The Official Good Television Thread

[rms]

whether or not you think that has merit, why are you still watching past season 1? that was clearly depicted in the first few episodes. what left is there to gain on that front?

this seems to be the clear direction of the show, the "battle" of the family

 

[Einherjar86]

Because it's entertaining as hell, that's why.

 

[rms]

Because it's entertaining as hell, that's why.

wack

But we can follow the narrative and not get lured into empathizing with the characters, and I don't think the show asks us to. It lets viewers wallow in the simultaneous unlikability and weird endearment of every character (with the exception of Logan).

ain't nobody asking you to sympathize with anyone in the Sopranos, but you sure as shit didn't take it that way

and reading this shit seems like most people are enjoying the drama of the family, not the way its depicted. however you want to quantify general consensus regarding a show

https://www.reddit.com/r/television/comments/hl0u9f/succession_is_one_of_the_best_shows_i_have_ever/

https://www.reddit.com/r/Succession...cession_is_quietly_becoming_the_best_show_on/

 

[Einherjar86]

wack

ain't nobody asking you to sympathize with anyone in the Sopranos, but you sure as shit didn't take it that way /

Again, I disagree--but I'll try to finish the show and maybe I'll change my mind.

As I see it so far, Tony Soprano is in the vein of Don Draper and Walter White: bad people who nonetheless elicit our support. People might think Walter White is a dick, but no one roots for Hank. For lack of a better word, these are shows about anti-heroes, and anti-heroes work because on some level we identify with them. They're gravitational centers around whom all other characters and events orbit.

By contrast, Succession asks you to root for everyone and no one. In one scene you want Kendall to take down his father and in the next you're whooping at Logan's alpha-predation. There's no reconciliation because there are no heroes and no villains. Everyone's a shark circling the sinking ship. The gravitational center is the fucking dumpster fire of high finance capitalism.

 

[CiG]

Funny because I thought Walter White was a cunt and always rooted for Hank, and I can't stand Don Draper either.

 

[Einherjar86]

Funny because I thought Walter White was a cunt and always rooted for Hank, and I can't stand Don Draper either.

Somehow I don’t think you’re in the majority.

 

[CiG]

Oh I agree, for sure.

 

[rms]

if you caught this earlier, I edited it to be less catty

Succession asks you to root for everyone and no one.

haha well i'm glad we're admitting there's people worth rootin' for in Succession! That's what I wasn't interested in, didn't like or care for anyone.

People might think Walter White is a dick, but no one roots for Hank

I didn't watch Mad Men but I don't think there's anyone worth "rooting" for in either direction in Sopranos. I'm pretty sure by season 2, Tony has cheated on his wife, killed people for the lowest of reasons, been outwardly racist, and has neglected his family for his own ego. I think he has a likeable quality that keeps you watching him & the show, but to root for him? I don't think I ever had that inclination. And I sure as shit didn't like Chris as much nor root for him throughout the show, and I think he's closer to that portrayal than Tony is

But Walter White, I wonder how many people re-watch Breaking Bad. When I did for my second watch, he's a pretty shit character a lot earlier than I remember on. Quickly drops his health insurance mantra for his own ego, as well. And I think we don't root against him (as in Hank's role) because we simply don't see his destruction. We see conflict with even worse people and a poorly demonstrated family life...which I think is a downside to the show

 

[Einherjar86]

I didn't catch your earlier post, so no sweat.

Maybe "rooting" isn't the right word; I'm using it pretty colloquially. I really just mean that the effect of successful shows like these is to make you want to see the characters more despite disliking them--sometimes deeply. In Succession, I would want to socialize with none of these people; and yet I want to see more of their drama. I dislike everyone one of them and yet want to see some of them best the others (and then in the following episode I'll want to see them bested).

In Breaking Bad and The Sopranos, there isn't much in the way of shifting viewers' allegiances away from the protagonists. Walter White is a shitty person from early on; but as you say, the show pitches him into conflict with "even worse people." To the show's credit, it would probably be boring to watch a morally superior and virtuous family man beat up drug dealers for six whole seasons or whatever. Watching awful people can be immensely entertaining. But these shows operate by wedding viewers' attentions to a central, singular character, generally speaking. And Mad Men and Breaking Bad in particular toy with the notion of redemption toward their conclusions.

Succession doesn't care about capturing overwhelming viewer support for a sole character. It works as satire because it undercuts everything while still making viewers want to see the perpetually downward spiral.

 

[no country for old wainds]

man, i don’t agree with you guys about breaking bad at all. i’ve never seen anything in either tv or cinema that incrementally changes the viewer’s perspective on its protagonist so thoroughly, that quality is its calling card for me and what makes it so uniquely uncomfortable to watch.

but i guess it does invest you in a single character whether the response is a positive one or not, so maybe that separates it from something like succession which i haven’t seen.

