When Robert Jebediah Freeman decides to move to the predominantly white suburbia of Woodcrest, to live out his twilight years in peace and quiet, his grandsons, Huey and Riley are somewhat less than enthusiastic.
This is the basis for the animated series based on the comic of the same name, by Aaron McGruder.
Huey, the 10 year old revolutionary activist, is distraught to live so far away from the “real struggle”, among rich white people, who usually proves to be ignorant in regards to racial matters. With a perceptive eye and a venomous toungue, he serves as the main narrator of the series.
The 8 year old Riley, on the other hand, is the complete opposite, caring nothing for his brother’s revolutionary ideals, valuing in stead the ideals of “thug life”, and idolizing Tony “Scarface” Montana and various gangsta rappers.
Granddad is a former civil rights activist, and has been affiliated with prominent figures such as Martin Luther King Jr, Malcolm X and Rosa Parks. However, he has left his days of activism behind, wishing only to fit in, and along with Riley merely scoffs at Huey’s activism.
Other characters include their black neighbor Tom DuBois, his white wife, Sarah and their bi-racial daughter, Jazmine. Ed Wuncler Sr, a capitalist who’d give Ebenezer Scrooge a run for his money, Ed Wuncler III and Gin Rummy, two gun-loving “wiggas” (And a parody of George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld.), and Uncle Ruckus, a self-loathing African-American, with nothing but contempt for the black man, and admiration for the white man.
The Boondocks is a highly satirical and politically incorrect show, that raises issues like racism, discrimination, social structure and foreign politics without mercy. Though you would think that the show would be most critical against whites, and “white culture”, the most venomous of criticism is actually directed at modern African-American culture. Aaron McGruder does not shy away from the most controversial topics, keeps the show up to date to counter his own critics.
The show features numerous references which may or may not be known to you. One of the reasons (I think) for why the strip stopped running in the Norwegian issue of Gary Larson’s Far Side, was the staggering amount of footnotes, which was a result of American politics and popular culture references unknown to most non-Americans. However, this has been lessened in the series, and most references should hit home.
If you are a fan of the comic strip, you will note that there are some differences in the series. Some of the main differences are the exclusion of Huey’s best friend, Caeser (Although, there are rumors of his introduction in a third season) the more prominent focus on Riley and Granddad, the inclusion of characters such as Uncle Ruckus, Ed Wuncler Sr, Ed Wuncler III and Gin Rummy, and the lack of focus on Jazmine’s struggle with racial identity.
The Boondocks avoids the “moral at the end” syndrome (Where everyone “gets it”, or everything “works out” at the end) that plagues so many shows these days. It refrains from the childishness that is unfortunately prominent in shows like “South Park” and “The Simpsons”.
These elements, combined with an excellent soundtrack, and superb animations, partially inspired by Japanese anime (But without the childish over-exaggeration that taints many anime shows), makes The Boondocks the best animated show. Ever.
Among my favorite episodes are “Return of the King”, “Granddad’s Fight” and “The Trial of R. Kelly”.
Anyway, I can whole-heartedly recommend this show, along with the comic strip, and I assure you it will be worth your while. The books can be found at Outland (At least the one in Bergen).
Free Jolly Jenkins!
I’m a little unsure – a political comedy show where two of the main characters are under eleven years of age? That sounds… I don’t know what that sounds like, but I’m not sure I’m attracted to it.
The other stuff you write about it, though, really seems interesting – for instance, South Park and Simpsons’ childishness has always bugged me a lot, as does the over-exaggerations of anime, so this show having neither is actually a huge draw. And the lack of end-morals sounds refreshing.
“I’m a little unsure – a political comedy show where two of the main characters are under eleven years of age? That sounds… I don’t know what that sounds like, but I’m not sure I’m attracted to it.”
I probably should have elaborated on that issue. Despite his age, Huey Freeman possesses an intelligence and perceptiveness of a grown up with an above average IQ. He does not possess the naivety of a child’s mind (Or an adult’s mind either, for that matter), and does not view the world through rose-tinted glasses.
He is very concerned with politics, and highly critical of the current social structure, modern African American culture and the general state of the country.
Huey is the voice of reason throughout the series, and also the voice of McGruder’s sharp critique. A skeptic by nature, Huey is very cynical, and never smiles, a stark contrast to fellow 10 year old, Jazmine’s, naive and positive nature.
If I remember correctly, one of his first lines in the series was: “Jesus was Black, Reagan was the devil, and the government lied to you about 9/11!” shouted at a Republican garden party.
