What was the last TV show you watched?

[Fading Fast]

"The Alfred Hitchcock Hour" episode "Blood Bargain" from 1963

Over the years - going as far back as the early '70s, when I was a young kid staying with my grandmother and we'd watch these shows on her old B&W TV late on Saturday night - I've seen most of them (and the "Alfred Hitchcock Presents") episodes several times and they are almost all good and bad at the same time.

They are formulaic - clearly trying to profit on Hitchcock's, then, huge popularity - with plots full of holes and way too many variation on the same few themes, but somehow most of them are also engaging. As a kid, they were scary and fully sucked me in - but as an adult, I see them for what they are, but still enjoy them both as time travel and for an earnestness, despite the subject matter (usually murder, embezzlement or something similar), that is almost charming today.

And there are a lot of actors who later became famous showing up as young unknowns which is why I watched this particular episode. It has Richard Long and Ann Francis playing out, what must be, Hitchcock's variation number sixty of a "one spouse cheats and the other finds a way to kill him or her" plot. While this one was even more forced and unbelievable than usual - a hit man hired to kill the husband for cheating the mob (remember what I said about the plots) gets to know the couple and decides to help them as he believes they are still in love, uh-huh - you are still engaged in the weak plot as the actors take it so seriously and the pacing is fast if, sometimes, awkward.

Away from that, the other beauty for Fedora Lounge members is the time travel to the late '50s / early '60 where the clothes, cars, architecture and general culture capture a moment right before the pre-late-'60s social change would unwind all of it.

 

[Fading Fast]

I am watching the Jewel in the Crown, the classic mini-series from 1984, having bought the dvds. I did not watch it at the time, not sure why, probably not the highest priority program for a 16 year old, but I am really enjoying it now, ahem, a little older...

I've seen it a couple of times over the years. I'm not proud of it, but I do enjoy it. Even though it's a period piece, it has a '80s big cheeseball feel to it somehow.

 

[MisterCairo]

I've seen it a couple of times over the years. I'm not proud of it, but I do enjoy it. Even though it's a period piece, it has a '80s big cheeseball feel to it somehow.

I couldn't disagree more. In fact, its understated drama is one of the things I like about. Compared to the other bombast of the 80s (Dallas, etc.), hell, even compared to Downtown Abbey, it is almost quiet in its presentation.

A chacun son gout, as they say...

 

[Fading Fast]

I couldn't disagree more. In fact, its understated drama is one of the things I like about. Compared to the other bombast of the 80s (Dallas, etc.), hell, even compared to Downtown Abbey, it is almost quiet in its presentation.

A chacun son gout, as they say...

As I've gotten older, my response to opposing opinions is to recheck my argument and premises (when I was younger, it was to dig in). So I went to IMDB to refresh my memory about the movie and have to admit, I confused "Jewel in the Crown" with "The Far Pavilions." I'll stand by what was my intended call that "The Far Pavilions" mini-series has a cheesy '80s feel to it (the book, conversely, is very good in a "epic" way).

I also agree with you that "The Jewel in the Crown" is thoughtfully done - slow in parts, but that reflects the care put into building the story and characters. I'm glad I checked IMDB and recognized my mistake (the younger me would still be arguing about the wrong movie).

 

[Formeruser012523]

This should have happened several seasons ago. I admittedly liked the show in the beginning, MANY moons ago, but it just took it's toll over time and stopped watching.

https://screenrant.com/big-bang-theory-cancelled-jim-parsons-response/

 

[HanauMan]

Same here, the first few seasons of TBBT were funny and the characters were endearing and fresh. However, it lost its appeal for me a long time ago when the show began to fall into a cycle of the same lame old jokes being retold and rehashed in nearly every episode. What kept me going, really, was the familiarity of Johnny Galecki and Sara Gilbert, two actors I had followed all the way back to Roseanne. Another reason I went off the show, I think, is that all the actors have aged over the course of the previous 12 odd years, and many of them are only a decade younger than me, yet still are portrayed as acting like awkward teenagers.

Still, I have my box set of TBBT DVDs to continue to enjoy the early episodes.

 

[Zombie_61]

...Another reason I went off the show, I think, is that all the actors have aged over the course of the previous 12 odd years, and many of them are only a decade younger than me, yet still are portrayed as acting like awkward teenagers...

I can't disagree, but if the characters suddenly matured and stopped acting like "awkward teenagers" they wouldn't have much of a show.

Also, I have a couple of friends who are very much like Sheldon and Leonard, though without the arrogance and misguided superiority that Sheldon often exhibits. They're highly intelligent but almost completely awkward socially, sometimes so much so that it's an effort for them to have a simple conversation even with people they're comfortable around. They've both mellowed a little with age, but otherwise they're very much the same as they were when I first met them 20-30 years ago. That being the case, it's easier for me to accept that the characters on The Big Bang Theory are still "stilted" in many ways because I've seen that in real life.

