Lukewarm on Dope Thief - my wife liked it more than I do. Will stick around for more. I agree the comedy doesn’t land. The lead actor is very good. Now “adolescence “ blew me away. Binged it straight. My kids only got grazed by toxic social media but if you have a young child a must see. It brought back memories of classes I had in middle school where the teacher had no control and it was chaos. Other classes where the teacher had control and learning was involved. Any mood would have worked - it is the show. Also what does Tim Goodman gave in common with. Frank Costanza- He likes to go in FRESH!!
I didn't want to say it before, but was given this advice and it was a little spoilery: give this one four episodes. Which is a Big Ask, right? In retrospect, maybe even too much of one.
I enjoyed those first four episodes because it's a mish mash of early aughts Asian horror that I love. This was back when Japan and Korea showed Hollywood how cheap their jump scares look when contrasted to a profoundly creepy atmosphere. But, even with a love for the tone, the stories being told through these episodes didn't make much sense.
There's an epiphany in the show where the structure turns on its head. All the (very) disparate strands start weaving together. It's no longer a horror show and the scary ghosts became these fully realized human stories. It's still about death, but some stories are hopeful and triumphant. Some are bitter and heartbreaking.
Which is to say, I'm glad I stuck with it, but the four episodes can be a test of patience.
'Interior Chinatown'
I watched the first episode and they really hammered home the theme of Asian representation lacking in Western productions – a role Jimmy O Yang is born to play. Maybe I'm just a little fatigued by the theme, but I just never found the motivation to click on Episode 2. Everything seemed a little one-note with little potential for nuance.
For those that watched it, do they do clever things with the premise?
'Dope Thief'
I, too, thought Bryan Tyree Henry was a revelation in 'Atlanta.' However, his performance in Season 1 was largely shadowed by LaKeith Stanfield and it took Season 2 and Henry's appearance in other projects for me to fully appreciate him.
The one review I read about 'Dope Thief' was that it was similar to 'The Wire.' But as I read the article, it was a comparison that's used for 'Snowfall' or 'The Chi' or [swap in your favorite urban crime procedural here], not "a superb sociological study of systems and infrastructures subjected to the stress test of the surveillance and supervision of slinging by Simon and Burns."
The premise looks awesome, but maybe for a film, right? And that premise seems a bit jacked on the action to really explore the verisimilitude of 'The Wire.'
Road Runner vs. Wile E Coyote was essentially a continuous chase, no? Touche, but said in Looney Tunes!
It's hard to sell 'Light Shop' without giving away the twist, but I'll just empathize that the first half of the show is a (very) confusing mish mash of horror tropes. I found the way the show wrapped up to be unexpected and satisfying. Also, there's a post-credits scene that connects the world back to 'Moving.'
I did get the MGM+ free trial via Amazon to watch S2 of "Rogue Heroes". Good like the first, a bit different this season but still an entertaining show that is also well-produced SBU.
Otherwise enjoying the revived Daredevil show. Rewatching S1 of Wolf Hall with S2 inbound Sunday. Anything else? Mythic Quest, which is always entertaining though wondering if it's leading to something in the finale.
We are making our way (gradually) through "Gangs of London" which is very good with a strong cast...but if you don't like (often quite graphic) violence, it's probably not going to be something you'll enjoy.
Gangs of London is an older series, correct? Not that there's anything wrong with that -- the rules here are anything is in play and I watch a lot of series, obviously, from past years -- I just wanted to make sure I'm finding the right show.
'Gangs of London' was developed by the writer/director of 'The Raid' film series, so the action -- at least in Season 1 -- is soooooo bonkers. This touches on one of Tim's points here where when the star showrunner isn't involved, there's a noticeable drop-off. And I've heard Season 2 is just that.
Yes, happens a lot! As I mentioned to RS, I wanted to make sure I was on the right page about whether this was the show you're talking about and I haven't missed something newer or on a different streamer.
And, from what I understand with 'Gangs of London,' Gareth Evans directed two of the episodes, but also directed ALL of the action scenes for Season 1.
Here's the first fight scene from Episode 1, and just the choreography, sound editing, and direction from one of the best in the business really shows.