“The other stuff you write about it, though, really seems interesting – for instance, South Park and Simpsons’ childishness has always bugged me a lot, as does the over-exaggerations of anime, so this show having neither is actually a huge draw. And the lack of end-morals sounds refreshing.”
I’m glad it sounds appealing. I hate watching what appears to be a good anime, just to have it ruined when the main character’s face suddenly transforms into something a 6 year old could have drawn, all to underline a simple emotion and reaction.
“If I remember correctly, one of his first lines in the series was: “Jesus was Black, Reagan was the devil, and the government lied to you about 9/11!” shouted at a Republican garden party.”
That sounds… like a rather meaningless pasttime for someone intelligent and with a distinct lack of naivete and more like something an attention-starved idealist with little grounding would do. But I guess it might make more sense in context. Funny scenario, though, I’ll admit that.
” I hate watching what appears to be a good anime, just to have it ruined when the main character’s face suddenly transforms into something a 6 year old could have drawn, all to underline a simple emotion and reaction.”
Yup. It’s the primary and main why I’ve never really watched any mentionable amounts of it.
One thing I’m reacting to here, though – if the kid’s so smart and cynical, why make him a ten-year-old at all? Doesn’t that just detract from the believability of the character? Or is his young age a major factor in some way or other?
Also, what’s the ongoing plot of the show – or is there none, following a more episodic pattern of standalone stories?
“That sounds… like a rather meaningless pasttime for someone intelligent and with a distinct lack of naivete and more like something an attention-starved idealist with little grounding would do. But I guess it might make more sense in context. Funny scenario, though, I’ll admit that.”
Aye, the context was actually a dream he had (Though they in the same episode attend a similar garden party, this incident did not occur, as far as I remember).
“One thing I’m reacting to here, though – if the kid’s so smart and cynical, why make him a ten-year-old at all? Doesn’t that just detract from the believability of the character? Or is his young age a major factor in some way or other?”
Why exactly Huey is a as young as he is, is difficult for me to know, as I don’t know what McGruder thought when he created the comic. His age plays a factor, of course, as the entire premise for the comic was that the family moved to Woodcrest, against the will of Huey and Riley.
He could of course have created them as teens in stead, but the believability would not increase much, and you’d have the whole hormone issue to take into account. All in all, I think it would have been an entirely different comic.
I could offer several different theories, but to mention a few: McGruder may have intended Huey’s age to underline the situation and problem of not being taken seriously and not being heard. Or that in a a world such as ours, it takes someone uncorrupted and not yet tainted, to see the world of what it is. He may also have created it this way to make it morer interesting, or funnier.
It’s difficult to say, I think it would be a whole different comic/tv-show if Huey had been a grown up, and taken the sting out of Riley’s gangster wanna-bee attitude.
“Also, what’s the ongoing plot of the show – or is there none, following a more episodic pattern of standalone stories?”
It’s more or less standalone. Characters will sometimes make references to incidents occurs in earlier episodes. And some characters who only seems to appear in one episode, sometimes makes appearances in later episodes, often as a continuity of the latter episode’s plot.
But mostly it contains standalone episodes.
Here are two clips I found on youtube: Nigga Moment, Riley Protest, Uncle Ruckus
and The R. Kelly Trial.
Your thoughts on the teen-issue and also the whole not being heard-bit makes sense. You know, I think you’re talking me into trying this out one day. Not very soon, probably, but maybe at some point this year or the next.
I’ll check out one or two of those clips (If I end up checking it out, best to spoil as little as possible) tonight. Thanks!
And thanks for the smashing review and taking the time to answer my needless questions!
Watched the last two of those links now. I get what the show is more, now, I think. Have to say though, I fail to see the attraction. Isn’t watching a show showing how fucked up people are without any ongoing plots or character-arcs to speak of a little, well, masochistic? I mean, it’s not like this is enlightenment – anybody willing to watch this show already accepts that the world is like this, or they wouldn’t bother to watch it. And if the show just illustrates it and does neither build ongoing stories out of it nor moralize upon it, what’s the key attraction that keeps one watching? (Not critizising, honestly asking, I’m sure there *is* an attraction and would like to know what it is)
I mean – watching people be morons and bastards and being shown that’s just how it is and how it’ll keep being, how is that enjoyable? Regardless of how well it is shown?
I fail to see the masochism in watching a this show. Yes, it shows how things don’t always work out, that people don’t always learn from their mistakes, that people often choose to close their eyes to the truth, and that things don’t always have a happy ending. To add rose-tinted goggles, a feel-good mood, and and unrealistic amount of happy endings would, in my oppinion, strip the show of its edge. The show doesn’t say that nothing ever changes, or that there is no hope, and existence is futile. All it does is portray a more grim and realistic picture of society. This may cause anger to the viewer, but anger is often necessary to take action. Hell, how are we supposed to progress if we’re constantly feeling so damned good about ourselves?
