I'm a traitor to my subcultures since I refuse to read older literature and watch older movies. I bothered to watch the Omen, which I hated, I also hated the Shining, the kid is annoying, it's all over the top and drawn out, I'm not a big fan of Kubrick's older films. I didn't like Rosemary's Baby either.
In terms of reading, I bothered to get through Pride and Prejudice and Zombies and really hated it, the Zombie element didn't make the whole thing less boring. I also don't know a lot of Shakespeare (maybe due in part that people tried to give me that as a nickname based on my last name being an alternate spelling to a particular play), I only know what I do know from reading one play all the way through, and seeing a few others in various visual adaptations. I thought I liked Shakespeare in Love but the acting was too much.
I also won't watch Citizen Kane. I really didn't want to anyway, it looks overblown and uninteresting, I'm not shitting on older cinema it doesn't mesh with me. I don't feel like seeing it. And that's been reinforced after hearing there is a major plothole that people are so willing to disregard because the film itself is relatively flawless, even its storytelling.
Yeah, of course. I agonised over a mild historical inaccuracy in a book I published after its release, I obsessively looked up whether it made sense a character would've been realistically alive during a particular part of history, I didn't do enough research since it wasn't a main character, she was a plot device. But I hated it and I panicked someone was going to point it out. Nobody did. A lot of what I found fault with, others didn't see.
But when something so revered cannot even see a blatant inaccuracy, that sounds like it would've been super easy to fix by just adding one character to a scene, I don't appreciate how much the praise remains intact, and even completely excused, because it's an overall masterpiece.
Plotholes are inevitability of convoluted stories, mostly in shows that go from season to season not knowing if the show will keep going, so certain rules have to be broken to keep a show going, it's probably why I don't invest time in new shows like this for them being at the mercy of streaming services who can pull them at a moment's notice, you can't project much. Of course this was true of normal TV when shows were picked up. I also avoided a lot of book adaptation shows for obvious reasons. I really hate a lot of their original adaptations finished in the last ten years and are already being considered for reboots purely from some misguided notion this will generate the same income as the original, or at least a substantial amount.
Knowing what I know about Citizen Kane, I'll never watch it now. I even thought the twist was kind of stupid anyway, and I suck at twists.
This came off the back of a video review of the Vampire Diaries spinoff The Originals, and looking at the aesthetic, it looks like Interview with the Vampire meets Melrose Place. The fake terrace look seems to be the same, only it's set in New Orleans not LA. So much of the old world look seems to be stolen from Interview, just the fact it's set in the same city and it's all about turf wars. It looks so derivative in its scenery and so prime time drama in the acting. I did try the Vampire Diaries, I have a copy of the first book, it wasn't for me, I only have a mild respect for it having to compete with the ignorance of what people thought was its predecessor and accusing it of ripping that off. Sorry, this show and its ilk is absolutely ripping off The Vampire Chronicles, not that other thing. Even them being super subtle with the fangs and appearance. There are shades of Buffy in terms of the over the top drama, and I hated that Buffy's vampires deliberately looked more ugly and menacing. I was loyal to my series and my favourite version. Everyone else's could get the fuck out.
No comments:
Post a Comment