Octopus Overlords

Sure, but I assume anyone working with the cartel will be doing so until they die.

By the way, is it me or do the actors playing Jonah and Charlotte suddenly look exactly alike? I had to double check that they weren't related.

hepcat wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 12:46 pm Unless you both are just referring to how Marty first got involved in laundering money, which was unwittingly? But after he found out his partner had been doing so, it was made very clear he was being forced to continue laundering and had no choice in the matter.

Was this stated? I don't recall it, but it's possible. I thought Marty and his coworkers were doing the laundering willingly in Chicago and that Marty's only unwilling involvement came after Del killed Bruce. Marty did not know about the skimming, but I thought he was fully onboard with the laundering.

hepcat wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 12:42 pm

$iljanus wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 12:40 pm I really enjoy Ozark but I'm also ready to see the Bryde's come to a bad end if that's what's in store for them. It's not like they were forced to launder money for the Cartel.

They weren't? I thought it was pretty clear in season 1 that if they didn't, very bad things were going to happen to them.

But I also want to see Lady MacBeth get her comeuppance. And I want to see Darlene put into an Agony Booth set to 11.

Ruth I would love to see come out of this alive as she is one of the rare sympathetic characters in the show. As is Marty to some extent (his shock at his wife's increasing need for power is a highlight of this latest season).

Charlotte has become Chuck Cunningham from Happy Days lately. Jonah has taken her spot as the main kid.

Oops, that does confuse things. I just wanted to drive home the point that the Bryde’s seemed to be living this illusion of a consequence free well off suburban life funded by their choice to launder drug money before his business partner was shot in the head. I think there may have been some flashback episodes which showed his introduction to the lucrative world of creative accounting. Of course, we would have had a really short season if they decided not to continue their business relationship.

hepcat wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 12:42 pmCharlotte has become Chuck Cunningham from Happy Days lately. Jonah has taken her spot as the main kid.

This is probably my biggest criticism, character-wise. Charlotte's character made a too-fast 180º personality turn IMO.

Yeah, totally agree. That was a weird change of course.

McNutt wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 1:04 pm

hepcat wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 12:46 pm Unless you both are just referring to how Marty first got involved in laundering money, which was unwittingly? But after he found out his partner had been doing so, it was made very clear he was being forced to continue laundering and had no choice in the matter.

Was this stated? I don't recall it, but it's possible. I thought Marty and his coworkers were doing the laundering willingly in Chicago and that Marty's only unwilling involvement came after Del killed Bruce. Marty did not know about the skimming, but I thought he was fully onboard with the laundering.

That actually may be true. I seem to recall now that Marty almost took pride in being good at it before his partner got offed. But after that, he was definitely forced into continuing to do it at gunpoint, which is what I was speaking to.

Malificent wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 11:29 am
Of course, everyone's sense of disbelief will trigger differently. I love Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul because I believe that their decisions made sense to them. But there have definitely been shows where it feels like the writers aren't interested in displaying why the character got themselves into a tragic position. Instead, they're just interested in putting the character in more of them or raising the stakes without justification. Those usually get abandoned quickly.

Yes! Amen!

I feel the large part of the problem I have with Ozark is that most of the decisions are just awful. It's chaotic ineptitude. They're not surviving because they're making good decisions, they're surviving because the writers will write them out of the situation. And frankly yes, it can be entertaining to a point, but when your show is almost entirely built around that, you can only suspend disbelief so much before it becomes tiring.

Sure, the show is extremely popular for Netflix, but I was surprised to see them go on to a 3rd, let alone a 4th season. By the end of the second season, I felt they were quickly exhausting where they could go with it, and I almost didn't watch the 3rd season.

If "PENDING DOOM" was a genre, Ozark will be its poster child.

It's almost sorta "horror" in a way, so maybe PENDING DOOM is a sub genre.

In other news, Munich: The Edge of War is great, and Jeremy Irons should be nominated for an Oscar for his Neville Chamberlain portrayal.

hepcat wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 11:40 am Unlike Walking Dead where people are doing things like trying to figure out how to bring back commercial sky writing when what they need is food.

I won't say who, but one of us has co workers who go through that kind of planning. Meetings can sometimes get "challenging" when that sort of thinking surfaces.

Rumpy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 2:22 pm I feel the large part of the problem I have with Ozark is that most of the decisions are just awful. It's chaotic ineptitude. They're not surviving because they're making good decisions, they're surviving because the writers will write them out of the situation. And frankly yes, it can be entertaining to a point, but when your show is almost entirely built around that, you can only suspend disbelief so much before it becomes tiring.

Please explain how that is any different than Breaking Bad.