I've read that Season 2 keeps up the gore content, but the action is nowhere on par.
R S, what did you think of the S1 ending? The twist was a little too soap opera-ish to me, but I get it in order to milk some great performances for S2. But it's not like I was watching the series for the story...
Well ... yeah. "Timing," as the saying goes, "is everything," and that certainly applies to whatever mood I happen to be in when tuning in a show -- even a show I already like and have fully bought into. It turns out some nights just aren't the right time to watch that one.
It's the same reason I have a dozen books -- each with a bookmark halfway in -- waiting for me each night when the Toob goes off and I settle in next to the wood stove to get some reading done. They're all good, but I'm rarely in the mood to read from the same book two nights in a row.
I saw the first ep of "Dope Thief" last night -- before reading this column -- and liked it well enough. The only serious flaw to my eye was the third wheel ex-con who came into the mix for the latter part of the episode. Given that we had two guys who've built a low key but well-oiled money machine -- and become pros at the process -- I really couldn't buy that they'd bring in such an obvious loose cannon (a guy clearly not trustworthy or cut out for that kind of work) right away to help pull off a bigger and more dangerous job. It just didn't compute ... so the bloody mess that ensued was then totally predictable. That's exactly the kind of fatal flaw -- a true failure of vision on the part of everyone involved -- that erodes the foundation of a show.
I get it -- those two had to screw up in a manner that would put themselves (and their families, no doubt) in harms way to provide the dramatic energy needed to power the remaning episodes, so the envelope of credibility needed to be stretched ... but with THAT out of the way, I was hoping the showrunners would would get things back on track. From what you say, they didn't ... but the little suprise at the very end -- which I definitely did NOT see coming -- provided just enough hope that I'll give Ep 2 a shot to see for myself.
This is why I’m here, Tim! I like that your writing makes me think.
I do think mood is in the mix, especially if you’re an amateur like myself. What I have been working on is eliminating shows before watching a single second. Basically, the last straw for me was The Last of Us. I fell for the hype and watched a show that was 100% not for me. And then I suffered through the season. (Yes, episode 3 was great. Still not worth it!) After that I decided no more. That’s why I skipped Baby Reindeer and it’s why I am going to skip Adolescence. I do have a few moments of FOMO. But the feeling passes.
But you’re right that a show totally in your wheelhouse not working has nothing to do with mood. It’s the show. My way of avoiding that is reading TV reviews, here and elsewhere. Now sometimes it’s not a clear case. Where critics disagree. Other times, I just sincerely disagree. But overall, it’s a pretty good method to weed out shows.
So to sum up, I ask 2 questions:
Is this show for me? If yes:
Do critics think the show is good?
It’s not completely foolproof but I would say it has a good batting average. This process this week has led me to decide to watch a new show on BritBox called Ludwig. Oh, and by the way, there is a third component which might annoy you: did audiences like the show. Sometimes the wisdom of crowds is helpful. Ludwig was very successful in the UK.
I hope you don’t skip it. There is nothing wrong with watching a show that makes one feel a little sad. It also made me think back to experiences on the show that I lived many years ago and how it was handled and now the toxicity of social media. This substack for me shows the net positive aspect of social media - but for many, social media is incredibly negative.
I think I will get to it once the mood changes a bit. Totally agree on social media and kind of being a recovered addict on that space. Such a disaster for individuals and thus society at large.
"Still not worth it!" Ah, yes, a good laugh because we've all been there. "But Ep. X is awesome!" Yep, it was, but the rest were not.
I'm skipping Adolescence as well. Not ready to increase my depression. Although back when I did watch Baby Reindeer and loved it, even though it was "difficult" at times.
I'll look for Ludwig. I just was browsing BritBox a couple of days ago.
That boy in Adolescence is fabulous. And camera movement witj no "visible" cuts is outstanding. I don't think you should skip the show, but I am certain you know better.
I'm curious if anyone has watched "Long Bright River" (Peacock)? I read the book, and the author, Liz Moore, exec produced it and cowrote five of the episodes. The novel is a bit of a tough read because of the subject matter (drug addiction, bad cops, survival prostitution, poverty, etc.). I've watched the first episode and half of the second so far. The whole thing dropped at once, but I can't imagine anyone really wanting to binge it.
