MovieChat Forums > Owlwise > Replies
Owlwise's Replies
From what I've read online, the second season has been in limbo due to music licensing issues for a few episodes. I'm hoping it will be released eventually, but I'm not sure. But the first season is quite good, dealing with real issues & not always tying them up with neat & tidy conclusions. Some stories are tied to major issues of the time, but even in those, the timeless human element plays an important part.
Precisely. Human beings consciously think they know what will make them happy, but are often unaware of the unconscious factors driving that belief. The tangible thing may well turn out to be an empty bauble once it's achieved. For instance, a man who felt he wasn't good enough as a child may strive for worldly success & get it, yet still discover that what he really wanted all along was the approval & respect of his parents. And he still may not get that from them even after his success. Then what does he do? Where is the happiness he sought?
Because what we believe to be what we most eagerly & desperately want may turn out not to be that after all. Sometimes you have to get something before understanding that you don't really want it, you never really did, that it's a substitute for what you actually want deep down inside, or that it's made your life worse, not better.
Look at plenty of lottery winners, for example -- they think that they've hit it big, that all their worries are over, that all their problems are resolved. Yet in many cases, their lives are destroyed, because there are almost always unforeseen consequences of getting what you think you wanted most. Or else you're not emotionally & psychologically prepared to handle the vast changes in your life, changes that you might never have imagined beforehand.
How many women have been insulted & treated cruelly by the men in their lives for being overweight? Yet when they do lose that weight & suddenly become attractive & desirable, the men often feel threatened & reject them. It can work the other around, too, men getting in better shape to please their women, then finding those women threatened by it. What was meant to save a relationship actually destroys it.
The problem is that what we consciously want, or think we want, may just be a false goal we've set for ourselves to compensate for unconscious fears or doubts that we can't see or acknowledge about ourselves. And the only way to discover that is by getting what we thought we wanted.
You might like the first season of Mr. Novak, in which he plays a young English teacher in a Californian high school. Strong, intelligent stories; quite a few soon-to-be-well-known actors in early roles; and an overall feeling of thoughtful quality that several early 1960s TV series had.
I can't wait to see this! One of the great formative writers of my life, one whose work still resonates & is just as relevant today as it was then. Maybe more so!
I don't see it as being a film about plot. It's far more of a symphonic tone poem in imagery. And I realize that this sort of thing isn't to everyone's taste, without my stooping to "you just don't get it" or anything like that. I wouldn't want a steady diet of it myself ... but every so often, a film like this is exactly & precisely what I want. And in those terms, I feel it works beautifully & movingly.
Exactly! His momentary frustration & embarrassment strike me as genuine reactions. For the first time in his life, he's met a woman who likes him, and he doesn't quite know how to deal with the intensity of feelings suddenly come to roaring life within him. A moment of anger isn't a red flag, it's a natural reaction for someone who's been as lonely & rejected as he's been. And the fact that he realizes his mistake almost at shows us that he really is the basically nice guy we've been watching all along.
Edward Woodward <b>made</b> that show!
There does seem to be a consistent narrative through the centuries about him being at least bisexual. Or, he may well have been gay, but married & had a child because that's what was expected of a king. Or he may simply have experimented as young man. Or he may have been straight. We really don't know.
And in any case, the film itself is presented as a story, not as history. We've seen countless wildly different depictions of historical figures in many films, so why should this one be an exception?
Still, I can understand your feelings, because I've felt the same way when some figure or moment in history that's dear to me has been depicted much differently from the way I'd always perceived it. My response these days is, "Well, that's how they told the story, it's not how I tell it."
A man can be brave & strong & a fearless warrior, and still be gay.
Absolutely.
Neither one. The original is perfect & needs no CGI remake.
I agree, Bea. <i>Father Knows Best</i> may have been filmed in black-and-white, but its stories & approach were far from black-and-white. It understood complexity & was a deeply humane show.
Bea, thank you!
My politics are definitely liberal/progressive, but I don't consider this show evil. In fact, it was a more complex & nuanced show than its detractors claim. The Andersons may have been slightly idealized, but they were still very human characters. Jim Anderson wasn't some overbearing tyrant, but a loving & decent man who could admit to his family when he was wrong. He was willing to change & grow, and meet his children halfway; yet he was never a pushover, and he stood firm on what he considered to be basic human values ... values that have no political bias either way, but are simply what we'd expect of any mature human being: courtesy, respect, integrity, honesty and occasionally a wry sense of humor about himself.
Did the show reflect the then-current values of mainstream middle America? Yes. But it also subtly examined & questioned them at times, too. Never in a cheaply sneering or dismissive way, but in a thoughtful & considered way.
As I say, the Andersons were somewhat idealized. But what's wrong with that? They offered a model of basically good & caring people, both as individuals & as a family. They also depicted the inevitable stresses of growing up; even loving families have quarrels & disagreements. The best episodes were often more drama than comedy, in fact. Definitely an underrated show, deserving of a second look!
Thank you for that! :)
There's no question that today's TV & film have made remarkable leaps forward in their visuals, special effects, etc. Yet the imagination to create something like the final episode of The Prisoner does seem to have been largely lost. The emphasis tends to be mainly on geek continuity, with everything having to be connected & explained in excruciatingly minute detail, which would destroy something as wild & bold & ferociously inventive as The Prisoner.
I agree, and I'm hardly a prude. The trouble with "anything goes" is that filmmakers have to keep upping the ante in order to have an impact; too many have never learned that "less is more" in many cases. What's suggested is often far more effective than what's so graphically depicted. But too many filmmakers <i>and</i> film viewers buy into the notion that the uglier something is, the more true & real it is, when it fact it's really just as artificial & stylized as "old-fashioned" films. And usually not as good as those older films, either.
Indeed. Churchill said that <i> Mrs. Miniver</i> did more for the war effort than a flotilla of battleships. And films like <i>Casablanca</i> were doing the same for America, informing the public of why America was in the war & why the Axis powers had to be defeated, all while telling compelling & highly enjoyable stories.
Yes, Jim and Julie were always wonderful together.
I'm running into storage space problems myself! But in some cases, tangible media is the only way to be able to see a beloved film whenever you want. Sad that as streaming increases, the choices available for older films becomes smaller. And if they're not available, then who will ever see them & make them desirable again?