Rumpy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 2:22 pm
Sure, the show is extremely popular for Netflix, but I was surprised to see them go on to a 3rd, let alone a 4th season. By the end of the second season, I felt they were quickly exhausting where they could go with it, and I almost didn't watch the 3rd season.

You're in the minority as the later seasons are even more critically acclaimed than the previous ones. It's actually gotten better, not worse.

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 2:24 pm If "PENDING DOOM" was a genre, Ozark will be its poster child.

Lost in Space has entered the chat...

coopasonic wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 3:24 pm

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 2:24 pm If "PENDING DOOM" was a genre, Ozark will be its poster child.

Lost in Space has entered the chat...

DON'T LOOK UP: O hai.

hepcat wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 3:13 pm

Rumpy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 2:22 pm I feel the large part of the problem I have with Ozark is that most of the decisions are just awful. It's chaotic ineptitude. They're not surviving because they're making good decisions, they're surviving because the writers will write them out of the situation. And frankly yes, it can be entertaining to a point, but when your show is almost entirely built around that, you can only suspend disbelief so much before it becomes tiring.

Please explain how that is any different than Breaking Bad.

I've already explained a multitude of reasons for why that's the case and don't feel like repeating myself. It boils down to the fact that I don't feel that they're smart enough to pull off anything in the magnitude that they're showing. It's much different in Breaking Bad, as you have the chemistry teacher background, and the cancer diagnosis, so he's someone you can easily root for. Ozark in comparison is bad people doing bad shit, rinse and repeat and up the stakes for the next season. The other thing that Breaking Bad has is better writing that helps sell it. It's part crime drama, part psychological profile. But you really have none of that going for it in Ozark.

You don't like it and that's fine. What I'm arguing against is what I feel is your mistaken belief that the plausibility of people making bad decisions on Ozark is in any way significantly worse than what happened on Breaking Bad. You still haven't explained why you feel it is beyond just saying "I don't like it" and "I think it's dumb".

Rumpy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 4:20 pm The other thing that Breaking Bad has is better writing that helps sell it. It's part crime drama, part psychological profile. But you really have none of that going for it in Ozark.

Yes, it does. It's almost identical to BB in that respect. Hence the critical acclaim it's been getting since season 2.

But hey, we'll agree to disagree and let it go at that.

Yeah, I really don't see that comparison at all. At all.

Yes, we know. Would you give Ozark one or two timbits on a scale of one to ten?

P.S. Just for fun, google "Ozark Breaking Bad".

Yeah, I know it's popular. I was expressing disbelief that it was. But whatever.

Lets hug it out. At the end of the day, both shows exist and we can be thankful for that.

Rumpy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 4:20 pm

hepcat wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 3:13 pm

Rumpy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 2:22 pm I feel the large part of the problem I have with Ozark is that most of the decisions are just awful. It's chaotic ineptitude. They're not surviving because they're making good decisions, they're surviving because the writers will write them out of the situation. And frankly yes, it can be entertaining to a point, but when your show is almost entirely built around that, you can only suspend disbelief so much before it becomes tiring.

Please explain how that is any different than Breaking Bad.

I've already explained a multitude of reasons for why that's the case and don't feel like repeating myself. It boils down to the fact that I don't feel that they're smart enough to pull off anything in the magnitude that they're showing. It's much different in Breaking Bad, as you have the chemistry teacher background, and the cancer diagnosis, so he's someone you can easily root for. Ozark in comparison is bad people doing bad shit, rinse and repeat and up the stakes for the next season. The other thing that Breaking Bad has is better writing that helps sell it. It's part crime drama, part psychological profile. But you really have none of that going for it in Ozark.

You can easily root for Walter at first, by design. But you really need to check yourself if you're still rooting for him in the last half when he's murdered quite a few people. IIRC that's exactly what the show creator wanted to make viewers consider as the seasons progressed, and Walter progressively became a murderous, drug-dealing monster, rather than a nerdy, lovable chemistry teacher Dad. You were supposed to think "do I STILL like him? Where is the line? Murder?" Ozark DEFINITELY cribs that same challenge to the viewer's sense of right and wrong.

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 5:33 pm
You can easily root for Walter at first, by design. But you really need to check yourself if you're still rooting for him in the last half when he's murdered quite a few people.

Yeah, there's definitely that. I agree. Definitely gets darker as it goes on, especially when it's no longer about the cancer once he's been in remission but continues on the path. It's why I've said it's part crime-drama, part psychological profile. But I would say that's about where the resemblances end. In retrospect, while I do like Better Call Saul, I like it less by design, because it feels like that kind of stuff is more upfront.

