Posting challenge
Oct. 21st, 2013 07:26 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
magnetic_poleFolks who know more about fashion than I do (which, by the way, is probably everyone; my closet is full of jeans and tee shirts):
What does her wardrobe say about her, exactly? I've tried (half-heartedly and quickly, admittedly) to do a bit of research and discovered that she wears things you could actually buy, which confirms the general impression I have of her as an accessible character--as opposed to Sherlock with his stiff, buttoned-up look that says "even you can see though this thin veneer of normalcy." But what subtleties am I missing? Hipster? Trendy? Conservative? Am I right in saying that she seems to dress a little young for her age? How does she compare to other fictional New Yorkers in other tv shows? I feel like I'm missing out on something that might be more meaningful if I had more context.
Meanwhile,
Let's genderswap Watson, let's take Sherlock's drug use seriously, let's call out Sherlock on some of his more obnoxious pretensions--the show's basic ideas are compelling and very much in line with fandom concerns. I like the show, and I find it easy to read as a kind of fannish critique of both canon and the BBC series, and for a while I thought it was actually trying to lead a double life, a bland procedural by day and with quirky forays into humor and canon commentary the evening. But why why, why are there so many moments in which characters say things like, "We should talk about that?" No, really, you shouldn't! I know the very premise of the show was therapeutic, but it pains me to hear things like "How did that make you feel?" or "You were supposed to be my friend." Let your characters act, and trust your audience to make the connections. Similarly, the emphases on character and back story are great, but if you look past Joan and Sherlock, you might never guess that this show was anything other than Baker Street: New York. The supporting characters are absolutely flat--all efforts to give them Special Moments or Special Episodes aside--and the mysteries themselves lack any distinguishing character. What's going on here? Does network television really kill off any spark in favor of bland content and good production values? How do good ideas go so bad so quickly?
That said, I was delighted to see a reference to Robert Moses on last week's episode. Go, show, learn something about New York! Let's make the most of it!
What does her wardrobe say about her, exactly? I've tried (half-heartedly and quickly, admittedly) to do a bit of research and discovered that she wears things you could actually buy, which confirms the general impression I have of her as an accessible character--as opposed to Sherlock with his stiff, buttoned-up look that says "even you can see though this thin veneer of normalcy." But what subtleties am I missing? Hipster? Trendy? Conservative? Am I right in saying that she seems to dress a little young for her age? How does she compare to other fictional New Yorkers in other tv shows? I feel like I'm missing out on something that might be more meaningful if I had more context.
Meanwhile,
Let's genderswap Watson, let's take Sherlock's drug use seriously, let's call out Sherlock on some of his more obnoxious pretensions--the show's basic ideas are compelling and very much in line with fandom concerns. I like the show, and I find it easy to read as a kind of fannish critique of both canon and the BBC series, and for a while I thought it was actually trying to lead a double life, a bland procedural by day and with quirky forays into humor and canon commentary the evening. But why why, why are there so many moments in which characters say things like, "We should talk about that?" No, really, you shouldn't! I know the very premise of the show was therapeutic, but it pains me to hear things like "How did that make you feel?" or "You were supposed to be my friend." Let your characters act, and trust your audience to make the connections. Similarly, the emphases on character and back story are great, but if you look past Joan and Sherlock, you might never guess that this show was anything other than Baker Street: New York. The supporting characters are absolutely flat--all efforts to give them Special Moments or Special Episodes aside--and the mysteries themselves lack any distinguishing character. What's going on here? Does network television really kill off any spark in favor of bland content and good production values? How do good ideas go so bad so quickly?
That said, I was delighted to see a reference to Robert Moses on last week's episode. Go, show, learn something about New York! Let's make the most of it!