I have the Peacock-with-ads sub, because they were basically giving it away at $30 for a full year. That's ridiculously cheap for a streaming service (I paid $60 last year, although that was when they had the Olympics coming up). "Poker Face" will be back in May and I absolutely loved the first season.
Anyway, I'll keep watching and report back. The only reason I didn't make it all the way through Episode 2 last night is because my husband came home and wanted to watch the Warriors (they lost, boo).
I have Peacock with ads since I mostly have it for sports, which have...spot breaks...so not as much a downside.
There haven't been a lot of series there that we've watched but those that we have ("Vigil", "The Jackal", and the surprisingly good/relevant "The Capture") have been good.
The biggest problem with this is even if you want to watch a game on replay (which I sometimes am forced to because of my work schedule), there are two MAJOR issues:
1) You literally cannot start watching it from the beginning until the replay is posted, which is like an HOUR AFTER the broadcast ends. This is insane for a streaming service. On anything else, I can start from the beginning at any minute I want to. This is a complete joke.
2) They still FORCE you to watch ads during timeouts of a REPLAY.
Ugh. Yes, that's a problem. I use YouTubeTV and add the Bay Area NBC sports stuff as an extra to catch Warriors and theoretically the Giants (I actually think they will be much better this season and drafted a whole mess of them in my fantasy league, which is odd.)
The Peacock sports replay stuff is really mind-numbing. I've sent them some very pointed feedback but since when do these companies care about their customers because we don't have choices?
Lukewarm on Dope Thief - my wife liked it more than I do. Will stick around for more. I agree the comedy doesn’t land. The lead actor is very good. Now “adolescence “ blew me away. Binged it straight. My kids only got grazed by toxic social media but if you have a young child a must see. It brought back memories of classes I had in middle school where the teacher had no control and it was chaos. Other classes where the teacher had control and learning was involved. Any mood would have worked - it is the show. Also what does Tim Goodman gave in common with. Frank Costanza- He likes to go in FRESH!!
I might have more in common with the Costanza family than I thought...
Slightly afraid to watch Adolescence because it seems really dark.
Hoping people at least tried Deli Boys. Loved it.
'Lightshop'
I didn't want to say it before, but was given this advice and it was a little spoilery: give this one four episodes. Which is a Big Ask, right? In retrospect, maybe even too much of one.
I enjoyed those first four episodes because it's a mish mash of early aughts Asian horror that I love. This was back when Japan and Korea showed Hollywood how cheap their jump scares look when contrasted to a profoundly creepy atmosphere. But, even with a love for the tone, the stories being told through these episodes didn't make much sense.
There's an epiphany in the show where the structure turns on its head. All the (very) disparate strands start weaving together. It's no longer a horror show and the scary ghosts became these fully realized human stories. It's still about death, but some stories are hopeful and triumphant. Some are bitter and heartbreaking.
Which is to say, I'm glad I stuck with it, but the four episodes can be a test of patience.
'Interior Chinatown'
I watched the first episode and they really hammered home the theme of Asian representation lacking in Western productions – a role Jimmy O Yang is born to play. Maybe I'm just a little fatigued by the theme, but I just never found the motivation to click on Episode 2. Everything seemed a little one-note with little potential for nuance.
For those that watched it, do they do clever things with the premise?
'Dope Thief'
I, too, thought Bryan Tyree Henry was a revelation in 'Atlanta.' However, his performance in Season 1 was largely shadowed by LaKeith Stanfield and it took Season 2 and Henry's appearance in other projects for me to fully appreciate him.
The one review I read about 'Dope Thief' was that it was similar to 'The Wire.' But as I read the article, it was a comparison that's used for 'Snowfall' or 'The Chi' or [swap in your favorite urban crime procedural here], not "a superb sociological study of systems and infrastructures subjected to the stress test of the surveillance and supervision of slinging by Simon and Burns."
The premise looks awesome, but maybe for a film, right? And that premise seems a bit jacked on the action to really explore the verisimilitude of 'The Wire.'
Ah, perhaps I got clickbaited.
I could see going back. If it pays off and morphs a bit, sure. I think it was the mood, as I said. The show seems very well done.