One of my favorite reviews for Ozark included the line “In Ozark, it’s the women that knock”. I think that’s a fantastic point. The show is essentially Breaking Bad when you look at Marty…but it becomes more when you include the great female characters in the show. In some ways, it addresses the lack of a really strong female presence in BB (well, until Walter’s wife finally stepped up in later seasons).

Confession time: I’m hooked on the international cooking documentaries that are showing up on Netflix. I just watched a 45 minute special on Korean beef like it was A Fistful of Dollars.

Rumpy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 4:20 pm

hepcat wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 3:13 pm

Rumpy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 2:22 pm I feel the large part of the problem I have with Ozark is that most of the decisions are just awful. It's chaotic ineptitude. They're not surviving because they're making good decisions, they're surviving because the writers will write them out of the situation. And frankly yes, it can be entertaining to a point, but when your show is almost entirely built around that, you can only suspend disbelief so much before it becomes tiring.

Please explain how that is any different than Breaking Bad.

I've already explained a multitude of reasons for why that's the case and don't feel like repeating myself. It boils down to the fact that I don't feel that they're smart enough to pull off anything in the magnitude that they're showing. It's much different in Breaking Bad, as you have the chemistry teacher background, and the cancer diagnosis, so he's someone you can easily root for. Ozark in comparison is bad people doing bad shit, rinse and repeat and up the stakes for the next season. The other thing that Breaking Bad has is better writing that helps sell it. It's part crime drama, part psychological profile. But you really have none of that going for it in Ozark.

I think that the decisions they make are not that bad. I feel they are put into bad situations with no right decision and they often make the best decision but it's still a bad decision. That said, Wendy has really become vindictive and power seeking. I don't think she makes bad decisions just has decided she's going to get what she can when she can. For Marty I think it's a flawed person who is good at his core being forced to make the least bad choice he can. Wendy isn't a good person. She's a step below Darlene. Overall I think the decision making by the characters here is much better than shows like 24, The Walking Dead, and many others in the constant dread genre.
Really, the only time I can think of that Marty made a terrible decision is when he didn't take a deal with the FBI last season. This season, however, feels fabricated more than past seasons. Javi is this all knowing bugaboo who seems to be there simply to drive the plot. If they need to force something they just have Javi do it. After the tenth time it gets a bit old.

Javi is the one I was talking about earlier when i mentioned they had introduced a character who felt clichéd. Not a fan of him.

Yeah, he's a little too...perfect (I like the "all-knowing" criticism above). Note I haven't finished watching this season, so who knows what's in store for him. Hopefully something nasty.

All-knowing characters can sometimes work, if written well. But most of the time, they're not. Reminds me of the character added to Us Against You, the sequel to Frederick Bachman's Beartown. I loved Beartown, it was such a great book. I went in to the sequel excited at revisiting the characters, but then this character, a politician, showed up and destroyed everything. Beartown was fairly grounded and gritty, and the problem with the new character was that he was an annoying know-it-all and in fact played up both sides politically and manipulated everyone. That in turn changed up the atmosphere, and not in a good way, as the character would always get his way, and he became this terrible cartoony character upon the gritty backdrop, and events due to his actions ended up feeling rather forced rather than flow naturally like the original had.

My issue with Javi is that he's your typical tv network cartel lord in that he's needlessly cruel, reckless, and apparently lucky as hell. It's like they just read a book on Pablo Escobar, but skimmed past the parts that discussed how clever he could be, and said "that's Javi!".

Finished part 1 of season 4 last night. Loved it. Can't wait for part 2 now.

One of the most annoying things to me is that he is supposed to be one of the people who is in charge but does everything himself and does it alone. He has nobody with him. Wouldn't someone that high up have at least one or two people with him for protection? Just makes no sense.

I will add that in addition to seeming omniscience, he's almost omnipresent too. How many times does he come out of shadows, is sitting in a turned around chair, etc ...all the tropes. Someone should make a supercut of scenes where he pops out of nowhere and scares (which means makes him raise one and sometimes both eyebrows) Marty.

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 3:19 pm I will add that in addition to seeming omniscience, he's almost omnipresent too. How many times does he come out of shadows

I'm surprised he never showed up in Game of Thrones, the way he travels so quickly.

hepcat wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 3:26 pm

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 3:19 pm I will add that in addition to seeming omniscience, he's almost omnipresent too. How many times does he come out of shadows

I'm surprised he never showed up in Game of Thrones, the way he travels so quickly.

That PI really gets around, too!

hepcat wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 2:43 pm My issue with Javi is that he's your typical tv network cartel lord in that he's needlessly cruel, reckless, and apparently lucky as hell. It's like they just read a book on Pablo Escobar, but skimmed past the parts that discussed how clever he could be, and said "that's Javi!".