That being said, as much as I enjoy the show I do think it's a good time for it to end.

 

[MisterCairo]

A few things on the go, including Jeeves and Wooster, Jewel in the Crown, and have now bought the HBO series Rome on dvd. A friend had loaned it to me a few years back, and I got both seasons used for a great price.

The production values are awesome, but the cost was a huge factor in HBO rushing it to conclusion in just two years.

 

[HanauMan]

There was a Poirot episode (The Third Girl) on TV again so I watched that. Besides Hercule Poirot (David Suchet) it also featured another of my favorite Poirot characters, namely Adriadne Oliver (Zoe Wanamaker). Though this episode was set in the 1930s, the story when it first came out was set in the 1960s. This still shows thru as Poirot deals with the young people and how they perceive him as an old man and a nuisance. There is the usual bit of melancholy as Poirot reflects, again, on his being a 'lonely old man' with no family of his own.

 

[Doctor Strange]

I finished up the Sharp Objects miniseries on HBO. I thought it was outstanding, really well done, and is sure to generate lots of Emmy noms. Amy Adams is a lock for best actress in a limited series (or whatever that category is called now.)

That said, I did not like - or more importantly, believe - the big reveal at the end. It makes sense dramatically, but not in terms of the reality of these characters and situations as they were presented throughout the series.

 

[Julian Shellhammer]

Two broadcasts from the Westinghouse Studio One program, Twelve Angry Men, from 1954, and Pontius Pilate, 1952. TAM had a stellar cast - Robert Cummings, Franchot Tone, Edward Arnold, Walter Abel, among others, including Norman Fell. Pontius Pilate featured Geraldine Fitzgerald and Cyril Ritchard, with Barry Kroeger as the High Priest.
Live television at its best.

 

[Edward]

This should have happened several seasons ago. I admittedly liked the show in the beginning, MANY moons ago, but it just took it's toll over time and stopped watching.

https://screenrant.com/big-bang-theory-cancelled-jim-parsons-response/

Here in the UK, all aspiring sitcom writers - or most of them, anyhow - want to make the next Fawlty Towers; the norm is often only three or four series with six to ten episodes per series. The sort of overall story arc that might make one or two seasons in the US could be the full run of a UK show. (The differences are well explored in Episodes, the BBC sitcom about a couple who have written a successful UK sitcom and are now overseeing its transition to the US.) The US networks clearly are prepared to bankroll a show as long as it remains successful, with the result that a hit will often stay in production long after it has run out of steam. I certainly can't blame any actor who stays with a show that long - given the phenomenal paycheques available to someone with the level of success of a Jim Parsons - most actors are lucky to get steady work of any kind! I also bear in mind that it can be surprisingly difficult for a key player in a show like that to find other work once the show is done - many never escape the shadow of their big role; that being the case, I can understand the drive to stay on as long as the train runs. If they've been sensible, the key players on TBBT are now financially sound for life, even if they are never able to work again.

Same here, the first few seasons of TBBT were funny and the characters were endearing and fresh. However, it lost its appeal for me a long time ago when the show began to fall into a cycle of the same lame old jokes being retold and rehashed in nearly every episode. What kept me going, really, was the familiarity of Johnny Galecki and Sara Gilbert, two actors I had followed all the way back to Roseanne. Another reason I went off the show, I think, is that all the actors have aged over the course of the previous 12 odd years, and many of them are only a decade younger than me, yet still are portrayed as acting like awkward teenagers.

Still, I have my box set of TBBT DVDs to continue to enjoy the early episodes.

I do wish they'd let them physically age. The funniest thing about Friends in the end was that we were expected to believe they were all still in their twenties. Reminded me of when Dylan Perry on Beverly Hills 90210 used to say things like "Wow, man, I'm late for class, man", and I'd think "Yeah.... by about forty years!" I have less of an issue with the lack of maturity - moving in sci-fi geek circles, fandom and academia; in some of the social groups I've been in over the years, Sheldon would be the closest to normal of the lot of them. So that still rings true for me. It is a show that feels like it should have concluded a season or so ago by now, however. I've enjoyed the way they have played out Sheldon and Howard's relationships. Penny and Leonard have never convinced, and become less so over time. I dearly wish that the show would end with them splitting up, but in the land of How I met your stepmother (still annoyed about that...), I know I'd be mad to hope for anything like that. I am glad that they have resisted the lazy option of making Raj actually gay, though the idea of him two-timing anyone is absolutely absurd. He's a character type who would be so pathetically grateful for the attention of even one woman.... A great show in its day, but definitely time for it to end now.

