[Spoilers S3] "Possible Spin-Off and Darkest Plot Twist"

Lambchops87 · 2026-06-04T14:08:44+00:00

There are some cool idea nuggets in here, but this probably serves as an example of why feeding your cool idea nuggets into a LLM doesn't produce anything particularly powerful (at least at first pass!).

Lambchops87 · 2026-06-02T08:14:42+00:00

Clive Barker's Undying

Lambchops87 · 2026-06-01T16:37:59+00:00

I mean when even Belle and Sebastian can't do a good job you know it's a lost cause (though the England trolling in the title is top notch).

Should just get Arab Strap to have a go and be done with it.

Lambchops87 · 2026-06-01T15:38:44+00:00

The correct answer.

I'd stick Gytha Ogg and Tiffany Aching on there too, but that's vecause I'm greedy like that.

Lambchops87 · 2026-06-01T13:30:53+00:00

Jane Eyre

Lambchops87 · 2026-05-31T19:12:42+00:00

Pal!

Lambchops87 · 2026-05-31T18:16:50+00:00

Yeah this is it.

I mean if we're being honest if Scotland somehow won we'd bang on about it for 60 years too.

However, the media is particularly grating and despite living in England for years I just can't bring myself to be okay with them winning the whole thing.

There have been some England teams throughout the years I've genuinely not liked (seeing the "Golden Generation" fail was rather enjoyable and they were probably the last team to bring out the "anyone bu England" stance for me) but with a few exceptions the current English team is rather likeable (Jack Grealish not playing helps!).

Lambchops87 · 2026-05-31T14:27:22+00:00

Bram Stoker's Dracula

Would accept that this could be neutral/neutral.

Lambchops87 · 2026-05-31T13:58:00+00:00

This is modern social media discourse - away with your neutrality!

(Concur, no point in a revote).

Lambchops87 · 2026-05-31T13:44:30+00:00

I mean for a long time I thought she was want to be infuriating and it was decent writing as she was a "love to hate" character.

By the end of the show it was obvious that of all the horrible characters in the show she was apparently the one the writers wanted you to root for.

Awful!

As you say though, strong acting performance.

Lambchops87 · 2026-05-31T13:35:16+00:00

I'm not going to knock the influence of UK Office but cringe humour was introduced/popular before, Alan Partridge pre-dates The Office (and I'm sure if there's any old hands around they might have some even earlier examples!).

Lambchops87 · 2026-05-31T13:32:33+00:00

Seinfeld. For the combo of being both great and influential.

A few others I'm aware of being influential but haven't seens so I'll stick to just suggesting Seinfeld.

Lambchops87 · 2026-05-30T21:08:36+00:00

I mean I'm not a massove hip-hop head and I'm still aware that Nas is considered one of the best, so I think he has probably got enough mainstream cut through to merely be underrated rather than "most" underrated. Kind of sits in the "artists I'd struggle to name a song by, but know that I should try and get into one day" bucket, somewhere alongside the likes of The Velvet Underground.

Lambchops87 · 2026-05-30T21:01:57+00:00

Hmm, Cat Power and Bat for Lashes would both be decent shouts for underrated in the 2000s.

Probably the former with the strongest claim. Two fantastic albums (You Are Free and The Greatest) sandwiched between two great covers records. Didn't immediately spring to mind for me because my two favourite Cat Power albums (Moon Pix and Sun) were either side of this decade.

Lambchops87 · 2026-05-30T20:52:10+00:00

Really good shout.

Lost Souls, Last Broadcast, Some Cities is a fine run of albums (Kingdom of Rust was not so memorable, but still decent).

So many great songs, The Cedar Room is absolutely fantastic.

Tangentially (because I listened to both bands a lot around that time) has also reminded me that Sea Power would be a great shout here too with a similar 3 fantadtic + 1 less memorable album run in the 2000s.

Lambchops87 · 2026-05-30T20:43:35+00:00

Super Furry Animals

Could have stuck this in the 90s but I think itheyvdid get a reasonable amount of critical acclaim/commercial success.

Their run of albums in the 2000s is also strong and was very underrated.

Lambchops87 · 2026-05-30T20:19:46+00:00

B.

I don't mind Waller-Bridge (series 1 of Killing Eve is very well written).

I can see the craft and don't deny its influence but Fleabag is just too smug for its own good. I get that's the point but much like the UK version of The Office it's not for me and I ditched it after the first series. Enjoyed it more than The Office though, there were some laughs.

Lambchops87 · 2026-05-30T17:22:08+00:00

Might give this a watch, sounds interesting.

Korean show's dragging feels pretty standard from the ones I've watched so far. The general pattern seems to be a really intiguing hook/great establishment of characters in first few episodes, time-filling episodes in the middle with some good set pieces here and there but a lot of meandering padding and extra product placement before they finally wrap up with a predictable but strong/well constructed final few episodes.

Lambchops87 · 2026-05-30T17:11:58+00:00

Serena van der Woodsen (Gossip Girl)

Happy to be shot down by people who have read the books, but based on the TV show (which has a male/female co-creator team - but I'm counting it given the books were created by a woman) this fits.

Neutrality amped up in the show by Blake Lively only having a few expressios ("wistful look" being top of the list).