And yes, Dope Thief would have been a better film. I mean, how many seasons can you have these guys running for their lives? Sigh.
Road Runner vs. Wile E Coyote was essentially a continuous chase, no? Touche, but said in Looney Tunes!
It's hard to sell 'Light Shop' without giving away the twist, but I'll just empathize that the first half of the show is a (very) confusing mish mash of horror tropes. I found the way the show wrapped up to be unexpected and satisfying. Also, there's a post-credits scene that connects the world back to 'Moving.'
Post credits thing: Now I'm gonna finish just to see!
I did get the MGM+ free trial via Amazon to watch S2 of "Rogue Heroes". Good like the first, a bit different this season but still an entertaining show that is also well-produced SBU.
Otherwise enjoying the revived Daredevil show. Rewatching S1 of Wolf Hall with S2 inbound Sunday. Anything else? Mythic Quest, which is always entertaining though wondering if it's leading to something in the finale.
We are making our way (gradually) through "Gangs of London" which is very good with a strong cast...but if you don't like (often quite graphic) violence, it's probably not going to be something you'll enjoy.
Gangs of London is an older series, correct? Not that there's anything wrong with that -- the rules here are anything is in play and I watch a lot of series, obviously, from past years -- I just wanted to make sure I'm finding the right show.
'Gangs of London' was developed by the writer/director of 'The Raid' film series, so the action -- at least in Season 1 -- is soooooo bonkers. This touches on one of Tim's points here where when the star showrunner isn't involved, there's a noticeable drop-off. And I've heard Season 2 is just that.
Yes, happens a lot! As I mentioned to RS, I wanted to make sure I was on the right page about whether this was the show you're talking about and I haven't missed something newer or on a different streamer.
And, from what I understand with 'Gangs of London,' Gareth Evans directed two of the episodes, but also directed ALL of the action scenes for Season 1.
Here's the first fight scene from Episode 1, and just the choreography, sound editing, and direction from one of the best in the business really shows.
https://youtu.be/aCZ6H0FMV3s?si=Kx4uyWK0PiZUJAze
I've read that Season 2 keeps up the gore content, but the action is nowhere on par.
R S, what did you think of the S1 ending? The twist was a little too soap opera-ish to me, but I get it in order to milk some great performances for S2. But it's not like I was watching the series for the story...
All in now after the clip.
Not shocking, I realize.
Just about to watch the S1 finale so...timely info! Thanks.
Well ... yeah. "Timing," as the saying goes, "is everything," and that certainly applies to whatever mood I happen to be in when tuning in a show -- even a show I already like and have fully bought into. It turns out some nights just aren't the right time to watch that one.
It's the same reason I have a dozen books -- each with a bookmark halfway in -- waiting for me each night when the Toob goes off and I settle in next to the wood stove to get some reading done. They're all good, but I'm rarely in the mood to read from the same book two nights in a row.
I saw the first ep of "Dope Thief" last night -- before reading this column -- and liked it well enough. The only serious flaw to my eye was the third wheel ex-con who came into the mix for the latter part of the episode. Given that we had two guys who've built a low key but well-oiled money machine -- and become pros at the process -- I really couldn't buy that they'd bring in such an obvious loose cannon (a guy clearly not trustworthy or cut out for that kind of work) right away to help pull off a bigger and more dangerous job. It just didn't compute ... so the bloody mess that ensued was then totally predictable. That's exactly the kind of fatal flaw -- a true failure of vision on the part of everyone involved -- that erodes the foundation of a show.
I get it -- those two had to screw up in a manner that would put themselves (and their families, no doubt) in harms way to provide the dramatic energy needed to power the remaning episodes, so the envelope of credibility needed to be stretched ... but with THAT out of the way, I was hoping the showrunners would would get things back on track. From what you say, they didn't ... but the little suprise at the very end -- which I definitely did NOT see coming -- provided just enough hope that I'll give Ep 2 a shot to see for myself.
Who knows? I might be in just the right mood.
Onward, into the mist...
Let me know if it evens out. And if your mood hangs in there
This is why I’m here, Tim! I like that your writing makes me think.