There was a Poirot episode (The Third Girl) on TV again so I watched that. Besides Hercule Poirot (David Suchet) it also featured another of my favorite Poirot characters, namely Adriadne Oliver (Zoe Wanamaker). Though this episode was set in the 1930s, the story when it first came out was set in the 1960s. This still shows thru as Poirot deals with the young people and how they perceive him as an old man and a nuisance. There is the usual bit of melancholy as Poirot reflects, again, on his being a 'lonely old man' with no family of his own.

Zoe Wanamaker is a tremendous actress - completely aside from being ridiculously sexy. I saw her in Chekov's The Cherry Orchard a few years ago at the NT. Wonderful.

 

[LizzieMaine]

(The differences are well explored in Episodes, the BBC sitcom about a couple who have written a successful UK sitcom and are now overseeing its transition to the US.)

I look forward to a mediocre US adaptation of this.

 

[Formeruser012523]

Here in the UK, all aspiring sitcom writers - or most of them, anyhow - want to make the next Fawlty Towers; the norm is often only three or four series with six to ten episodes per series. The sort of overall story arc that might make one or two seasons in the US could be the full run of a UK show. (The differences are well explored in Episodes, the BBC sitcom about a couple who have written a successful UK sitcom and are now overseeing its transition to the US.) The US networks clearly are prepared to bankroll a show as long as it remains successful, with the result that a hit will often stay in production long after it has run out of steam. I certainly can't blame any actor who stays with a show that long - given the phenomenal paycheques available to someone with the level of success of a Jim Parsons - most actors are lucky to get steady work of any kind! I also bear in mind that it can be surprisingly difficult for a key player in a show like that to find other work once the show is done - many never escape the shadow of their big role; that being the case, I can understand the drive to stay on as long as the train runs. If they've been sensible, the key players on TBBT are now financially sound for life, even if they are never able to work again.



I do wish they'd let them physically age. The funniest thing about Friends in the end was that we were expected to believe they were all still in their twenties. Reminded me of when Dylan Perry on Beverly Hills 90210 used to say things like "Wow, man, I'm late for class, man", and I'd think "Yeah.... by about forty years!" I have less of an issue with the lack of maturity - moving in sci-fi geek circles, fandom and academia; in some of the social groups I've been in over the years, Sheldon would be the closest to normal of the lot of them. So that still rings true for me. It is a show that feels like it should have concluded a season or so ago by now, however. I've enjoyed the way they have played out Sheldon and Howard's relationships. Penny and Leonard have never convinced, and become less so over time. I dearly wish that the show would end with them splitting up, but in the land of How I met your stepmother (still annoyed about that...), I know I'd be mad to hope for anything like that. I am glad that they have resisted the lazy option of making Raj actually gay, though the idea of him two-timing anyone is absolutely absurd. He's a character type who would be so pathetically grateful for the attention of even one woman.... A great show in its day, but definitely time for it to end now.

Okay, did a re-watch of Fraiser on Netflix last year and it definitely had its Fawlty Towers moments. But the thing that floored me was how similar it was to TBBT. SO MANY TIMES. One of the writers started on Fraiser and ended up on TBBT. (Can't recall the guy's name now, but it had to be him. The scenes were just too similar.) Another show that went too long and often had mean humor, but could also be kind and had a strange balance. Unlike Big Bang.

I too thought the writers would make Raj (as well as Stuart) gay. Why did we think that?

 

[Fading Fast]

I look forward to a mediocre US adaptation of this.

There is a brilliant scene in "Episodes" where the US producers are trying to induce the now jaded-to-America writers to do a new US show. They try to entice them with a "we've got Susan Sarandon to star" carrot, which the wife - it's a husband and wife writing team - responds to with a several-minute-long and much-deserved harangue of how Every. Single. Promise. "they" make to "us" now is a lie - a flat-out, bold face lie - and that, by the end, a teacup and not Susan Sarandon will be the star.

 

[Edward]

I look forward to a mediocre US adaptation of this.

That would be tres meta.

Okay, did a re-watch of Fraiser on Netflix last year and it definitely had its Fawlty Towers moments. But the thing that floored me was how similar it was to TBBT. SO MANY TIMES. One of the writers started on Fraiser and ended up on TBBT. (Can't recall the guy's name now, but it had to be him. The scenes were just too similar.) Another show that went too long and often had mean humor, but could also be kind and had a strange balance. Unlike Big Bang.

I didn't know there was a link in the writing. I love Frasier; Martin's down to earth pricking of his sons' pomposity was always entertaining, yet done in a way that never smacked of populist anti-intellectualism. Really, though, it should have ended before Niles and Daphne got together, imo - it seriously jumped the shark later on, though of course by then that was all it could do.