The issue of enlightenment reminds me of good ‘ol Bill Hicks. I ask myself, why does he continue to be such a popular comedian, even 12 years after his death? Hell, why do I enjoy listening to his shows at all? I mean, his political views are something that most of his fans already agree with, the essence of what he says is already known to them. Then it hits me, it’s not necessarily what he says, but how he says it. The arguments change. The message stays the same.
With Boondocks, it’s a combination of message, different angles and points, and the way it is told.
The key attraction? Entertainment. Pure and simple. I mean, that is the first and foremost reason why we indulge ourselves in books, films, tv-shows and computer/video games, right? Comedies for the laughs, thrillers for the excitements, horrors for the frights etc. In the end, we all want to entertained, and Boondocks succeeds in this.
To me, Boondocks offers a perfect blend of political satire, social critisism, popular culture references and deadly humor that has provided me with tons of laughs.
Boondocks succeeds with a vengeance in entertaining me, with both comedy as well as broadening my mind. And this is my main enjoyment and attraction to the show.
“And thanks for the smashing review and taking the time to answer my needless questions!”
Always a pleasure
Yeah, I get the key attraction is entertainment – the thing is, from the two clips I watched, I kind of got the impression that the show’s just about illustrating how stupid and/or horrible a lot of things are in the world/with people, and if there’d been an on-going story to make the characters change (not necessarily for the better!) then I’d see the draw in watching that – for character-development, for building relationships with the people on-screen, to see what will happen to them and to care about what does. But if it is, as you say, a stand-alone-episode-show where things mostly get reset to status quo at the end of each episode, then obviously the show doesn’t do that. Which means it must have something happening in each single episode that makes me interested beyond the general concept. If the show’s setting is a constant, and it’s realistic so you can’t have the Simpsons/Duckburg “the city blows up in the end!”-stuff going on and have everything reset the next day, and comedy isn’t a big part of the show… I don’t know, it just to me seems like all the draws of a realistic and serious show involves it getting to develop and build on itself into longer and deeper stories. I obviously have no idea if that’d apply to this show or not, it’s just a general “wait, what?”-feeling I get from hearing about the show.
Because the episodic standalone-thing may work a little bit when it comes to shows where comedy or shallow action or feel-good-plots is the main stuff. But when you want to make a serious, realistic show about darker things where stuff doesn’t necessarily turn out alright, then not having an ongoing continuity sounds a little depressing. Why would I watch if I know nothing changes – for better or worse – for the main characters at the end of the episode if all the show is about is the real and serious issues the characters face?
I’m sorry, I’m coming off as all negative, I’m not, I’m just piqued at how this works. I don’t think I’ve ever heard of a realistic, politically loaded show that doesn’t rely heavily on character- and story-arcs over the course of many episodes or even seasons. (Take, say, “The Sopranos”, “Battlestar Galactica” or “The Wire” and see how well they’d work with only standalone stories)
You’re right, there is not an on-going story (At least not in these sense you’re thinking of, I believe), though there is some development in characters, albeit a minor one. Such as the relationship between Huey and Jazmine appears to be changing, and incidents that occurs in earlier episodes sometimes have repercussions in later episodes.
It does not have the whole “Simpsons/Duckburg” thing, though comedy is a big part of the show, as it is a comedic show, intended to make you laugh and think at the same time.
“I don’t know, it just to me seems like all the draws of a realistic and serious show involves it getting to develop and build on itself into longer and deeper stories.”
Well, it would be difficult to tackle as many issues if the the show kept a plot continuity. And keeping a show satirical, political, character developing with ongoing plot continuity all at the same time, would be extremely hard.
If continuity is one of your main attraction in a humorous show, than “Entourage” may suit you better, though it very seldom makes political references.
Why you would watch this show? Well, why do we watch shows like “The IT Crowd”, “Blackadder”, or “Black Books”? It makes us laugh, which is what Boondocks does, as well as broadening our minds along the way. We seek out different shows for different reasons. And it’s pretty hard to be depressed when you’re laughing out loud.
I can’t say for sure about the character development until I have done a re-watch. What I can say, though, is that it’s not all grim and bleak, I can recall several episodes that don’t carry too much of a cynical message. At least one of them even has a happy ending(!). In the end, I don’t think Boondocks will leave you with a dark mood, because it will most likely make you laugh, amuse you, and generally cause you to have a good time watching it.