Finished part 1 of season 4 last night. Loved it. Can't wait for part 2 now.

Ahh, so in other words, someone whose luck is always is on their side. Yeah, that's annoying. Annoying for the same reasons I outlined above. I think it lessens the impact of what the others are going through. It's the 'nothing can go wrong with me, I've got luck on my side' trope.

Rumpy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 2:43 pm In other news, Munich: The Edge of War is great, and Jeremy Irons should be nominated for an Oscar for his Neville Chamberlain portrayal.

I’m watching it now. I was hoping it would be more Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, which I consider one of the greatest spy movies ever made; but it’s not really a movie about spies. It’s about regular politicians trying to stop Hitler, and a strained friendship between a German and an Englishman. It’s an historical drama. It’s good though. And Jeremy Irons can do justice to just about any role.

hepcat wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 9:53 pm

Rumpy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 2:43 pm In other news, Munich: The Edge of War is great, and Jeremy Irons should be nominated for an Oscar for his Neville Chamberlain portrayal.

I’m watching it now. I was hoping it would be more Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, which I consider one of the greatest spy movies ever made; but it’s not really a movie about spies. It’s about regular politicians trying to stop Hitler, and a strained friendship between a German and an Englishman. It’s an historical drama. It’s good though. And Jeremy Irons can do justice to just about any role.

Well, that's more or less what wartime spying was all about really. Not every spy gets action and glory, you know But yeah, agree about Jeremy Irons. And for the record, I never called it a spy movie, just a great movie

Not sure if anyone else has mentioned it but I've been watching Archive 81 and really enjoying. Slow burn horror series about a mystery concerning a fire at a residential apartment building in NYC. The story is told from the perspective of a video archivist who is trying to restore tapes that were damaged in the fire. The story jumps between him in the present and the woman who was filming in the past. If you enjoyed Hill House I think you will really like this one.

Lordnine wrote:Not sure if anyone else has mentioned it but I've been watching Archive 81 and really enjoying. Slow burn horror series about a mystery concerning a fire at a residential apartment building in NYC. The story is told from the perspective of a video archivist who is trying to restore tapes that were damaged in the fire. The story jumps between him in the present and the woman who was filming in the past. If you enjoyed Hill House I think you will really like this one.

Archive 81 is based on a podcast that started in 2016, and although I haven't watched the show yet, it seems to be based on the first season of the audio drama. It's a pretty cool story that could translate really well to tv...at least for the first season. If they keep going with an attempt at telling the stories from later seasons, it gets really wild...lots of really crazy characters and concepts that I think would be very challenging to show on TV. If they keep going and pull it off, however, it's one heck of a crazy ride.

Rumpy wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:44 pm

hepcat wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 9:53 pm

Rumpy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 2:43 pm In other news, Munich: The Edge of War is great, and Jeremy Irons should be nominated for an Oscar for his Neville Chamberlain portrayal.

I’m watching it now. I was hoping it would be more Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, which I consider one of the greatest spy movies ever made; but it’s not really a movie about spies. It’s about regular politicians trying to stop Hitler, and a strained friendship between a German and an Englishman. It’s an historical drama. It’s good though. And Jeremy Irons can do justice to just about any role.

Well, that's more or less what wartime spying was all about really. Not every spy gets action and glory, you know But yeah, agree about Jeremy Irons. And for the record, I never called it a spy movie, just a great movie

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy was definitely not about action and glory. If you haven’t seen it, you should. You have to pay attention to everything in the movie as the plot demands it. Sadly, audiences don’t like being challenged like that for the most part, so we don’t get many such films like that.

I was just hoping Munich would be more about that kind of spy craft, but I’m the one that assumed it would be so from reading the synopsis. So that’s on me. Still, it’s a very good movie.

hepcat wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 8:40 am
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy was definitely not about action and glory. If you haven’t seen it, you should. You have to pay attention to everything in the movie as the plot demands it. Sadly, audiences don’t like being challenged like that for the most part, so we don’t get many such films like that.

I was just hoping Munich would be more about that kind of spy craft, but I’m the one that assumed it would be so from reading the synopsis. So that’s on me. Still, it’s a very good movie.

Ahh Ok, yeah I guess I could see how it could be taken that way. I think it's still a spy movie, just a different way of storytelling. But yeah, it's definitely not a movie loaded with that kind of details.

Btw, If you like spy stories, check out The Spy and The Traitor by Ben Macintyre. This one is a real-life account of one of the most important spies of the Cold War era. It was an amazing read.