esteemedcolleag

Paper thin characters acting in service of a paper thin plot. The writing is definitely geared towards the lowest common denominator. Expect to get smacked in the face by every plot point while characters explain everything to you. Character motivated plot is a lost art. It is hard to suspend disbelief to get invested in the plot because of inconsistencies in character driven decisions, a paper thin plot and a very noticeable departure from realism in the violence and espionage. It is hard to make a gritty political thriller with cartoonish action - there is no tension or the feeling of the massive stakes. Nuance, fulfilling action sequences, realism, and grounded commentary are all sorely missed. As it is, I found it mindless and unentertaining. This is mediocre to poor entertainment and you could honestly pass. You could probably watch it in the background while watching another show you care about and get all the plot points.

Easily a 10/10. This is a war epic with a deep undercurrent of observational irony. Nothing hits home like the sad irony observed in the reality of war. In the end, little feels epic and there is no closure as the war has yet to rage another 17 years though as we all remember, "Mission Accomplished". However, the show is less of a dark satire or cynical humor than it is an observation of what defines modern war in the Post Vietnam era and admittedly, there may be some overlap. This is where the story's writer - Evan Wright's anti war sentiment comes in. He attempts to show that no matter the motivation or objectives, everyone in war is foolhardy. As time goes on, the marines shed their preconceptions about war and grow to despise and mistrust their leaders for their foolhardiness, yet at times these same marines expect their leaders to make such decisions on their terms as their morality reemerges and is questioned. The entire series is dripping with this sad irony. It's easy to miss some of these elements and focus on the failures of the leadership, while praising positive morality of some individuals, just like it is in war. The subculture of the Recon Marines numbs morality - for good reason, but it also magnifies the flaws in human society with its rigidity against the backdrop of war. Morality when it reawakens in war is troublesome and diverse in its presentation. This series encapsulates the experience of war in microcosm. It can be enjoyed on many levels and requires several viewings.

A worthy, equal and opposite response to Game of Thrones. A female centric show which seeks to empower but not glamorize female suffering. Expect this show to be equally as androgynistic as Game of Thrones was misogynistic. If Game of Thrones was a show seen through the male gaze, House of the Dragon is a show seen through the female gaze. We live in the age of polarization, and gender politics is as polarized of a subset as you will find. The two shows complement each other greatly in this regard. The show focuses on the female experience set in the fantasy universe of GoT. It shows female suffering at the hands of their biology, the men around them, and at the hands of other females. Childbirth, reproductive rights, the patriarchal ideal of female purity, and gender inequality are at the forefront. It definitely is a show centered around gender politics with a strong feminist message. It is somewhat ironic that it fails miserably at the Bechdel Test. I think the show succeeds at being entertaining at parts, even offering a somewhat sympathetic view of toxic masculinity and how modern feminism may mesh with and even reconcile with misogyny and traditional masculinity. In the end though there is a definite largess of male characters with irredeemable? character flaws (pedophilia, rapists, sadists, absenteeism) while female characters have some very redeemable flaws (maternal love, filial duty, extra marital romance) which are often attributed to men who manipulate or control them. It's a show with very contemporary sensibilities. Women are shown to be powerful, while their deepest flaws are attributed to men or their loyalties to men. Men who are shown in the most positive light are subservient to women. Men who are in positions of power are deeply and irredeemably flawed. I find this lack of balance both contemporary and yet tired. While it serves to make a very small number of female characters interesting, it turns the remainder of the expansive cast into mere set dressing and thus the whole setup seems very artificial. In short, a worthy, equal and opposite response to Game of Thrones. Newton's Third Law reigns supreme.