24
- Thread starter Woebot
- Start date
3underscore
Well-known member
I thought the first and second series were both pretty good. Can't be bothered with any more as I just get annoyed that Keifer Sutherland will never get killed!
Diggedy Derek
Stray Dog
The second series is crap. I reckon, although it's very exciting to start with. Grudgingly trudging through series three at the moment, and it's total shite to be honest.
Pearsall said:
Got to say, I'm really into "Deadwood" at the moment. In fairness, I'm only a few episodes in (getting the DVD boxed set 1 disc at a time c/o LoveFilm), but I'm totally sold on how 'authentic' the whole thing feels - the proto-Yankee accents, the weather-beaten sets and costumes, the rancid whores, not to mention the outrageous dialogue ("when you talk, your mouth looks like a cunt moving"). The episodes are fairly self-contained, but the character motivations and interpersonal conflicts (both explicit and implicit) make it easily as moreish as "24".
Oh, and Ian MacShane (Lovejoy!) scares the bejeezus out of me
Anyone else here seen it?
Woebot
Well-known member
blunt said:Got to say, I'm really into "Deadwood" at the moment. In fairness, I'm only a few episodes in (getting the DVD boxed set 1 disc at a time c/o LoveFilm), but I'm totally sold on how 'authentic' the whole thing feels - the proto-Yankee accents, the weather-beaten sets and costumes, the rancid whores, not to mention the outrageous dialogue ("when you talk, your mouth looks like a cunt moving"). The episodes are fairly self-contained, but the character motivations and interpersonal conflicts (both explicit and implicit) make it easily as moreish as "24".
Oh, and Ian MacShane (Lovejoy!) scares the bejeezus out of me
Anyone else here seen it?
i saw snatches of it as i was piecing some designs together for Sky. and yeah i was quite taken with it too. seen the bit where the chinese bloke has all his smack stolen and keeps going "muthafuckas" - the only word he knows in english? thats pretty funny.
oh, and casting mcshane was a cool move!
thanks for the feedback re: series 2. missus found a copy at the library so we're going to rip it. thus cheap tv. beats eastenders.
Series 2 was pretty weak (compared to Series 1, which was excellent), until the very end when it suddenly looked as though the whole thing was the middle part of a giant trilogy (72?). That would have been great, except that wasn't how it turned out, and Series 3 is just more of the same old same old.
Diggedy Derek
Stray Dog
Yeah. Series 2 ends in a somewhat enigmatic manner, with loads and loads of untied loose ends. And then series 3 doesn't deal with these at all.
Basically, massive plot twists are thrown in for the hell of it, roughly at the incidence of each commercial break.
Basically, massive plot twists are thrown in for the hell of it, roughly at the incidence of each commercial break.
Ness Rowlah
Norwegian Wood
Gave up after Series 2. Thought it was decent (but not good enough for another 6 months of it).
Anyone else enjoying House with Hugh Laurie? Episodes a bit samey, but at least it's possible to miss one (never thought I would enjoy a medical drama).
Anyone else enjoying House with Hugh Laurie? Episodes a bit samey, but at least it's possible to miss one (never thought I would enjoy a medical drama).
baboon2004
Darned cockwombles.
Interesting question: are youse lot saying these things about 24 from a one-episode-a-week standpoint? If so, I completely understand, but it has to be said that sitting down and watching each series for 16 hours straight is one of the greatest televisual pleasures I've ever had...
Grievous Angel
Beast of Burden
I like Scrubs.
baboon2004 said:
I've never watched them in one go, but Series 1 I watched on DVD rather than TV; got through it in about a week. That was quite odd - I started to daydream 24 scenarios during the day; half expected my life to cut away to an ad break every 15 minutes. Series 2 was mostly on TV; and Series 3 was box set again (borrowed from someone else, mind you).
2stepfan said:
Oh sweet Lord yes.
love this david thomson piece on the second '24' (which i'm not keen on, but the first is obv great)
http://www.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/feature/88/
http://www.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/feature/88/
That's a very good article. When 24/2 was shown in the UK, it was back to back with a late series of the X Files, and there was a really jarring effect between the two (putting aside the fact that late X Files is awful). What was striking was how 24 was very definitely post-9/11 TV, and the X Files was pre-9/11. The heroics of Jack Bauer et al can only function because he has access to an unprecedented, absurd amount of privacy-busting, civil liberties infringing surveillance tools. In the post 9/11 world of 24, a shady, all-powerful Government-funded black ops wing of the FBI is a force for good, keeping us all safe in our beds at night; the whole premise of the X Files, from the relatively peaceful 1990s when America did not feel such a threat to its security, is exactly the reverse - shady government organisations are what we should fear the most. It's probably unintended, but there's a definite propagandistic element to 24, in which in a climate of fear, total loss of privacy and liberty becomes an essential weapon.