How is Ashes to Ashes? My partner and I have been put off by the extreme unlikelihood of the premise, even though I want more Gene Hunt. (Also, see comment below regarding the original series.)
As someone else said, A2A rewards some persistence. It has some annoying elements (inconsistent character development, ooky treatment of characters-of-color), I'm not as moved by the '80s as by the '70s, personally, and Gene gets Big Damn Hero'd far beyond what my palate can bear, but it has its own kind of weird magic. Supporting cast comes into their own, too. I recommend it, as someone who usually dislikes TV that everyone else loves to death. So there's that.
I loved Ashes to Ashes, though as others have said, it's a bit slower to get going. All the 80s stuff is very much familiar to me so that was much fun, and while the writers are a bit too much in love with Gene in the first series, it all makes sense in the end. Also, Alex Drake is fantastic.
I discovered the show when I was on vacation and channel-surfing. I clicked onto a channel and heard "Ballroom Blitz" by the Sweet, my fave band. I watched for a few minutes more and then I saw one of bcholmes's icons (http://www.dreamwidth.org/userpic/85490/119236) and I was like "Oh, THAT'S where she got that icon!" So then I had to watch the episode to see what it was about.
The show is set in 1973. I visited England in the mid-70s, when I was a teenager, and the look of the show was just as I remembered England, so I got a hit of nostalgia. They play lots of great songs from the 60s and early 70s. It's about working-class people. There's an exuberance to it. The relationship between the two main characters, Sam and Gene, is a lot of fun. The way they wove in the overarching mystery (how did Sam get into 1973?) reminded me a little bit of The Prisoner, which I liked a lot.
So that's why I liked it. Those are mostly kind of personal reasons, and I don't know whether they would add up to something appealing for you.
I loved it, but pokershaman and I both hated the very very ending, which is so clearly designed to be "what the audience wants" and not what the story calls for.
I didn't like the very very ending either, but it didn't bug me that much because I couldn't see any way to end it that was satisfactory, and so I wasn't expecting much. How do you think they should have done it?
I think I'd'a just ended it at the jump. But lots of people think lots of different things, and I'm not sure anyone is happy with exactly what happened. :-)
I think I'm probably the only person I've ever run across for whom this show didn't "click." I heard such great things about it and I really wanted to like it, but it just didn't fulfill its potential (e.g., exploring the nature of reality, states of consciousness, feelings of isolation, emotional disabilities, etc.) for me. I think maybe if it hadn't tried to so hard to be "Starsky & Hutch", I might have possibly liked it better. Then again, now that I'm old enough to not be embarrassed by such things, I had to admit that my fond childhood memories of the real "Starsky & Hutch" may have screwed my mindset a bit in terms of readiness to enjoy.
I'm glad you liked it, though. It's good to to see somebody whose thoughts I trust found it enjoyable --- gives me impetus to give it one more chance.
exploring the nature of reality, states of consciousness, feelings of isolation, emotional disabilities, etc.
If I had heard hype that it did those things really well before watching it, I would have been disappointed. It does some of them fairly well for a TV show.
I have no strong memories of Starsky & Hutch so that didn't get in my way either.
If I had heard hype that it did those things really well before watching it, I would have been disappointed.
It definitely did teach me that I had been unwittingly paying too much attention to the opinions of others -- whose criteria for what constituted "good TV", I came to realize, can differ vastly from my own despite the fact that we seem to have similar tastes in preferred types of genre --- in deciding what to spend time watching, that's for sure.
i liked the us version, too. i liked that they just took the idea and ran with it instead of just making a us dupe. i lived and breathed life on mars when it was on, and i was so disappointed by ashes to ashes, that when i got the chance to watch the american version it was a real treat.
I enjoyed Ashes to Ashes as well, but it took FAR longer for it to start setting well in my brain. It's a very different show but I think it does reward persistence.
Life on Mars though, love, love, love. (I think Gene Hunt is pretty much the definition of inappropriate crush!)
no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2011 08:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2011 04:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2011 06:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2011 07:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 10 Nov 2011 12:08 am (UTC)Good recommendation for me! :-)
no subject
Date: 10 Nov 2011 12:37 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 10 Nov 2011 05:20 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 10 Nov 2011 05:30 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2011 09:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2011 11:39 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2011 06:46 pm (UTC)The show is set in 1973. I visited England in the mid-70s, when I was a teenager, and the look of the show was just as I remembered England, so I got a hit of nostalgia. They play lots of great songs from the 60s and early 70s. It's about working-class people. There's an exuberance to it. The relationship between the two main characters, Sam and Gene, is a lot of fun. The way they wove in the overarching mystery (how did Sam get into 1973?) reminded me a little bit of The Prisoner, which I liked a lot.
So that's why I liked it. Those are mostly kind of personal reasons, and I don't know whether they would add up to something appealing for you.
Not Exactly a Spoiler
Date: 9 Nov 2011 04:02 pm (UTC)Re: Not Exactly a Spoiler
Date: 9 Nov 2011 06:49 pm (UTC)Re: Not Exactly a Spoiler
Date: 9 Nov 2011 07:10 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2011 07:23 pm (UTC)I'm glad it did end, but I wish it hadn't.
no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2011 10:27 pm (UTC)I'm glad you liked it, though. It's good to to see somebody whose thoughts I trust found it enjoyable --- gives me impetus to give it one more chance.
no subject
Date: 10 Nov 2011 12:07 am (UTC)If I had heard hype that it did those things really well before watching it, I would have been disappointed. It does some of them fairly well for a TV show.
I have no strong memories of Starsky & Hutch so that didn't get in my way either.
no subject
Date: 10 Nov 2011 01:15 am (UTC)It definitely did teach me that I had been unwittingly paying too much attention to the opinions of others -- whose criteria for what constituted "good TV", I came to realize, can differ vastly from my own despite the fact that we seem to have similar tastes in preferred types of genre --- in deciding what to spend time watching, that's for sure.
no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2011 06:18 am (UTC)We started watching Ashes to Ashes, which also has Gene in it, but it started slow and we haven't watched more yet.
no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2011 08:08 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2011 08:06 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2011 06:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2011 07:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2011 08:17 am (UTC)Life on Mars though, love, love, love. (I think Gene Hunt is pretty much the definition of inappropriate crush!)
no subject
Date: 9 Nov 2011 06:31 pm (UTC)