From a storytelling point of view - really, from any remotely objective point of view - I recognize that it's a good thing that they didn't kill werebaby. But my emotional hatred of werebaby and everything werebaby represents is sufficiently intense to override all objectivity there. ;)
I can understand why Annie reacted the way she did, though it still irritates, maybe because I'm wishing someone would have picked up on the general inconsistency? I don't know.
The Box Tunnel was really awful, no question there. It's not really that I mind them acknowledging that, it's more that it bothers me that they're acknowledging that as this really horrible, horrible thing, but not doing the same for all the other vampire murder that happens. It's the inconsistency that bothers me, the singling out of that particular atrocity as completely unforgivable basically for the sake of Mitchell's character development while kind of glossing over all the others. Like, we got all this stuff about the fallout for those victims' families, but when
( ... )
I dunno, to me it seemed like Annie specifically wanted Mitchell to give himself up and go to jail so his victims' families could have closure - it was more about the people he'd hurt than about him. And sure, there weren't equivalent easy opportunities to lock up all the other vampires, but it still seems like everyone - both the other characters and the writers - cared a lot more about Mitchell's victims than they did about anyone else's. There was this whole massive focus on the police search and the newspaper clippings about distraught families and and all that, and realistically you'd have the exact same thing going on for every other person a vampire's killed (at least until the hierarchy gets around to covering it up) but we never saw any of that
( ... )
For me, the fact that they actually faced up to dealing with Mitchell would be the only reason for me to watch the later seasons. I pretty much thought he had to die from the start and I didn't really care whether he was a predator or a junkie.
I don't really get this:
"If I accept that killing people is just a thing vampires do in this universe, as inevitable as werewolves ripping apart anyone they happen to come across at the full moon, then the Box Tunnel massacre is, while particularly unpleasant, really not a good enough reason for Mitchell and his friends to decide he needs to die. "
If one of my friends occasionally murdered scores of people, I'd damn well think it was a good enough reason for them to need to go to jail or death.
If one of my friends occasionally murdered scores of people, I'd damn well think it was a good enough reason for them to need to go to jail or death
( ... )
Basically, if murder by vampires is an evil equivalent to murder by humans, then I feel like this show should be about Annie and whoever else making a concerted effort to do something about, if not vampires in general, at least the specific vampires they know about.
This is kind of why I decided to stop watching after s2 -- I don't have much patience for the option where murder by vampires is any less evil. And I felt like the show wanted me to get involved with "moral dilemmas" that weren't, and liked the "cool" factor of having a murderous protag. But if the moral ridiculousness had remained to one side, the fuckups share a house aspect front and centre, I would probably have stuck with it.
But if the moral ridiculousness had remained to one side, the fuckups share a house aspect front and centre, I would probably have stuck with it.
Yeah, exactly. I'm sometimes willing to accept a certain amount of fucked-up (lack of) morality in my entertainment when it's not trying to take itself too seriously to begin with, but I can't handwave some things for the sake of enjoying the show and then also get on board when the show decides it wants me to take basically the same things seriously.
And yes, I think s3 would annoy you. I had hope after the first episode, but on the whole it's been a lot more like s2 than like s1, and it's ever more concerned with the (inconsistent) Moral Dilemmas and such than it is with the wacky supernatural hijinks. Which is a shame.
*sigh* The most annoying thing is that I love actual, well-done moral grey (though I appreciate that it is very difficult to write and that many people have probably been unsatisfied with my own efforts in that direction). But shows like Being Human should play to their strengths.
I am SOOOO sick of Ninajkrm310April 13 2011, 20:23:49 UTC
I feel like I've been 'Children-Of-Earthed'. I suppose it was a decent ending given that Turner has to be written out of the show so he can go to New Zealand and be a dwarf, but...I really didn't like it much. And I sure hope the BBC doesn't think I plan on watching "2 1/2 Werewolves (& a Ghost)" if they plan on having a season4. Mitchell was the only character that didn't annoy me on a regular basis. To watch George, Nina and Annie whine for an hour each week just sounds like a whole lot of not-fun. Up until season 3 I swore that SyFy couldn't do a better job, that the BBC version was the best. After having finished BBC's season 3, and SyFy's season 1, I'm going to have to revise my opinion. SyFy acually did a good job, and it got better as it went along. I really liked the finale - the characters finally seemed to gel
( ... )
Comments 10
(The comment has been removed)
I can understand why Annie reacted the way she did, though it still irritates, maybe because I'm wishing someone would have picked up on the general inconsistency? I don't know.
The Box Tunnel was really awful, no question there. It's not really that I mind them acknowledging that, it's more that it bothers me that they're acknowledging that as this really horrible, horrible thing, but not doing the same for all the other vampire murder that happens. It's the inconsistency that bothers me, the singling out of that particular atrocity as completely unforgivable basically for the sake of Mitchell's character development while kind of glossing over all the others. Like, we got all this stuff about the fallout for those victims' families, but when ( ... )
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
I don't really get this:
"If I accept that killing people is just a thing vampires do in this universe, as inevitable as werewolves ripping apart anyone they happen to come across at the full moon, then the Box Tunnel massacre is, while particularly unpleasant, really not a good enough reason for Mitchell and his friends to decide he needs to die. "
If one of my friends occasionally murdered scores of people, I'd damn well think it was a good enough reason for them to need to go to jail or death.
Reply
Reply
This is kind of why I decided to stop watching after s2 -- I don't have much patience for the option where murder by vampires is any less evil. And I felt like the show wanted me to get involved with "moral dilemmas" that weren't, and liked the "cool" factor of having a murderous protag. But if the moral ridiculousness had remained to one side, the fuckups share a house aspect front and centre, I would probably have stuck with it.
So, um. I'm guessing s3 would probably annoy me?
Reply
Yeah, exactly. I'm sometimes willing to accept a certain amount of fucked-up (lack of) morality in my entertainment when it's not trying to take itself too seriously to begin with, but I can't handwave some things for the sake of enjoying the show and then also get on board when the show decides it wants me to take basically the same things seriously.
And yes, I think s3 would annoy you. I had hope after the first episode, but on the whole it's been a lot more like s2 than like s1, and it's ever more concerned with the (inconsistent) Moral Dilemmas and such than it is with the wacky supernatural hijinks. Which is a shame.
Reply
*commiserates with you*
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment