[ SECRET POST #1961 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #1961 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________



16.


__________________________________________________



17.


__________________________________________________



18.


__________________________________________________



19.


__________________________________________________



20.


__________________________________________________






Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 043 secrets from Secret Submission Post #280.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 2 - posted twice ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[maryandr.livejournal.com]

I saw Branagh only as Wallander so I can't judge, and Cumberbatch is not good, but not bad either, he's a second-rate actor, at least he was before "Sherlock", but Simm is very charismatic, every time when I see him playing I can't ever realise is he that good actor or here's something more than that, but I just can't take my eyes off a screen. And I'm not even a fan. But, here's one huge "but". They are british actors. Only this makes him better than others. Because, to be honest, when I'm watching american movies or tv shows, the only thing I can keep in my mind is "Gosh, how bad are those actors, how poor is directing or/and screenplay etc etc". And it's me who watching american movies and shows practically my entire life (because tv channels in our country prefer usa movies in 99 cases out of a 100). When I started to watch british tv shows and movies, I was stunned, really. It was so much better than everything I saw before, it was like whole new world. So I can't say even a one bad word againgt theese guys.

[(Anonymous)]

Okay, I don't get your remark about Cumberbatch. Do you think he progressed while being in Sherlock, or are you referring to his popularity? People don't have to be popular to be good actors, some make it mainstream, and some don't. That's the way the world turns. As for his skill-set, I think it was all there. If you look at the way his characters are masterfully created... The way even Sherlock as a character is masterfully created, especially comparing to him in the Pilot version -- the way he can alter himself completely for the role makes him very special in my eyes.

Yeah, I was lucky to see Simm on stage once, and was blown away. As for them being british, therefore automatically better, they are better trained, but the initial talent must still be there.
And yes, agreeing with you on british TV being tragically superior to american one by far.

OP.

(I'm from somewhere which is neither UK, nor US, btw)

[ncc-gqmf.livejournal.com]

Oh lord, I'm so tired of this silly "British things are automatically better" meme. Aren't we past that yet?

If your country is only delivering bad American TV to you, here: Breaking Bad, Mad Men, Game of Thrones, The Wire, Curb your Enthusiasm, Arrested Development, The West Wing. Seven of the best shows ever made, all American productions.

[(Anonymous)]

Lol my country does mostly deliver crap, but the internet's unlimited... No one's saying that the whole of american TV's bad, just as no one's stating that everything about british tv's high-level (*ahem* Merlin *ahem*), and I get why such generalisation can offend you. However, the level of british TV, at least from what I've seen, tends to be higher. That's all.

[ncc-gqmf.livejournal.com]

Maybe if you're only watching the first season of Misfits and like the new 90210, I guess... I'm not offended, I just think it's a ridiculous thing to say. I find the whole Anglophile thing pretty silly in general, sorry.

[(Anonymous)]

Different anon.

Quality in TV-shows is, like all things, terribly subjective though. For example: While I agree that Game of Thrones is certainly a good production, it sometimes feels like it's basically a softporn series with great costumes because of the way they tend to focus so much on the smut.
The thing is: I think a lot of people think that American TV sucks because the mass of shows produced for the US is so much higher than in the UK and as such, there automatically is a lot of trash and it's incredibly difficult to find the good stuff.

In general, I think simply based on the sheer size of the American TV-program, it's very hard to compare it to the British. But if you absolutely have to, it should be based on the percentage of good shows compared to the bad ones, not on the sole number. Having 7 great shows out of hundreds of horribly bad shows is not that great a quota.

[ncc-gqmf.livejournal.com]

It's really not that difficult to find the good stuff, though, is what I keep saying. There are certain networks like HBO and AMC that reliably generate good programming. And the fact is, while the ratio of good British TV to bad British TV may be higher than that of American TV (although keep in mind, for anyone who doesn't actually live in Britain, you're not actually seeing most of the crap on their airwaves, and it's definitely there), the best of the best American shows are, IMO, better than anything I've seen from Britain.

I just honestly feel like the people who automatically default to "It's British so it's better" just... haven't seen good media in other countries, or are so wrapped up in being Anglophiles that they don't care.

[(Anonymous)]

That, I agree with. To say "everything British is great by default, everything else sucks" sounds like they aren't exactly able or willing to give something other than British a chance and will watch anything British, no matter how sucky, on principle alone.
I think that a lot of American productions being better produced than British is definitely a matter of money. I've seen the old pilot for the Sherlock BBC series, before funding for it was vastly increased, and it sucked a lot.

[(Anonymous)]

I agree with you completely. I love good British programming myself but get super annoyed when people make this blanket statement. Just watch good US TV dramas -- and I mean really good US TV dramas (e.g. The Wire, The Sopranos, etc.) and you see that British TV has nowhere near the level of complexity that these shows are able to produce.

It's also funny because a lot of British articles I've read keep on lamenting the bad quality of TV they have in comparison with America.

[(Anonymous)]

You know, saying "all Brit shows are awesome, everything else sucks" is exactly as stupid as saying "No Brit series is as ~deep~ and ~complex~ as these selected US series".

[intrigueing.livejournal.com]

Except that one is a sweeping generalization and one is a statement of fact? I'm sure they mean so far no Brit series has been as deep and complex. Because, y'know, the British don't produce as many TV series as Americans and their series are generally shorter, cheaper etc, and therefore they haven't gotten the chance to produce something of The Wire-level awesomeness. Doesn't mean they can't. Also means they produce far less crap, btw.