Standalone episodes would not work well at all with shows like “The Wire”, “Battlestar Galactica” and “The Sopranos” (Something we have already witnessed in BSG), because plot continuity and character development is one of the main reasons why we are attracted to these shows. Comparing
“The Wire” with Boondocks would be unfair, as these are two completely different shows, that we seek out for completely different reasons.
Yeah, I think the problem with my reaction here is just that comedy was mostly absent in the two clips I watched – if the comedy-element is stronger in your average scene, then I see more easily how the show works.
Thanks for all the extensive replying. I might check this out at some point.
“Yeah, I think the problem with my reaction here is just that comedy was mostly absent in the two clips I watched – if the comedy-element is stronger in your average scene, then I see more easily how the show works.”
Well, it’s all in th eye of the beholder, I suppose. But if I remember correctly, the comedy element is generally stronger.
“Thanks for all the extensive replying. I might check this out at some point.”
No problem. I hope you enjoy it if you decide to give it a go.
I might. There’s a lot of other shows higher on my to-try-list, though. This summer I’ll get up to date on “How I Met Your Mother” as well as probably start trying out “Dexter” and “Tru Calling”. I’ve also recently started watching “Brisco County Jr.”, and it’s fun so I think I’ll probably keep watching it through. I’m in a similar situation with “The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles”, but that one’s a good bit less fun, so I might bail out after a while.
When I’m done with those, which takes some time as I watch a lot of current shows (BSG, Scrubs, Prison Break, 24, Lost, Chuck, Reaper, Smallville and The Tudors) in addition, my plans are fuzzy, but I’m likely to finally get around to do a full watch-through of “Monty Python’s Flying Circus” (never watched it from end to end, so there might be scores of episodes I’ve never seen without even knowing it) and “Batman: The Animated Series” and it’s sister-series and spin-offs (with which I’m in the same situation.
And THEN, I’ll probably keep going on my List (last time I posted the whole thing was April: http://my.opera.com/Loki%20Aesir/blog/show-list-2). On which, now, will be The Boondocks.
That’s quite a formidable list. How you find the time to keep up with your studies between all the shows you are watching is beyond me.
Dexter is probably one of the best tv-shows I have seen, keeping shows like The Wire and The Sopranos company “up there”. I might write a post on it sometime.
I am currently watching Lost, and loving it, despite my initial prejudice against the show.
Me and a friend have a very strange and ritualistic relationship to Prison Break. It is forbidden to download it, and also forbidden to watch it in less then 1 weekend. We’re pretty weird.
T\The rest of the shows are mostly unknown to me, except for Flying Circus, and 24, which I have watched season 1 of, back when it aired on TV2 oh so many summers ago.
On your to-try list, the only shows I am familiar with (Apart from Dexter) are Entourage, which I love, Red Dwarf and The Pretender, both are shows that I haven’t seen in almost 10 years, but vaguely remember that were good.
I have also seen a few episodes of The Shield, which seemed decent, despite the fact that I don’t normally like cop-shows.
EDIT: By the way, seeing “Adebisi” from “Oz” in the role of the compassionate and (relatively) sane Mr. Eko nearly made by eyeballs leap out of their sockets.
“That’s quite a formidable list. How you find the time to keep up with your studies between all the shows you are watching is beyond me. ”
Oh, that’s because I do nothing but watch shows for fun these days. I don’t read fiction, I don’t socialize, I don’t watch TV or read newspapers, or any of that other stuff people do with their spare time. I surf the Net a bit, and I watch shows. It’s sad, really, but that’s what it’s come to. Summers and Christmas being the main exceptions, because I then get far enough away from curricular activities to want to read for fun again.
This summer I’ll get further ahead, though, I’m visiting my girlfriend and seeing as she’ll be at work every day, that means I’ll probably watch an episode or two of something every day plus whatever I watch with her in the evenings.
I don’t normally like cop-shows either – The Wire suffered long “not yet”-prioritizing over that – but people say The Shield is supposedly good. Not The Wire-good, but good.
I haven’t seen “Oz”, but Mr. Eko was fun. “Lost” is a show I’m ambigous about. It is nowhere close to deserve the hype, but parts of season one (the brilliant “Walkabout” in particular) WAS pretty awesome, there’s no denying that, and while the average quality fell considerably in seasons 2 and 3, 4 has been constantly blowing me away, and it’s actually the current show I look the most forward to after BSG. It’s really quite shocking how much better the average quality-level of season 4 is compared to 3 or 2. (Which both had good episodes, but unlike 4 was sprinkled with less-than-episodes as well) And if I remember correctly, I think it’s probably better than 1, too, though the difference is much smaller.
