kyrenaika

Even true things are tainted by good storytelling. Anyone who expects accuracy from the "history" channel is naive. Very little of their content other than the basic outline of the subject matter could ever be considered anywhere near the neighborhood of accuracy. It's the old adage that losers speak the lines while winners write the books. Which is to say, they colour it to their own benefit, i.e. They lie. Maybe read a book or two, which tend not to lie quite as much, but they are also fallible, just not as glaringly so. The only ones who really know the truth are the ones who were there and they're all dead. Even the ones who managed to survive may not be the bastions of truth that they often make themselves out to be. Symbolically speaking, it doesn't matter if you're blue or red or pink or green or purple or grey or black and white, you've been lied to or taught things that may or may not be inaccurate, intentionally or unintentionally. And you may never know unless you dedicate your life to it and who's got time for that? And books are boring; too many facts get in the way of a good story. Even true things are tainted by good storytelling. Particularly by those who get to choose the story. Would Washington ever admit to being the first to betray his greatest general and friend? You won't hear that side of it unless you look. Will American soldiers who liberated France and Germany after WWII ever admit to also liberating thousands of French and German women of their innocence? Not bloody likely. The list is endless, so don't expect accuracy in film or television. Is it entertaining? The acting's fairly good and the writing is subpar, so yeah, it's somewhat entertaining. But it's not a history lesson. If you're eating a hot dog (wrapped in a fluffy bun), why would you expect it to taste like filet mignon?

Don't you get it? Self indulgent, narcissistic, nihilistic and ironically oblivious. Of course it won all the statuettes (themselves only plated facades of what they once were), it's everything that hollywood is. They're losing at all else, so they must excel in mediocrity and meaninglessness. A story of prozzies for the glitterati prozzies to warm the cockles of their hearts in a time where it's ok to be the blandest on the strand. An average story of average (albeit unrealistic) people doing average things played by average people ironically oblivious to reality. Add mediocre music and the pudding is proved. What's not to get?

What is with film makers who think that telling the end of the story in the first five minutes and then backtracking to show how it got there was ever a good idea. It is the true sign of lazy writing and a weak story. Five seasons in and they have to give in to this attitude that they have to rope the viewers in with an exciting start? Did everybody in Hollywood forget how to tell a compelling story? One of the things that make shows worth watching is wondering what could happen next. If they give it away at the start, there's nothing to wonder about, no curiosity, so what's the point? And I'm not one of those people who think that where the story ends is either good or bad or a betrayal of the fans or anything like that. It seems like a natural progression for where the story goes. The true betrayal is that they put it at the beginning, where it doesn't belong. Even if real world decisions have to be made around the availability of actors, a good writing team can work around such things.

It's almost as if the detractors of the show took over the production and wanted viewers to turn it off.

Destroyers of joy. A sign of the times.