TurquoiseB wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <noozg...@...> wrote:
>
>> TurquoiseB wrote:
>>
>>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <noozguru@> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> With the local Hollywood Video going out of business and a new
>>>> Samsung networked Bluray player I decided to sign up again for
>>>> Netflix. As I've mentioned before I used Netflix over 10 years
>>>> ago when DVD first came out because few if any of the local
>>>> stores had DVDs to rent. Then they began getting them and I
>>>> stopped using Netflix. So upon Turq's recommendation I put
>>>> Starz's "Spartacus: Blood and Sand" in my Instant Watch list.
>>>> Last night I watched the first half of the first episode.
>>>> Interesting series though nowhere as well produced as HBO's
>>>> "Rome"...
>>>>
>>> Just you wait. Heh heh. :-)
>>>
>>
>> The second episode was better. There is an interesting subtext
>> going on which is almost more about current affairs than life in
>> Rome.
>>
>
> If you perceive a modern "subtext" in the series, I suspect
> it is more due to projecting it there than the producers
> intending it there. It's a remarkably factual portrayal of
> the Roman society of the time. If there is a resemblance to
> modern times, that's probably due more to "Those who do not
> learn from history are doomed to repeat it" than to artistic
> intent IMO.
>
I have to disagree with you there knowing how screen writers work. No
projection, just observation. Bet they talk about it in the commentaries.
>
>
>>>> ...but quite interesting how they put green screen and CG to
>>>> work to create the episode. Not sure if it's my cup of tea as
>>>> I found plenty to fill the queue otherwise. Of course I've seen
>>>> enough to see why Turq liked it. ;-)
>>>>
>>> As much as I like tits, it's not just the tits. :-)
>>> "Spartacus" has some of the best villains I have
>>> ever seen onscreen, and some of the most nefarious
>>> plotting. Not to mention a depth of characterization
>>> I had absolutely no reason to suspect was coming in
>>> the first couple of episodes.
>>>
>>> I have gone beyond being an apologetic fan and have
>>> become an unapologetic fan. I think that -- for good
>>> or ill -- it defines the future of television. I
>>> expect there to be six knockoff copycat series within
>>> a year. None of them will be as good, but all of them
>>> will use the "violence porn" metaphor.
>>>
>> Unfortunately that is the way that horror has gone especially
>> since the Saw and Hostel successes.
>>
>
> Not entirely. The latest episode of "Bones" was a delight-
> ful spoof of the horror genre, going so far as to co-star
> Robert Englund ("Freddie Krueger"). It was a hoot.
>
Bones is a TV series and so formula I found it difficult to watch. The
Freddie remake is coming out so he was product placement. I'm talking
about much of films being made especially ones in the "After Dark
Horrorfest 4" which I'm winding my way through. They're all on Vudu in
HD except for the 8th one which each year is the winner and gets some
theater bookings before going to video. I guess it's hard to scare
audiences anymore. Just stepping outside your door in the US maybe more
horrifying than any horror movie.
Forgot to mention that I watched "Defendor" on DVD last night. You will
be pleased to know that Redbox listed the genre correctly. But I think
I would have enjoyed it more on Vudu where it was available in HD. Fun
little film. I was reminded of some of the people downtown I've talked
too that were equally "out there."