That list of mine of current shows missed “Heroes”, by the way, I’m realizing. (“Current” meaning “not cancelled”, a lot of those are obviously not currently airing but will again at some point)
“24″ has probably never again been at the level of its first season, as the basic concept worked the most cleanly and well in it for obvious reasons. But despite some less-than-ideal seasons, I still find it to be an entertaining show – it’s got a lot of the same virtues and flaws as “Prison Break” does, though with somewhat less ongoing stories from season to season. Also, there’s a good bit of Whedon-related people involved behind the camera on that show by now, so I’m half-watching for loyalty and to get to smile whenever they throw in small references in the show or grin while (mis)credting them with whatever the show does well.
Finally, find time for my studies, well, er, let’s hope I do.
I have been in similar situations myself with shows, but most prominently, computer gaming. It depends on the company, if I’m alone, I often take breaks between episodes (Unless I am watching some of the shows residing at the top of my list), to either read a comic/book or spending time of the net.
“This summer I’ll get further ahead, though, I’m visiting my girlfriend and seeing as she’ll be at work every day, that means I’ll probably watch an episode or two of something every day plus whatever I watch with her in the evenings.”
A girlfriend that shares your taste in tv-shows? I didn’t know that was even allowed! Damn, I’ve been missing out.
“I don’t normally like cop-shows either – The Wire suffered long “not yet”-prioritizing over that – but people say The Shield is supposedly good. Not The Wire-good, but good.”
Yeah, I thought the same thing, because I thought it was a pure cop-show (Like NYPD Blue), in stead of a show that is actually more of depiction of environment, institutions and lifestyles etc, with focus on the police and the criminals.
And very few shows are The Wire-good.
“I haven’t seen “Oz”, but Mr. Eko was fun. “Lost” is a show I’m ambigous about. It is nowhere close to deserve the hype, but parts of season one (the brilliant “Walkabout” in particular) WAS pretty awesome, there’s no denying that, and while the average quality fell considerably in seasons 2 and 3, 4 has been constantly blowing me away, and it’s actually the current show I look the most forward to after BSG.”
I think one of the major problems with “Lost” is that the mysteries exceed their revelations. I have a gruesome suspicion that when all the loose threads are tied up, and the the great mysteries are revealed, I will be left with “This is fucking it!?” feeling.
Though I have decided to focus on my current positive enjoyment of the series, which is enormous. I have always held a torch for these “mystery” shows, but realise that it is extremely difficult to keep latter seasons pn par with the standard of the first ones (Which was evident in my beloved Carnivàle).
““24″ has probably never again been at the level of its first season, as the basic concept worked the most cleanly and well in it for obvious reasons. But despite some less-than-ideal seasons, I still find it to be an entertaining show – it’s got a lot of the same virtues and flaws as “Prison Break” does, though with somewhat less ongoing stories from season to season”
I think perhaps the reason why I never followed “24″ further, is that it is not ideally suited for watching over a “large” period of time, but is in stead more suited to watch over a few days, like Prison Break.
“Also, there’s a good bit of Whedon-related people involved behind the camera on that show by now, so I’m half-watching for loyalty and to get to smile whenever they throw in small references in the show or grin while (mis)credting them with whatever the show does well.”
I think there were some Whedon associates (Ugh, that sounds suspicious) working on Lost as well, I could be wrong, though.
“Oz” is a prison series, though not like Prison Break, but more of a relentlessly detailed depiction of prison-life, concerning everything from intrigues between inmates or guards, to political system, social hierarchy and power struggles between the inmates. Its only similarity to Lost, is probably that you are given the background story of 1 inmate per episode.
The only shows comparable, that I have seen, are “The Wire” and perhaps “The Sopranos”.
Oz: Wow, that’s high praise! That’s straight in on the prioritized to-watch-list, especially if I can find someone to second your recommendation.
“I think there were some Whedon associates (Ugh, that sounds suspicious) working on Lost as well, I could be wrong, though.”
There is. David Fury was there at least in season one (he’s the one I give credit to the wonderful “Walkabout” for…), and I think Drew Goddard in seasons 3 and 4. Also Brian K. Vaughan, who’s a Whedon-affiliate if you squint a little, considering he’s written an arc for the canon Buffy-comic and Whedon took over his run on the Marvel-series “Runaways”.
