Thoughts? It’s been out four days and I’m surprised there hasn’t been a thread on it yet.
2 Likes
I’m waiting to see it when I get home, get rested and go with a neighborhood group.
Among other things I’m a surrogate granny aka ‘village crazy lady’.
1 Like
Was still good. Not as good as Season 1 or 2, with 1 being the best.
I never watched the show until my friend had it on while I was over at his house so i don’t have much to offer. I grew up in the 80’s and the attention to detail really got me. I loved that whole aspect of the few episodes I caught. It’s why my friend watches it. Starcourt mall was really impressive. Oh, and how they used Moving in Stereo was pretty cool. I always see that pool scene from Fast Times at Ridgemont High whenever it comes on. I like how they changed it around.
So yea. lol Not much to add. ![:sweat_smile:](https://d38bqls1q93fod.cloudfront.net/en/wow/images/emoji/twitter/sweat_smile.png?v=6" ":sweat_smile:")
It was not as good as the second, which in turn wasn’t as good as the first.
My complaints?
It was far too derivative of other movies and television shows. We had direct shot-for-shot “borrowing” from Star Wars, Terminator, Terminator 2 (which, ironically, was a 90s movie, not 80s), Fast Times at Ridgemont High, Back to the Future, Breakfast Club, Blue Thunder - as well as heavy “homages” to a few dozen other productions including Indiana Jones, the Abyss, National Lampoon’s Vacation, the Lost Boys, and so many more (I should have made a list.)
Yes, they even re-used the klaxon from the Death Star, and figured out a sneaky way to use the Back to the Future score for about eight minutes.
I know that ST’s huge catapult to a top series is due in part to the 80s setting and homages to 80s movies in the first season… but those were subtle, and the genius is in the subtety. Anyone can do blatant.
Yeah, season one was like the love child of E.T. and Goonies, clearly. But they didn’t go so far as to, say, have a scene where the kids fly through the air past the full moon on bikes. Or someone doing the “Truffle Shuffle.” They were subtle about it, not blatant.
Season three did the exact opposite of one and two, and unfortunately went way, way overboard. Which is interesting because this “dripping with mega-80s” production style was actually nearly absent in season two.
I dunno if any of you lived through the 80s, but I did. That whole mall and everyone’s attire looked way more like what productions hearkening back to the 80s make people look like, rather than what people in the 80s looked like. These kids are the age I was in the 80s (ten in '85), and neither I nor any of my friends would have been caught dead wearing what they were wearing.
It must have been the difference in our home towns, I guess. I was in Hawaii and California, usually out here in Los Angeles for a big part of the summer.
I can agree with you on detail - it’s just about perfect. However, instead of peppering the production with perfect detail, they loosened the top of the shaker, and the whole thing went in. April-fools style.
The mall in the 80s was just the mall. There weren’t nine million volts of neon everywhere. There was neon, sure, just not that much of it. Ditto the huge, crazy hairstyles. Ditto people wearing day-glo. Most of the people at the mall in the 80s were simply wearing jeans and a t-shirt like they do today. It mighta been worse on a Friday night, sure. But not to that extent.
And lest we forget that Tom Cruise was the hairstyle to look up to for many kids (myself included). My hair was always short - I never teased it out LOL.
Kids weren’t wearing dress shirts buttoned up to their neck unless they were told to do so. Kids weren’t dressing like Karate Kid unless they were at the theater premiere.
The background detail was accurate, sure. But, hella overused as a component of a scene. When I’m paying more attention to “that toilet paper we had when I was a kid” than I am to the dialogue and actors upstage of the products, then there is an issue.
Also, I don’t mind product placement. It is what it is, and the fact that it is everywhere in movies and TV usually doesn’t mess with my suspension of disbelief. You know what does? Two-minute Coke commercials right in the middle of a scene. Debating New Coke vs. Old Coke, which happened to coincide with Coca Cola “re-launching” New Coke at the exact same time.
Anyway, aside from those gripes, literally nothing of consequence happened during the first three episodes. They could have cut all of the who-likes-whom and who-kisses-whom nonsense and actually put content in those first few episodes. I ask you this: how much did the first and most popular season rely on who-likes-whom and who-kisses-whom? Exactly.
Overall:
Season 1: 9.5/10
Season 2: 7/10
Season 3: 5/10
I really thought they came to a nice, concise ending with three, but they couldn’t resist, could they? Teaser for 4 was an obvious cliche; they can’t feed us those downer endings without a spoonful of sugar to go with it.
…
I should write for a living. Dunno why I don’t.
I really enjoyed the first season, felt indifferent but watched the second, have no desire to watch a third.
I think it just feels milked now.
I found season 3 to be ok but it’s really slipping. There probably wasn’t a thread about it yet because it’s pretty meh. It definitely won’t ever have a really good season like the first ever.
That’s about right. It’s been progressively declining. They should bin it but I’m sure they’ll milk it for another two seasons, at least.
1 Like
Yeah, I know…
So much this. I wish that we, as a people, could just accept one “thing,” be it a book, movie, television show, song, whatever - and just have that one to appreciate without needing part two, three, four, five … seventeen, eighteen, etc. Virtually all of which, I might add, usually pale in comparison to the original.
Da Vinci never did the Mona Lisa II, III, and Mona Lisa: Beyond the Canvas. There is one, and only one Mona Lisa, and that’s part of the reason why it’s an indelible part of art history.
Unfortunately, there’s mega bucks to be made in repackaging and reselling the same content with minor changes. I suppose Da Vinci very well could have been working on “Mona Lisa X: This Time It’s Personal” if he were alive today and making $20 million off every new “version” of her.
And that is pretty much the end of the “keep art pure” argument, yeah? 