Interesting to read of David Chase being so enamoured with the movies having spent virtually the whole of his career in television. He started in the industry at the time, when it was enjoying a creative renaissance.
Cinema today is like modern popular music, vapid and ephemeral. Television (depending upon the broadcaster) appears to give writers the freedom and creativity to develop interwoven stories and characters that you used to see in films 40-50 years ago. Hopefully that will remain so, unless the large media companies decide to bludgeon us with po faced “Social Justice” messages and there are increasing signs of that.
Last edited 2 years ago by Andrew Raiment
William Murphy
2 years ago
The famous riots of 1967? Having lived in Detroit from 1998 to 2000, Motown’s riots were the only 1967 conflict I had been aware of. Huge areas of Detroit were still a post-apocalypse wasteland in 2000. (I lived out in safe and prosperous Farmington Hills) And Detroit’s woes have been very well reported, not least in the fine book ‘The last days of Detroit”. This takes the grim story up to 2010, when what’s left of inner Detroit sounds even worse than my memories.
But in 1967 there were less famous riots in 170 communities across America. Reportedly parts of Newark have similarly never been fully restored. So there was some educational value in seeing the racial violence portrayed in this movie. And the National Guard moving into the centre of a US city with an armoured vehicle. And in seeing some of the racist attitudes frankly aired. Though the philosophical advice from the lifer prisoner smells a bit of 21st century psychologizing. Inevitably the nostalgic top hits soundtrack playing through much of the film suggests a slightly lazy approach to evoking the old days. But it is one hoary cliché which I love.
Last edited 2 years ago by William Murphy
Richard Kuslan
2 years ago
The damning premise of The Sopranos, having watched every episode (for the acting, primarily of the women: Edie Falco, Jamie Lynn-Siegler, Drea de Matteo and especially Lola Glaudini, all of whom I believed totally, which I can’t say for the men) was the equation of mafiosi with the middle-class viewers they were selling the program to. This is a species of contempt, but it is subdued in this television series; it is rife in productions out of Hollywood and New York and London. (I’ve written about this phenomenon in an essay focused upon the best exemplar of this, the American version of The Office.) This premise alone destroys, for me at least, believability. It is essential that truth be the basis of all that the falsehood of fiction is supposed to convey. When falsehood is employed to convey falsehoods, the job of the actor is that much more difficult; hence, my appreciation of the actors who flourished in spite of it. One wonders how the movie will present this theme of moral equivalency between the manifestly guilty and the innocent.
The Sopranos my have been different but it wasn’t very good.
And the adulation it received from the industry and media puts me in mind of those tower blocks so loved by architects but hated by the people who have to live in them
I watched the Shield with my son after watching the Wire.
His verdict was that the Shield was better. I think it the best thing ever made for TV.
We are on series 5.It has not aged and each series seems to be better than the previous one. As I remember the final episode of series 7 was shocking even for the Shield but because of the character driven tension and not violence.
From the very first episode I’d say. With VM’s contempt for his fellow officers and his belief that only he has clarity and sense of purpose to to cut through the BS and find the solution which puts him above the law.
What is also compelling is how VM finds the weakness in everybody who looks tries to bring him down and turns the tables on them
Interesting to read of David Chase being so enamoured with the movies having spent virtually the whole of his career in television. He started in the industry at the time, when it was enjoying a creative renaissance.
Cinema today is like modern popular music, vapid and ephemeral. Television (depending upon the broadcaster) appears to give writers the freedom and creativity to develop interwoven stories and characters that you used to see in films 40-50 years ago. Hopefully that will remain so, unless the large media companies decide to bludgeon us with po faced “Social Justice” messages and there are increasing signs of that.
The famous riots of 1967? Having lived in Detroit from 1998 to 2000, Motown’s riots were the only 1967 conflict I had been aware of. Huge areas of Detroit were still a post-apocalypse wasteland in 2000. (I lived out in safe and prosperous Farmington Hills) And Detroit’s woes have been very well reported, not least in the fine book ‘The last days of Detroit”. This takes the grim story up to 2010, when what’s left of inner Detroit sounds even worse than my memories.
But in 1967 there were less famous riots in 170 communities across America. Reportedly parts of Newark have similarly never been fully restored. So there was some educational value in seeing the racial violence portrayed in this movie. And the National Guard moving into the centre of a US city with an armoured vehicle. And in seeing some of the racist attitudes frankly aired. Though the philosophical advice from the lifer prisoner smells a bit of 21st century psychologizing. Inevitably the nostalgic top hits soundtrack playing through much of the film suggests a slightly lazy approach to evoking the old days. But it is one hoary cliché which I love.
The damning premise of The Sopranos, having watched every episode (for the acting, primarily of the women: Edie Falco, Jamie Lynn-Siegler, Drea de Matteo and especially Lola Glaudini, all of whom I believed totally, which I can’t say for the men) was the equation of mafiosi with the middle-class viewers they were selling the program to. This is a species of contempt, but it is subdued in this television series; it is rife in productions out of Hollywood and New York and London. (I’ve written about this phenomenon in an essay focused upon the best exemplar of this, the American version of The Office.) This premise alone destroys, for me at least, believability. It is essential that truth be the basis of all that the falsehood of fiction is supposed to convey. When falsehood is employed to convey falsehoods, the job of the actor is that much more difficult; hence, my appreciation of the actors who flourished in spite of it. One wonders how the movie will present this theme of moral equivalency between the manifestly guilty and the innocent.
I had not thought of it this way but that is exactly why it rang hollow to me
You might be interested in my essay on the American version of The Office, which is the premiere example of contempt, passed off as comedy.
https://voegelinview.com/the-nihilist-masquerade-or-contempt-edy-not-comedy/
The Sopranos my have been different but it wasn’t very good.
And the adulation it received from the industry and media puts me in mind of those tower blocks so loved by architects but hated by the people who have to live in them
I watched the Shield with my son after watching the Wire.
His verdict was that the Shield was better. I think it the best thing ever made for TV.
We are on series 5.It has not aged and each series seems to be better than the previous one. As I remember the final episode of series 7 was shocking even for the Shield but because of the character driven tension and not violence.
From the very first episode I’d say. With VM’s contempt for his fellow officers and his belief that only he has clarity and sense of purpose to to cut through the BS and find the solution which puts him above the law.
What is also compelling is how VM finds the weakness in everybody who looks tries to bring him down and turns the tables on them
No one HAD to watch the Sopranos. They chose to do so. In their millions.
So does Love Island. In fact I bet Love Island gets more viewers. Does that make it great television? Are you a fan?