I have some of the same worries of you regarding Lost, but I don’t watch tv for the series finales, so…
“A girlfriend that shares your taste in tv-shows? I didn’t know that was even allowed! Damn, I’ve been missing out”
We started chatting (I met her online, that’s how big a geek I am) because of Angel and later Firefly, so yeah. She’s actually (long before she became my girlfriend) among the people who recommended Firefly and Battlestar Galactica to me before I’d watched either. (I bought and watched Firefly partly on her recommendation, but BSG I forgot about until NRK started airing it, so I’m not crediting her on that one) Out show-tastes aren’t identical, but they’re pretty close. She’s a full-time-worker, though, so she doesn’t watch half as many as I do…
It is a very good show, indeed, with a character development that surpasses anything that I have seen. It can sometimes be very dark and cruel in its depiction of prison life, even for someone who has has grown up with “The Sopranos”, and has maintained diet of shows that offers a merciless portrayal of human nature.
I counter this by not watching too many episodes at the time, being careful to take short break once in a while. This is ideal, as each season consists only of 8 episodes. The series maintains a continuity throughout the entire show, free from the taint of standalone episodes.
If you want, I can post a more descriptive post on “Oz”.
“We started chatting (I met her online, that’s how big a geek I am) because of Angel and later Firefly, so yeah. She’s actually (long before she became my girlfriend) among the people who recommended Firefly and Battlestar Galactica to me before I’d watched either. (I bought and watched Firefly partly on her recommendation, but BSG I forgot about until NRK started airing it, so I’m not crediting her on that one) Out show-tastes aren’t identical, but they’re pretty close. She’s a full-time-worker, though, so she doesn’t watch half as many as I do…”
A lady of great taste, but I must say, I find the thought of someone recommending you Firefly and BSG very surprising.
You’d be surprised at how many people I know of whom have met under similar circumstances. The net is one of the most popular places to meet people, especially among non-clubber.
Well, you stand less of a chance to get involved with people from across the Atlantic in clubs. I think. (Not that I’m in any way complaining about how things are turning out)
I think the thing is that with shows, the selection of great stuff is somewhat limited. Sure, there’s a ton of tv-shows, but once you eliminate the non-English-speaking ones, the reality-tv, the gameshows, the sucky ones and the ones aimed at particular audiences you’re not a part of, it’s not that many left. Contrarywise I keep finding that our taste in books isn’t all that different either, but we’ve rarely read any of the same stuff anyway – the selection is just so much bigger, the odds of having read the same stuff are thus accordingly smaller.
Currently, of non-cancelled shows, she watches BSG, Chuck, Lost, Heroes, Scrubs and Reaper, and I think I’m not too off if I desrcibe her likings of them in that order from best to worst, and she was a huge Veronica Mars-fan which is still a show that recently ended airing in my head. So yeah, we still watch a lot of the same stuff. Which is handy for all the late-night-chats not to run out of topics. This summer she’s going to show me Tru Calling (or possibly Dark Angel) and I’m going to show her Rome and Arrested Development. And if we have time, we’ll check out Dexter together, as we’ve both been curious about it.
We’re hardly identical in taste, though. I’m having a hard time selling her on Blackadder (she’s watched nearly all of it with me now, and she’s still feeling somewhat “eh, it’s okay I guess” about it), and I didn’t enjoy Dead Like Me by far as much as I think she does. So again, I think it just has to do with mutual recognition of quality in tv-shows, and the somewhat narrow selection there was to begin with.
My GODS, I run a loose keyboard. Sorry, dude, didn’t mean to spam your weblog with my private watching-habits. And yeah, an Oz-post would be splendid, though from what you’re saying I’m interested enough to want to check it out already, so it’s not really necessary. How many of the eight-episode-seasons are there?
As for my being recommended BSG and Firefly – I was hesitant about Firefly because I was too much of an Angel/Buffy-fanboy, I was sceptical of venturing into something else and unrelated made by the same guy – and I’m also a fantasy-guy much more than a sci-fi-one. The latter point also goes for BSG. If NRK hadn’t started airing it and I was in a phase were I tried supporting genre-shows on Norwegian tv by trying to watch anything they started up with that looked half-interesting, I probably wouldn’t have been watching it until very recently. I didn’t use to watch that much TV, in fact, three or four years back or so, I probably hadn’t watched a fifth or the shows I’d call my favourites today. ‘Cause dude, there was a time when I actually had time to *read*. (Shocking, I know) These days I seem to always watch TV instead.
We’re hardly identical in taste, though. I’m having a hard time selling her on Blackadder (she’s watched nearly all of it with me now, and she’s still feeling somewhat “eh, it’s okay I guess” about it), and I didn’t enjoy Dead Like Me by far as much as I think she does. So again, I think it just has to do with mutual recognition of quality in tv-shows, and the somewhat narrow selection there was to begin with.
