, I would have struggled. Give it a month worth of binging and now it's quickly become one of my all-time favourite TV series. I genuinely believe "Friends" to be a pinnacle in the sitcom genre, perhaps the one that perfected the now dated laugh track format.
What, in my opinion, separates "Friends" from most other sitcoms and, frankly, comedies in general, is the cast of characters. All of them have unique personalities, backstories and personal development. You quickly get attached to them and get to see them spent 10 years of their lives together. Throughout all this, you see all the events that occur in their lives, which gradually change them without betraying their esssence. Another notable factor is the relatability of the friends' everyday situations. Whether it be a comedic moment that hits a little true to home, or someone's struggle that you can understand, it grounds the series in spite of its often outlandish tone.
I liked the show from the start, but grew to love it after the first couple of seasons. I needed time to grow to the cast and for the series to get rid of some of its more annoying plot contrivances, namely certain relationship drama. The episodes are standalone and worked well for the cable TV format of old, but I can attest to its bingeability. "Friends" is not a comedy that pretends to be more than it is, perhaps only doing so very early on. It learns to thrive on its goofiness and makes for an easy and comfortable watch. It's greatness is in its very nature, which it doesn't shy away from. It's a show you can always go to, whether your life is going down or up. It can definitely feel as if you are hanging out with some of your own friends.
I've mentioned now more than once how silly the series gets, but there's certainly some wittier moments present. The writing is sharp when it needs to be, and rarely fails to get a laugh out of me. Surprisingly, some rather series topics can be covered here. It's almost always done with a humourous view of things, but it can certainly provoke you to contemplate some of what is seen.
There's some issues with the show, but none that ruin the experience for me. I do wish the ending could have been a bit more detailed regarding certain character's fates, but it's nothing that bugged me much. I felt melancholic to have parted with this group I found myself rooting for during 10 seasons. Chandler remained my favourite throughout, and I made sure to clap during the intro everytime I could.
Was quickly hooked on the show. Saul Goodman was an entertaining character in Breaking Bad, but I couldn't have guessed he'd have this much depth and be such a fantastic lead. BCS is an exceptional character study that shows the gradual development of all the people carrying the action in it. Several Breaking Bad characters make an appearance, though they are never shoehorned in. Fan service is not once forced and always carries the story. BCS functions as its standalone show, although there are just a few moments that knowledge of Breaking Bad would explain.
The show balances all its moments, from one comedic end of the emotional spectrum to the other, tragic one, in a great manner. It's absolutely hillarious and utterly devastating when it decides to be. Witty writing and outstanding acting allow them to do so and bring the series to a level of immersion where each scene is memorable and to be savoured. The magnificient cinematography further enhances these aspects. Each shot is carefully placed and visually impressive. The music selection is great and gives new layers to the story. I was very impressed by some of the original tracks too.
What separates Better Call Saul from just any show is the complex interconnected plotting and subtle character development. Not one minute in the series is pointless, everything builds up to something. Everybody has their own motivations, reasoning, personality. Present are themes such as the road of crime having no option of turning back, moral degradation, naivette and many, many more. Examining the layers of storytelling here will net many results, but this would be nothing if the pacing and general mood set didn't carry it forward.
There's a lot to say about Better Call Saul, but summing it up is, in a sense, too easy. There's nothing wrong with it, but much great stuff that it has to offer. It has cemented its place as a favourite series of mine alongside its parent show. I can't wait for the final season!
I found the show enjoyable overall, but most certainly flawed. It adapts material from the first two books, taking a good amount of liberties in certain areas. Now, I was fine with them making changes, but felt some of them certainly were for the worse. To begin with, the timeline is completely messed up. They wanted to give the story a POV type of thing, following each of the 3 main characters separately, which had me confused for half of the show. There are jumps in time all the time. I genuinely believe that it would have been better if they had just had the story move chronologically.
The POV brings forth another issue, pacing. The most interesting parts to watch were certainly Geralt's, adapted straight from the book. They were adapted pretty well, though a bit rushed at times. It is understandable why they showed Yen and Ciri's stories, though I think that if they had their own separate episodes, the show would have fared better. It leaves a very disjointed feel to the whole story, moving between classic Geralt stories, the weird Yennefer ones and that of Ciri.
Speaking of Geralt, Henry Cavill is the perfect actor to play Geralt. Within a few episodes, he became my default version of the character. I experienced immense enjoyment just watching him be Geralt, there are a lot of subtleties he completely nails, while giving it his own flavour. My other favourite casting choice was Julian, Geralt's troubadour companion. The actor portrays his witty, cynical, comedic relief aspects lovingly well and he is a pretty darn good singer to boot.
The actress of Yennefer does a good job. They show her development from the start to the woman she becomes, which was interesting. There were some weird parts here. I will give it to this way of presenting the story, it makes the mage characters a lot more interesting from the start here.
Now, I have some more issues with Ciri. They missed what the execution in the books had, mainly the connection between Geralt and Ciri. They have the theme of destiny connecting them, but it feels more unsatisfying and contrived. They set up the hunt from her and her powers much earlier, I hope it doesn't lead to the show feeling repetitive later. I just wish they didn't feel so much like a plot device and more like a human being. She is a rowdy tomboy, they only hinted at this once.
Visually, the show looks good. Cinematography is fine, not outstanding, but fine. The CGI is mostly okay, but it has some horrible spots. Fight scenes are amazing, maybe overchoreographed at times, though that is nitpicky.
Loved the music for the show. I was surprised how good it was even. As a person that spent time with all 3 games, each one of which always had an outstanding soundtrack, I wondered how the show would live up to that. It did it excellently. The sound is different from that of the games, but feels very much like the Witcher. Particular fan of the theme of Yennefer and the Toss A Coin For Your Witcher.
All in all, The Witcher is a good show. The first 2 books are in a different format that the other books, being short story collections rather than novels. There was obviously an attempt to streamline the former into the latter to make it more serialised, yet I feel those 2 books make for great TV just the way they are. Episodic with hints of continuity. I have hope there will be improvements in the next season, so I am waiting eagerly.
Edit: As time has passed, I've grown to dislike the show somewhat more. As it is, it is enjoyable, though heavily flawed. It largely butchers the material from the first two books, even though it's arguably the best material to adapt for a TV series. I've changed my rating from a 7 to a 6 and edited out a few parts I don't agree with any more, but my thoughts are mostly the same, I've just realised I felt pressured to give it a higher score so I wouldn't be one of those "the books are better" people, but I think it is perfectly fair to criticise a show when it neither does anything particularly unique with its concept, nor does it do its source material justice.