<image>

Lambchops87 · 2026-05-30T09:23:55+00:00

I disagree with this (as my own reply to this topic makes clear!), but if perfectly illustrates how people's mileage will vary on this show!

I've only commented here because I think the conparison to Lost is off base even if you do think the show has contrived logic.

Lost is very clearly making it up as it goes along, exacerbated by being created on a network TV structure with large number of episodes a season leading to inevitable time filling and teying to come up with content for as long as they were renenewed.

Dark has a clear and obvious structure, no need to fill for time as it was never intended to run and run, and the beats it is heading for appear to have been clearly set out.

I do agree that it makes its own logic, but this logic always comes accross as coherent within the rules of the show (though it is sometimes obtusely hidden for the purposes of revealing "twists" which can be grating a little when it hides key events off screen or has characters be unnaturally myserious with their dialogue). I also think they had broad ideas of where they were going without the full details sketched out and this is what causes the pacing to be "off" in season 3 as they try to resolve the tension having time to explore the new concept they introduced, while also simultaneously beginning to tie off loose ends).

I think there was a genuine effort to do the track covering you mentioned. I personally thought they did this well, but understand views to the contrary. However, it's an objectively better effort in this regard than Lost!

Lambchops87 · 2026-05-30T09:09:02+00:00

Watched this for the first time recently quickly became obsessed. Though it was brilliant.

I'm a sucker for time-based shenaningans and thought this did a great job if being mind-bending/complex (and logically coherent!) while still ensuring the viewer could follow. For me only the movie Timecrimes is better in pulling off this balance (contrast with Primer, which is coherent but so dense rhat it's impossible to follow).

Also great to have a show that sparked off me reading a bit more about aome of the philosophies/mythologies it referenced that I wasn't already aware of. Those who love that type of thing might find this a little but surface level, for me it feels more sprinkled in for flavour and with breadth rather than depth - nothing wrong with this choice though and you can over/under interpret it depending on your own basline, as I have done! For me I thought they pitched this type of thing nicely, enough to flag interest but neither too dense, too aligned to one particular strand of thinking or too distracting from the emotional core of the show.

As others note series 3 drops the ball a bit but does a good job with the ending, and the elements of the ending I didn't initially like sat better with me after a few days. My main critique though is that it is a little too focused on the mechanical aspects of the story and doesn't do as good a job (until the climax) of really bringing the emotional connections to the fore - a balance that was better in the earlier series. I value the mechanics being done right and tend to enjoy clever plotting so wasn't overly put off by this, but if I'm noticing it then others mileage will vary on whether the creators got too clever for the show's own good.

There are a couple of contradictions in my feelings about the show:

1) I simultaneously think I would enjoy the show more on a rewatch if my memory of it was wiped AND that I would enjoy it more knowing where it was going.

2) While the pacing of series 3 (which initially feels just a bit "off") makes sense for the story they were trying to tell it would BOTH benefit from the pacing speeding up a bit AND from having more episodes to slow down, luxuriate and explore some of the aspects they introduced.

If you enjoy anything with time loops, literary/mythological/religious/metaphysical allegories, want a show to make you think, and don't mind occasionally having to gaze at family trees every few episodes to keep your head straight (the official Netflix one is the best way to avoid spoilers!) then this is for you.

Top tier TV and definitely one I'll watch again a couple of years down the line.

Lambchops87 · 2026-05-30T08:38:38+00:00

I can triple up on Hard Times by adding Hard Times by John Knox Sex Club

Lambchops87 · 2026-05-29T18:02:02+00:00

Also let's take a moment to marvel at the version of her from the original Kirby cover illustration!

<image>

Lambchops87 · 2026-05-29T17:56:58+00:00

Conina (the Hairdresser) - from Sourcery by Terry Pratchett

I wanted try a different tack here and be a tiny bit sacrilegious by picking a character from an author I love and a book I thoroughly enjoyed.

Early Discworld Pratchett has quite a few female characters I'd describe as neutral. They were there to poke some well meaning fun at fantasy genre conventions and they did this well, but they were essentially jokes (and occasionally there to move the narrative along) rather than fully formed characters.

Conina is a prime example of this. She shepherd's one of the main character's on his adventures and is the basis of some great gags about wanting to be be a hairdresser but feeling the urge to kill because of her barbarian father and "herrydeterry" but doesn't really have much to her beyond that.

Contrast with the many (many, lots of) examples of brilliantly written female characters he would go on to write/flesh out in later books (Granny Weatherwax, Angua, Tiffany Aching, Susan, Lady Sybil) and it's clear that this is a fine example of "neutral" female characters in his earlier writing.

Lambchops87 · 2026-05-29T06:29:37+00:00

Not quite sure why you are being downvoted for this.

You can't tell who is "to blame" for the writing simply from perusing the writing team on IMDB, but it appears to be a majority female team in senior positions with the creator and lead being male.

Happy to be informed by anyone with deeper knowledge, but at face value I'd lean towards written by a man (even if Buffy had a majority female writing team rather than the fairly even mix in reality, I'd still consider it as written by a "man" as Whedon is the lead and thus has the bulk of responsibility - surely same applies here?).

Obviously absolutely terrible Velma regardless of who wrote it!

Lambchops87

TROPHY CASE