 

[rms]

I dislike everyone one of them and yet want to see some of them best the others

this just feels at odds with itself but probably no point in going on about Succession

I really just mean that the effect of successful shows like these is to make you want to see the characters more despite disliking them--sometimes deeply.

feels like we could talk about this being one of the main intentions Simon created The Wire

i’ve never seen anything in either tv or cinema that incrementally changes the viewer’s perspective on its protagonist so thoroughly

thorough hmm

 

[CiG]

man, i don’t agree with you guys about breaking bad at all. i’ve never seen anything in either tv or cinema that incrementally changes the viewer’s perspective on its protagonist so thoroughly, that quality is its calling card for me and what makes it so uniquely uncomfortable to watch.

but i guess it does invest you in a single character whether the response is a positive one or not, so maybe that separates it from something like succession which i haven’t seen.

It incrementally changed my perspective from something positive to something negative. Not in a way that makes me dislike the show, I love Breaking Bad, I just "incrementally" found myself rooting for Walt less and less.

 

[no country for old wainds]

i think we're on a similar page, but i'd put it a slightly different way: i don't stop rooting for him so much as i start feeling like a piece of shit for doing so. it really exploited my identification with the character in an uncomfortable way, creating a lot of self-doubt and guilty complicity, mostly because the multi-season transition is so slow it really sneaks up on you. that he's contrasted with even worse people is just a strategy to suck you in so it can bite you later IMO, and his 'redemption' is a conflicted one to say the least. the fact that in hindsight he's actually a dick from the start is part of what makes it great, exposing how easily one can buy into and romanticise such characters. i think many iconic heroes of cinema/tv display similarly unpleasant qualities if you approach them with a more critical eye.

 

[CiG]

Honestly it's been so long that I barely remember why I slowly disliked Walter, so I decided to rewatch Breaking Bad and got started on that tonight. I'm interested to see if my mind will change on this.

 

[Einherjar86]

i think we're on a similar page, but i'd put it a slightly different way: i don't stop rooting for him so much as i start feeling like a piece of shit for doing so. it really exploited my identification with the character in an uncomfortable way, creating a lot of self-doubt and guilty complicity, mostly because the multi-season transition is so slow it really sneaks up on you.

This reads like a more nuanced and lucid version of what I was trying to say. The show does elicit our support and concern for him, but does so in a way that makes us increasingly conscious of his manipulative qualities.

Again, with shows wherein there's a central character that grounds the narrative development (Tony Soprano, Don Draper, Walter White, etc.), I think it's very difficult to convince an audience to go along for multiple seasons without crafting an empathetic bridge. Even if we realize a character's disreputability, that doesn't warrant our dissociation; and that speaks to the narrative strength of shows like Breaking Bad.

Succession is entirely different in tone in that it's not a character study. It's uninterested in exploring the psychological depth of its protagonists and far more interested in the absurdity of their lives and relationships. Which is why I would classify it as satire, unlike Breaking Bad et al.

 

[Vegard Pompey]

I find myself "rooting" for Walter because for as terrible of a person as he reveals himself to be (and to have been all along) there's a clear element of self-actualization to his arc. I want to see this downtrodden man become a feared drug kingpin, even though it has disastrous consequences for everyone around him.

It's interesting to me how differently this kind of character progression is handled in Better Call Saul. With every step that Jimmy McGill takes towards becoming Saul Goodman, I wince (gilligan) because it feels like something of value is lost. Jimmy could've led a good life on the right side of the law. With Walt, there was only ever Heisenberg or mediocrity.

 

[CiG]

This is why I think Better Call Saul is a slightly better show. I'm more invested in Jimmy and his choices, Walt is like an "alpha" fantasy for "betas" (I don't mean that as an insult to anybody) and because of his health he really doesn't have anything to lose anyway.

On the other hand, it's easier to relate to Jimmy because he's just a (seemingly) regular person who is constantly fucking up, whereas I don't know if you can truly relate to Walt's actions without being terminally ill. I know what I'd be willing to do to make sure my family is okay after I'm gone, but not if I thought I'd be dead within a year.

 

[Vegard Pompey]

I would agree that Better Call Saul is a better drama, because Jimmy, Kim and Chuck are arguably more complicated than any characters in Breaking Bad. But I still think Breaking Bad is the only resoundingly successful execution of the thriller genre in the medium of television, so when people say The Sopranos/Better Call Saul/The Wire/whatever other canonized TV show is better, I get where they're coming from but I also think it's in some ways an invalid comparison. Breaking Bad is still unmatched in what it does best. I went through a brief disillusionment with it when it first ended because I didn't love the ending (still don't) but nowadays I've come back around to regarding it a 10/10 masterpiece even if it didn't fully stick the landing.

Slight tangent I know but I feel like it became a hip thing at some point to say that Better Call Saul is better and I've been wanting to get my rebuttal off my chest.

 

[CiG]

Not much of a rebuttal mate. Also my experience has been the opposite, a lot of people I talk to who loved Breaking Bad call Better Call Saul boring.

But Better Call Saul hasn't finished yet, the way it ends could completely change my view of which show I prefer.

 

[rms]

But I still think Breaking Bad is the only resoundingly successful execution of the thriller genre in the medium of television,

thriller? feel like that isn't appropriate for 80% of the show