I too thought the writers would make Raj (as well as Stuart) gay. Why did we think that?

Stuart would be an interesting character to make gay. At one time I also thought Howard would be interesting to take that way too. Raj however fits most or all the stereotypical Hollywood notions of a gay man. Hollywood doesn't, as a rule, Do Gay Well, so I suppose that's why a lot of us thought they might go there. Actually, as a straight man Raj is much more interesting. Yes, there's the superficial point about him defying all the alphamale stereotypes in the West, but I'm just not convinced by the 'two women fancy me, oh noes' thing. I'm sure I remember them doing that plotline much better with Leonard a few season previously?

There is a brilliant scene in "Episodes" where the US producers are trying to induce the now jaded-to-America writers to do a new US show. They try to entice them with a "we've got Susan Sarandon to star" carrot, which the wife - it's a husband and wife writing team - responds to with a several-minute-long and much-deserved harangue of how Every. Single. Promise. "they" make to "us" now is a lie - a flat-out, bold face lie - and that, by the end, a teacup and not Susan Sarandon will be the star.

Pretty much how the industry seems to work. Ironically, I've been to a Hollywood-related event in London which used the lure of Susan Sarandon making a pa to sell tickets, only to hear from inside after the event that she had never even confirmed.

 

[Formeruser012523]

I didn't know there was a link in the writing. I love Frasier; Martin's down to earth pricking of his sons' pomposity was always entertaining, yet done in a way that never smacked of populist anti-intellectualism. Really, though, it should have ended before Niles and Daphne got together, imo - it seriously jumped the shark later on, though of course by then that was all it could do.

Stuart would be an interesting character to make gay. At one time I also thought Howard would be interesting to take that way too. Raj however fits most or all the stereotypical Hollywood notions of a gay man. Hollywood doesn't, as a rule, Do Gay Well, so I suppose that's why a lot of us thought they might go there. Actually, as a straight man Raj is much more interesting. Yes, there's the superficial point about him defying all the alphamale stereotypes in the West, but I'm just not convinced by the 'two women fancy me, oh noes' thing. I'm sure I remember them doing that plotline much better with Leonard a few season previously?

Loved Martin probably more than any other character. But despised how dumb Daphne was when it came to Niles. And the fact that she was basically the house servant. Plus, who doesn't give their brother a key to their apartment after that length of time? It was more little situational details that were recycled on TBBT that I noticed having come from the show.

Do recall a conversation between Howard and Raj, where if he weren't already taken he'd marry Raj. Poor taste, if you ask me. Hollywood most definitely does not Do Gay Well, as you say, and this is coming from a straight person. I won't go into the whole "maybe he's this way because he's foreign" character problems they gave him.

Did they do the two women thing? With Leonard, too? Don't recall. Either way, glad it's ending. Basically, it could have been better, but wasn't.

 

[Zombie_61]

...I am glad that they have resisted the lazy option of making Raj actually gay...

...I too thought the writers would make Raj (as well as Stuart) gay. Why did we think that?

They have one full season to go; it could still happen.

 

[TimeWarpWife]

With all of the TV reboots and movie remakes, it makes you wonder if Hollywood has run out of original ideas. I just read a couple of days ago that Bewitched is being rebooted with Samantha and Darren as an interracial couple - Samantha will initially be a single mom who then marries Darren.

 

[Edward]

Did they do the two women thing? With Leonard, too? Don't recall. Either way, glad it's ending. Basically, it could have been better, but wasn't.

A much simpler, one-episode version, though I think it was less him cheating and more Another Bad Woman trying to tempt him away from Penny, then the Poor Man Getting The Blame. (Yawn)

With all of the TV reboots and movie remakes, it makes you wonder if Hollywood has run out of original ideas. I just read a couple of days ago that Bewitched is being rebooted with Samantha and Darren as an interracial couple - Samantha will initially be a single mom who then marries Darren.

There only are something like twelve basic stories in human history anyhow... Bewitched is probably long overdue a remake (the Will Ferrell film notwithstanding). That setup sounds fair enough, really - reflective of a lot of people's experience. Being a single parent nowadays is far from unusual (and in sitcom land, it goes back to at least Different Strokes). Does anyone even notice that a relationship is interracial nowadays? Is that still a 'thing'? My only concern on that front would be if they made it a thing, like made her a Hatian voodoo priestess or something like that and handled it in an appallingly culturally insensitive way.

I do, in general., wish Hollywood would be more creative and less reliant on remakes - West End Theatre is often the same. Problem is, it's a business, and as long as 'more of the same' is what the market will accept or even demands...