I terrorize my friends and family with Blackadder quotes, and it is one of the few shows that I keep watching over and over again, so the fact that she didn’t like it beyond the “meh” point, is almost reason for me to take offense.
“Veronica Mars” is a show that has come highly recomended from various sources, but has been filed under my “misgivings” folder. My instincts tells me No, but ht praise and my curiosity tells me Yes.
“My GODS, I run a loose keyboard. Sorry, dude, didn’t mean to spam your weblog with my private watching-habits. And yeah, an Oz-post would be splendid, though from what you’re saying I’m interested enough to want to check it out already, so it’s not really necessary. How many of the eight-episode-seasons are there?”
No worries, mate. It’s not as if you’re posting advertisement for penis-enlargement pills.
Of “Oz”, there are 6 seasons, all containing 8 episodes, with the exception of season 4, which contains 16.
I will probably write a post about it at some point.
Oh, speaking of “Rome”, I recall an incident where I was telling some friends/classmates about it to hook them, and I mentioned Julius Caesar’s death, which resulted in one of them saying: “Dude, chill with the spoilers!”, we stared at him in disbelief, before bursting into mocking laughter.
Blackadder – yeah, me too, I’m exactly like that too. (Which is why she watches it with me) She likes it well enough, she laughs occasionally, but I think it gets a little too repetitive and stagnant for her tastes. And I have to admit – I’d probably feel a little bit like that too, if I watched them for the first time as a 23 year old. Having been introduced to this in my very early teens is probably a big portion of why it still seems so thoroughly excellent. Because it’s FUNNY, but not all of it is that excellent or even intelligent. (Some bits are, though) That being said, I love Blackadder to bits, so I’m force-feeding her with it until she likes it.
I’ve gotten her quoting it now (and Monty Python! To which she feels very much the same way (but there I’m more in line, I’m not that huge an MP-fan, some of their stuff is brilliant, some is complete misses, a lot of it falls between the two categories) , so… that’s a giant leap in the right direction.
Veronica Mars has a VERY VERY strong season-plot in both its first two seasons, very good dialogue and mostly intriguing and well-crafted characters. The single episode-plots vary somewhat, but they’re good enough on the whole, and when they’re not the excellent dialogue, characters and season-plot-clues guide you through. Season 3 is all-around weaker except in the dialogue, but still well worth the watch.
And the Cæsar-thing sounds horrid. (I *study* Ancient Roman religion (and thus also a good bit of history) so that’s doubly frightening to me) I’m glad you mocked him properly. ^^
“That being said, I love Blackadder to bits, so I’m force-feeding her with it until she likes it”
Good man. I think I spent 8 months convincing one of my previous girlfriends to watch Star Wars. It was hard work, but it had to be done.
I agree with you on Monty Python, there’ a lot of brilliant skits, but also some skits that simply ricochets off.
Though I have to say, the first time I experienced MP, which was “Holy Grail” at the age of 11, it revolutionized my perspective on humor forever.
“Veronica Mars has a VERY VERY strong season-plot in both its first two seasons, very good dialogue and mostly intriguing and well-crafted characters. The single episode-plots vary somewhat, but they’re good enough on the whole, and when they’re not the excellent dialogue, characters and season-plot-clues guide you through. Season 3 is all-around weaker except in the dialogue, but still well worth the watch.”
Hm, given your considerable praise, I will have to give Veronica a try. I think the reason why I have previously discarded it, is that I tend to be deceived by appearence, which was the case with Buffy, Heroes etc. Hopefully my initial “Nancy Drew/teen-drama/chick-flick” judgements will be shattered.
“And the Cæsar-thing sounds horrid. (I *study* Ancient Roman religion (and thus also a good bit of history) so that’s doubly frightening to me) I’m glad you mocked him properly. ^^”
Don’t worry, we make sure to pull this one out of the archives regularly.
They’re aware of the Nancy Drew-thing. There’s a wonderful in-joke on it in season… 3, I think, where her father (an ex-sheriff and P.I.) inroduces himself and his daughter undercover like so:
“Hello, my name is Carson Drew, and this is my assistant Nancy”. Even her father sees the likeness, and in-story. ;D (Her dad, by the way, is probably one of the most touching portrayals of a close father-daughter-relationship I’ve ever seen, and Enrico Colantoni (the guy who brilliantly played the head alien in “Galaxy Quest”) is simply awesome in the part)
I’ve never read Nancy Drew – obviously – but I don’t think it’s annoying. Some of the episode-plots might be somewhat too teen-drama and Nancy Drew-like, but the main stories are too dark. I mean, before the pilot has even begun, Veronica herself has experienced the murder of her best friend, left by her mother, having her father losing his job and hated by the entire city, choosing between this father and her entire social circle of friends (including her long-time boyfriend the brother of her dead best friend), and losing her virginity being raped at a party. So yeah, teen-drama seems kind of… cheap.