I do think mood is in the mix, especially if you’re an amateur like myself. What I have been working on is eliminating shows before watching a single second. Basically, the last straw for me was The Last of Us. I fell for the hype and watched a show that was 100% not for me. And then I suffered through the season. (Yes, episode 3 was great. Still not worth it!) After that I decided no more. That’s why I skipped Baby Reindeer and it’s why I am going to skip Adolescence. I do have a few moments of FOMO. But the feeling passes.
But you’re right that a show totally in your wheelhouse not working has nothing to do with mood. It’s the show. My way of avoiding that is reading TV reviews, here and elsewhere. Now sometimes it’s not a clear case. Where critics disagree. Other times, I just sincerely disagree. But overall, it’s a pretty good method to weed out shows.
So to sum up, I ask 2 questions:
Is this show for me? If yes:
Do critics think the show is good?
It’s not completely foolproof but I would say it has a good batting average. This process this week has led me to decide to watch a new show on BritBox called Ludwig. Oh, and by the way, there is a third component which might annoy you: did audiences like the show. Sometimes the wisdom of crowds is helpful. Ludwig was very successful in the UK.
I hope you don’t skip it. There is nothing wrong with watching a show that makes one feel a little sad. It also made me think back to experiences on the show that I lived many years ago and how it was handled and now the toxicity of social media. This substack for me shows the net positive aspect of social media - but for many, social media is incredibly negative.
I think I will get to it once the mood changes a bit. Totally agree on social media and kind of being a recovered addict on that space. Such a disaster for individuals and thus society at large.
"Still not worth it!" Ah, yes, a good laugh because we've all been there. "But Ep. X is awesome!" Yep, it was, but the rest were not.
I'm skipping Adolescence as well. Not ready to increase my depression. Although back when I did watch Baby Reindeer and loved it, even though it was "difficult" at times.
I'll look for Ludwig. I just was browsing BritBox a couple of days ago.
That boy in Adolescence is fabulous. And camera movement witj no "visible" cuts is outstanding. I don't think you should skip the show, but I am certain you know better.
Waiting for the mood, but will likely get there.
It premieres Thursday. Not sure if it’s all at once or weekly.
I'm curious if anyone has watched "Long Bright River" (Peacock)? I read the book, and the author, Liz Moore, exec produced it and cowrote five of the episodes. The novel is a bit of a tough read because of the subject matter (drug addiction, bad cops, survival prostitution, poverty, etc.). I've watched the first episode and half of the second so far. The whole thing dropped at once, but I can't imagine anyone really wanting to binge it.
Interesting and maybe another data point for upping a Peacock sub. I'm glad she wrote five of the episodes. Gives (some) control and makes money.
I have the Peacock-with-ads sub, because they were basically giving it away at $30 for a full year. That's ridiculously cheap for a streaming service (I paid $60 last year, although that was when they had the Olympics coming up). "Poker Face" will be back in May and I absolutely loved the first season.
Anyway, I'll keep watching and report back. The only reason I didn't make it all the way through Episode 2 last night is because my husband came home and wanted to watch the Warriors (they lost, boo).
I have Peacock with ads since I mostly have it for sports, which have...spot breaks...so not as much a downside.
There haven't been a lot of series there that we've watched but those that we have ("Vigil", "The Jackal", and the surprisingly good/relevant "The Capture") have been good.
The biggest problem with this is even if you want to watch a game on replay (which I sometimes am forced to because of my work schedule), there are two MAJOR issues:
1) You literally cannot start watching it from the beginning until the replay is posted, which is like an HOUR AFTER the broadcast ends. This is insane for a streaming service. On anything else, I can start from the beginning at any minute I want to. This is a complete joke.
2) They still FORCE you to watch ads during timeouts of a REPLAY.
Ugh. Yes, that's a problem. I use YouTubeTV and add the Bay Area NBC sports stuff as an extra to catch Warriors and theoretically the Giants (I actually think they will be much better this season and drafted a whole mess of them in my fantasy league, which is odd.)
The Peacock sports replay stuff is really mind-numbing. I've sent them some very pointed feedback but since when do these companies care about their customers because we don't have choices?
It's always the show, never you Tim, never you!!! LOL
This is SO true. Strange how it turns out that way.