Red Mosquito

But I should listen to this interview. Maybe someday.

durdencommatyler wrote:A douchebag, maybe. Never met him. But if he is, he's a douchebag that's responsible for one of greatest, if not the single greatest, television show in history. And what I would personally consider one of the few contenders for the greatest American artistic achievement since Angels in America.

Mad men? the greatest television show?

VinylGuy wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:A douchebag, maybe. Never met him. But if he is, he's a douchebag that's responsible for one of greatest, if not the single greatest, television show in history. And what I would personally consider one of the few contenders for the greatest American artistic achievement since Angels in America.

Mad men? the greatest television show?

Absolutely. And it's not even close. Though, I will in the interest of full disclosure admit that I have yet to watch The Wire. I'm told by virtually everyone that Mad Men will absolutely drop to second place once I watch that.

But, yes. Mad Men is far and away the greatest thing I've ever seen on television.

I cant feel that way with a show thats still on tv.

Maybe, with time...

durdencommatyler wrote:A douchebag, maybe. Never met him. But if he is, he's a douchebag that's responsible for one of greatest, if not the single greatest, television show in history. And what I would personally consider one of the few contenders for the greatest American artistic achievement since Angels in America.

I haven't given the show much of a chance, but I'm not saying his doucheyness has anything to do with his creative output. I just found a lot of what he said really off-putting. I hate when artists get all defensive and dismissive when people criticize their work, which he also did in the interview. That's very unflattering.

The same happened during the Fred Armisen podcast.

VinylGuy wrote:The same happened during the Fred Armisen podcast.

And the Ira Sachs episode. I love how they're all proving BEE's point about people not being able to handle criticism or negativity.

What does he mean by "visual texture"

theplatypus wrote:What does he mean by "visual texture"

I really don't know. Everything he said in the beginning of the episode sounded like the near-incoherent ramblings of a desperate windbag.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

VinylGuy wrote:The same happened during the Fred Armisen podcast.

And the Ira Sachs episode. I love how they're all proving BEE's point about people not being able to handle criticism or negativity.

Pretty much yeah...the funny thing about the fred and carrie one was that he wasnt even saying anything about them. Fred gets histerical because of Bret´s view of Zero dark thirty, even when had a point.

VinylGuy wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

VinylGuy wrote:The same happened during the Fred Armisen podcast.

And the Ira Sachs episode. I love how they're all proving BEE's point about people not being able to handle criticism or negativity.

Pretty much yeah...the funny thing about the fred and carrie one was that he wasnt even saying anything about them. Fred gets histerical because of Bret´s view of Zero dark thirty, even when had a point.

Fred's whole attitude on that episode was so bizarre and irrational that a small part of me almost wonders if it was some kind of meta prank.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:A douchebag, maybe. Never met him. But if he is, he's a douchebag that's responsible for one of greatest, if not the single greatest, television show in history. And what I would personally consider one of the few contenders for the greatest American artistic achievement since Angels in America.

I haven't given the show much of a chance, but I'm not saying his doucheyness has anything to do with his creative output. I just found a lot of what he said really off-putting. I hate when artists get all defensive and dismissive when people criticize their work, which he also did in the interview. That's very unflattering.

I totally get that. It would turn me off, too. Absolutely. Which is why I'm on the fence about listening to it. But I really should. There are a ton of artists who I respect but don't like very much as people.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

VinylGuy wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

VinylGuy wrote:The same happened during the Fred Armisen podcast.

And the Ira Sachs episode. I love how they're all proving BEE's point about people not being able to handle criticism or negativity.

Pretty much yeah...the funny thing about the fred and carrie one was that he wasnt even saying anything about them. Fred gets histerical because of Bret´s view of Zero dark thirty, even when had a point.

Fred's whole attitude on that episode was so bizarre and irrational that a small part of me almost wonders if it was some kind of meta prank.

You need to listen the Ivan Reitman episode.

I'm exactly 4.5 minutes into the Weiner/Ellis podcast and already Ellis is just dead wrong. If he's coming from a false a priori assumption, then the whole thing is going to be wrong and awful.

Also are we sure this is Bret Easton Ellis and not Jorge. They have the exact same accent.

Oh, okay. So he's not an idiot. He's just wrong. That's good to know.

He's 100% dead RIGHT bout Breaking Bad, though. Good insights. Totally agree.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:Listening to the Matthew Weiner episode now. Holy shit, this guy is hopelessly clueless. How the fuck could anyone seriously believe that fucking Boardwalk Empire has more "visual texture" than any movie and that the concept of a director being the author of a movie is an arbitrary marketing decision? I mean...goddamit. There is no hope for this guy.

Just as I suspected, you're taking this moments a bit out of context.

I don't think anything Weiner is saying regarding Boardwalk Empire's texture (he never uses the phrase "visual texture") is inaccurate. And I certainly don't have a problem with him saying that a former professor taught him that there's a history to the way movies have been marketed and credited. I don't have that knowledge myself, but it makes perfect sense. I believe he's correct. And I'm surprised you would take issue with that. Clearly film is a collaborative medium. It makes sense that, at some point, studios would want to streamline and hold someone (the director) in higher regard/responsibility than any other. Keep in mind, as I'm sure you know, he's talking about an era when studios matter way more than an artists vision, way more than a director or cinematographer or writer.

VinylGuy wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

VinylGuy wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

VinylGuy wrote:The same happened during the Fred Armisen podcast.

And the Ira Sachs episode. I love how they're all proving BEE's point about people not being able to handle criticism or negativity.

Pretty much yeah...the funny thing about the fred and carrie one was that he wasnt even saying anything about them. Fred gets histerical because of Bret´s view of Zero dark thirty, even when had a point.

Fred's whole attitude on that episode was so bizarre and irrational that a small part of me almost wonders if it was some kind of meta prank.

You need to listen the Ivan Reitman episode.

Oh I have. I've listened to every episode.

"TV is about confirming your expectations for entertainment," says Matt Weiner, speaking about TV prior to The Sopranos. And that's dead on balls accurate. And that's why TV is in a golden age. That's what Ellis is missing. Because there are a myriad shows now (and for the last decade) that have tried over and over again to defy that model. To break that mold. To defy those expectations.

And that's part of the reason why Breaking Bad was (ultimately) less fulfilling than a show like Mad Men. Because it acted like it was above all of that, but in the end it absolutely just confirmed the audiences expectations for entertainment. Still a fantastic show that I'd hold up against most movies made during the same time, but that's why it wasn't the greatest show on TV.