• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Forum moderator applications are now open! Click here for details.
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

Chit-Chat: EVAN PETERS HAVE MY BABIES

Status
Not open for further replies.
13,600
Posts
15
Years
  • Age 31
  • Seen Dec 11, 2023
Nick and Greg are the only two original characters that are still around. I think Sarah came back but I haven't been following CSI at all since Grissom left. :c It just hasn't been the same since to since then I've moved on to Criminal Minds and Psych.

Speaking of Criminal Minds it's great that it was renewed! Now I just hope they don't have any problems with the actors like that did last season.
 

Mr Cat Dog

Frasier says it best
11,344
Posts
19
Years
The only one of those renewals I care about is The Good Wife. In another year, I might have cared about HIMYM or BBT, but I've just lost interest completely in both those shows, so I don't anymore. But still... yay Good Wife!
 

Cello

Tonight!
1,498
Posts
14
Years
So back in the day I used to be into a lot of indie pop/rock type stuff (I guess that's what you would call it) but I kinda stopped keeping tabs on it lately.

Does anybody know of some good, kinda unheard of, upbeat pop/rock?

An example of music i'm looking for would be Vibe by Coyote Theory, which is a band I just recently heard of:




Key word here is upbeat. I'd rather not hear the sad, heart broken songs. :P
I need something that's going to keep me pumped while i'm working on art!
 

Her

11,467
Posts
15
Years
  • Age 30
  • Seen yesterday
2 Broke Girls got renewed.
Bye.
death1.jpg
 
5,814
Posts
16
Years
  • Age 30
  • Seen May 19, 2021
So back in the day I used to be into a lot of indie pop/rock type stuff (I guess that's what you would call it) but I kinda stopped keeping tabs on it lately.

Does anybody know of some good, kinda unheard of, upbeat pop/rock?

An example of music i'm looking for would be Vibe by Coyote Theory, which is a band I just recently heard of:




Key word here is upbeat. I'd rather not hear the sad, heart broken songs. :P
I need something that's going to keep me pumped while i'm working on art!
I love these guys! This is my favorite song. c: Um, if you go in Rise Records channel on YouTube, you might find some good Pop Punk, don't know if you're looking for that. Try Transit, they're pretty good, even though I don't really listen to that kind of music.


Hands Like Houses just released their full-length album and I recommend it to EVERYONE! Don't worry, they don't scream. ;)

Here's my favorite song off the album (Matty Mullins from Memphis May Fire does guest vocals; 0:45 - 1:00):

 

Houndour2005

Banned
1,028
Posts
19
Years
Last edited:
30,928
Posts
20
Years
  • Seen Apr 2, 2023
That's the basic crux of a lot of American TV, so it shouldn't be too difficult to see why people would stop liking a show. Most shows go on until the ratings no longer merit the continued production, and this is usually because the stories and characters have become so diluted that they no longer have the spark that originally captured people's interest in the first place.

In another year, I might have cared about HIMYM or BBT, but I've just lost interest completely in both those shows, so I don't anymore.
HIMYM has been bothering me so much this season. I was like the only person in my group of friends that somehow didn't think Robin being sterile was sad. It's hard to feel bad for her when she's literally dancing about the fact that she isn't pregnant just minutes earlier in that episode. Not to mention going back to the Robin and Ted story yet again, it's just redundant at this point. Though I do like that for once it seems we might be getting a major development as far as that story goes, even if it should have come a season or two earlier.


What always springs to mind for me is Citizen Kane, influential yes, but it is just not enjoyable at all and I would definitely not watch it again. I'm always disappointed when it tops "best of all time" lists, or if modern film makers cite it as an influence. It was influential for years afterwards yes, but still?
It strikes me as a pretty good film in general, not even just as a "for its time" sort of thing. I know there are a lot of folks who don't see Citizen Kane because of its reputation, and I was kinda one of those folks, but it's a pretty cool film.

I mean, yeah, there's the context of this movie essentially being a sort of trolling of a mogul who controlled most of Hollywood at the time and it also sort of gives you a window into Orson Welles' life, but I think it's still a fairly solid and enjoyable film beyond that. Visually it's just this very dynamic piece of work that has shots (the arching down shot for instance) that continue to be impressive even compared to a lot of films today, there's a craftsmanship in there that's been lost. The opening of the film is something I could see people getting a little lost with, but it actually does a fairly good job of pulling you in. To me it's not a really good film in the artistic art house sense, it's quite an entertaining film in general and I've always found that it stands the test of time pretty great.

Either way, it can continue to be an influence because it influences film makers who influence film makers who influence film makers, so a lot of it sort of ties back to it. And in general, a lot of people do go and watch it and still find themselves being able to draw influence from it. Yeah, you shouldn't like a film just because it's a classic and it's forced on you, but at the same time, I think a lot of them are classics and influential for a reason. I think people should just watch those films whenever they get the urge to because then the perspective is probably going to be their own, not marred by bias of having people tell you it's a classic you should love.

There are a ton of classics I don't like, Casablanca, The Wizard of Oz, and Gone With the Wind that I don't find myself enjoying a lot while I think something like Black Moon Rising can be considered classic, but I think Citizen Kane is probably the definition of what a classic film should be.
 
Last edited:
3,509
Posts
15
Years
  • Age 30
  • Seen Nov 5, 2017
I mean, yeah, there's the context of this movie essentially being a sort of trolling of a mogul who controlled most of Hollywood at the time and it also sort of gives you a window into Orson Welles' life, but I think it's still a fairly solid and enjoyable film beyond that. Visually it's just this very dynamic piece of work that has shots (the arching down shot for instance) that continue to be impressive even compared to a lot of films today, there's a craftsmanship in there that's been lost. The opening of the film is something I could see people getting a little lost with, but it actually does a fairly good job of pulling you in. To me it's not a really good film in the artistic art house sense, it's quite an entertaining film in general and I've always found that it stands the test of time pretty great. Either way, it can continue to be an influence because it influences film makers who influence film makers who influence film makers, so a lot of it sort of ties back to it.
Definitely agree with you on a lot here, it just isn't what I (and a lot of people) look for in a lot of films. When I watch a film most of the time I'm looking for a balance of entertainment and artistic quality, when a film tips over the fence into one of those categories too far I just can't enjoy it. I can understand other people enjoying it, but would you say it's the #1 best film of all time?

I just feel at the time it was obviously so much more important. Now I can watch films like Persona or To Kill a Mockingbird and enjoy them so much more; those films were inspired by Citizen Kane, definitely, but when it comes to choosing a classic film to watch when you're in the 21st century, these films just seem to stand the test of time a lot better.

Going back to my Beatles analogy, it's like people grabbing the first Beatles album, because it is the first Beatles album. It's good, but everyone's real favourite is still Abbey Road or the White Album. And for an art analogy, it's the Mona Lisa of the film world; not many people would hang a replica of the Mona Lisa on their wall, but everyone appreciates it.

People look at media of the past and see in such a better light than those of the past. If Citizen Kane didn't turn out to be as important was it was, it would have been forgotten amongst a sea of countless films out there. It's also possible that half the innovative ideas credited to CK were even done beforehand, CK was just the first film to use those techniques and be recognised at the same time. This is just baseless speculating here, but it is not very unlikely seeing as such things happen often.
 
Last edited:

Her

11,467
Posts
15
Years
  • Age 30
  • Seen yesterday
I still don't see how people can lose interest in shows. When I commit to a show it's til death do us part.

Lord forbid people coming to a realization that the show they're watching is crap, or that they just don't have the energy to watch it anymore. I had that with LOST. At first I loved the show, but after the third season I just couldn't handle it anymore and got tired of trying to keep up with it's crazy plot line.
 

Shining Raichu

Expect me like you expect Jesus.
8,959
Posts
13
Years
For me, it's not about the show quality or whatever, it's about the story. Why start a story if you're eventually gonna lose interest and not even care how it ends? To be honest, most shows do begin to lose quality as the seasons go on - and that's a pretty commonly acknowledged fact. So if you go into a show with that understanding then you must know eventually it will lose quality and you will lose interest. So why invest in the first place? It's just counterintuitive to me. It means you'll be watching the first three seasons of a lot of shows and having a whole catalogue of stories without endings. Or middles, for that matter.
 
30,928
Posts
20
Years
  • Seen Apr 2, 2023
Definitely agree with you on a lot here, it just isn't what I (and a lot of people) look for in a lot of films. When I watch a film most of the time I'm looking for a balance of entertainment and artistic quality, when a film tips over the fence into one of those categories too far I just can't enjoy it. I can understand other people enjoying it, but would you say it's the #1 best film of all time?
Haha, I actually would say it's one of the best films of all time. To me it just hits all the right notes and is the template of what a good movie should be, so it becomes one of those things I try to defend a lot. (though To Kill a Mockingbird is my favorite film)

People look at media of the past and see in such a better light than those of the past. If Citizen Kane didn't turn out to be as important was it was, it would have been forgotten amongst a sea of countless films out there. It's also possible that half the innovative ideas credited to CK were even done beforehand, CK was just the first film to use those techniques and be recognised at the same time. This is just baseless speculating here, but it is not very unlikely seeing as such things happen often.
What I think made Citizen Kane stand out so much was that, yeah, you probably saw a few of its ideas done here and there, but nothing quite like it had ever been done before. The film was made during an era where Hollywood was controlled by a select few people more than ever before or ever since, so there were these unspoken rules. Filmmakers just knew there were certain things they couldn't touch and Welles said to hell with it all and did what he wanted. Welles went into this movie with a contract that essentially gave him complete artistic control, nothing like that had ever been done before.

Beyond all of this, I think it was Welles' background that did a lot to help bring fresh ideas to the film world. The guy was coming off what was essentially a career in theater, he had never actually worked in film to this extent before. A lot of his ideas were adapted from things he learned and innovated in the world of theater and they were innovative there, but on screen on was allowed to play with these ideas in ways that the theater didn't allow. He was also so paranoid that he had something historic on his hands that people would want to mess with it that he actually went to the lengths of implementing a lot of basic things like fades to black on set. He would have the set lights be turned off one by one until there was complete darkness just so he could have one more thing the film editors didn't need to touch.

And, yeah, dude was pretty...maybe arrogant isn't the right word, but he knew he was good and wanted to protect his vision.

For me, it's not about the show quality or whatever, it's about the story. Why start a story if you're eventually gonna lose interest and not even care how it ends? To be honest, most shows do begin to lose quality as the seasons go on - and that's a pretty commonly acknowledged fact. So if you go into a show with that understanding then you must know eventually it will lose quality and you will lose interest. So why invest in the first place? It's just counterintuitive to me. It means you'll be watching the first three seasons of a lot of shows and having a whole catalogue of stories without endings. Or middles, for that matter.
Nobody goes into something with the expectations that things are eventually going to lose steam and it will become a shell of its former self. I mean, yeah, there is the accepted fact that if a show is incredibly popular, it's going to be milked, but people don't expect it to become this hollow thing. At the worst, people probably accept that later seasons might not be as good as the first few, but I'm sure they don't go into them with the mindset that these stories will eventually become trash. People invest because they like what they see and they want a similar quality to continue on through the life of the show. If this wasn't the case, the TV industry would not be where it is today. It feels more counterintuitive to start off a new show and expect for it to become crap as the years go along, it's a waste of time. All of my favorite shows are ones that I've gone into with the hope that they won't lose quality, and you know what? They don't. (okay maybe that one season of 24 was pretty bad) Like, I can't honestly look at Community and feel there is ever going to come a day when the show doesn't consistently produce outstanding material.

This is the essential flaw of American TV, there are too many episodes produced per year and rather than go until the story comes to a natural end, they go until they aren't popular anymore. This is sort of why I like the way shows are done in places like Japan, a season over there is only 13 episodes and shows manage to come to natural conclusions.
 

TRIFORCE89

Guide of Darkness
8,123
Posts
19
Years
Going back to my Beatles analogy, it's like people grabbing the first Beatles album, because it is the first Beatles album. It's good, but everyone's real favourite is still Abbey Road or the White Album. And for an art analogy, it's the Mona Lisa of the film world; not many people would hang a replica of the Mona Lisa on their wall, but everyone appreciates it.
Rubber Soul is where it's at. And Pepper. And the naked version of Let It Be. But I fondness for the old days with their first album.

Anywho... I liked Citizen Kane when I watched it. It was well-crafted and while not highly entertaining, it was certainly captivating. Greatest film of all time though? I don't know. I don't think so.
 
10,769
Posts
14
Years
I really like movies and love finding good movies to watch, but I've never seen Citizen Kane. Or Casablanca, Gone With the Wind, To Kill a Mockingbird (though I've read it), and pretty much 90% of the classics. I guess I assume they are going to be overrated.

And I also prefer TV from places where they keep a limit to the episodes, like the UK and Japan. I would much rather have a 1 or 2 season show and nothing longer even it was really, really good.
 

Mr Cat Dog

Frasier says it best
11,344
Posts
19
Years
And I also prefer TV from places where they keep a limit to the episodes, like the UK and Japan. I would much rather have a 1 or 2 season show and nothing longer even it was really, really good.
I'm the opposite, in that I like TV series that are really good at 'world-building': shows that create such a vivid world in which all of the characters interact, that you could actually imagine such a place existing, even if it was very out-of-the-ordinary (e.g. Springfield from The Simpsons). Shorter shows, for the most part, don't have the freedom to do this as they're constantly all about plotplotplotplotplot and can't really expand their worlds for fear of losing the plot... so to speak. It's for this reason that I don't really like a lot of British TV; the pacing is very different to that of US TV, and British TV is a lot more plot-centric, as opposed to character-centric like US TV.

But that's just my preference, really. :D
 
10,769
Posts
14
Years
I'm the opposite, in that I like TV series that are really good at 'world-building': shows that create such a vivid world in which all of the characters interact, that you could actually imagine such a place existing, even if it was very out-of-the-ordinary (e.g. Springfield from The Simpsons). Shorter shows, for the most part, don't have the freedom to do this as they're constantly all about plotplotplotplotplot and can't really expand their worlds for fear of losing the plot... so to speak. It's for this reason that I don't really like a lot of British TV; the pacing is very different to that of US TV, and British TV is a lot more plot-centric, as opposed to character-centric like US TV.

But that's just my preference, really. :D
That's kind of what I hate about a lot of American TV: its character-centric-ness. So many shows think they only need to throw in "quirky" characters and that will make a good show (or one that will sell anyway). I can't stand those kinds of characters because they so frequently do stupid things that no one with their personality/background/etc. would do.

Plus I like plotplotplotplotplot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top