I think you’d like it, judging by your tastes. I mean, the main reason *I* checked it out was because Joss Whedon couldn’t stop raving about it on his own fanpages. (That’s right – he practically spammed his own fanpages with a by now famous “Veronica Mars is awesome”-post that became a huge deal in the show’s self-promotion) And The Whedon can’t be that far off. I mean, sure, he likes Harry Potter more than I’d say seems reasonable, but you’ve got to cut him some slack in media other than his own I suppose.
My first introduction to MP was Holy Grail, too, but I think I was twelve or posibly even thirteen by the time. It’s still thoroughly awesome, of course, though I never liked the ending and that hasn’t changed.
Sarah’s seen Star Wars, thankfully – but only once each. She’s promised me to do a watch-through of them with me some day, though. Won’t be this summer, we have too much else to watch and I still haven’t bought RotS (waiting for a box collecting the prequels) or the very good Clone Wars-animated series that I’d really like to include in such a watch-through.
I’ve shown her two MP-movies (not “Meaning of Life”) and also force-fed her a single MP-episode – the Spanish Inquisition. Just so I could quote it freely. It’s really not among their best episodes, barring the inquisition-stuff the only thing that’s truly funny in it to my tastes were the court-room-scene in the end – but blissfully, despite agreeing with me that it wasn’t too strong, she’s taken to quoting it too now.
By the way, speaking of Rome, wikipedia tells me there’s a slight chance of a Rome-movie. That sounds quite interesting. (Though I’m unsure what it’d be about – there’s hardly that much upheaval and horror going on during Augustus’ reign and skipping ahead to the crazy and/or incompetent ones wouldn’t really feel lika a continuation of the series. Maybe a prequel with Caesar, Pompey and Crassus? I always felt they started the show off some good twenty years later than they should’ve.)
Well, that settles it, I’m giving Veronica Mars a go, probably sometime this weekend, if I can get a hold of it until then.
Having finished the third season of “Lost” 3 days ago, I’m starving for more captivating, mystery infused television, and judging by your writings, Veronica fits the bill.
The awareness of the Nancy Drew likeness is also re-assuring.
“My first introduction to MP was Holy Grail, too, but I think I was twelve or posibly even thirteen by the time. It’s still thoroughly awesome, of course, though I never liked the ending and that hasn’t changed”
I agree with you, I can’t help at feel a little.. cheated by the ending.
“Sarah’s seen Star Wars, thankfully – but only once each. She’s promised me to do a watch-through of them with me some day, though. Won’t be this summer, we have too much else to watch and I still haven’t bought RotS (waiting for a box collecting the prequels) or the very good Clone Wars-animated series that I’d really like to include in such a watch-through.”
I own all the prequels, and yet somehow I just know that I will buy the box as well. That’s the hold Star Wars have over me, it’s disturbing to say the least.
I went into a store a few months ago, and I notice a new, metallic SW box on their shelves, containing the original trilogy. I picked it up, went over to the woman behind counter where she informs me that it is the exact same box released in 2004 (Which I, of course, already have), only in a different package. And despite this crucial information, I had to fight an inner battle to return the box to its shelves, and walk out of there.
Oh, just had to add This.
“By the way, speaking of Rome, wikipedia tells me there’s a slight chance of a Rome-movie. That sounds quite interesting. (Though I’m unsure what it’d be about – there’s hardly that much upheaval and horror going on during Augustus’ reign and skipping ahead to the crazy and/or incompetent ones wouldn’t really feel lika a continuation of the series. Maybe a prequel with Caesar, Pompey and Crassus? I always felt they started the show off some good twenty years later than they should’ve.)”
Yeah, it sort of felt like I was thrown right into the middle of a conflict nearing it end, so a prequel would be ideal to remedy this. I would love to see more of the relationship and conflicts of Caesar and Pompey.
I hope they decide to follow this through, because I finished season 2 with a strong yearning for more Rome.
I suspect I’ll buy the prequel-box, but I *know* I’ll buy the complete-saga-box whenever it comes out – and this combined knowledge is giving me the strength not to cash out on RotS on its own. That, and the movie kind of disappointed me. I haven’t watched in since it was in theatres and suspect I’d like it a lot more now, with mostly memories of how much it disappointed originally. Dooku was barely used, Grievous sucked, and all they did with the plots they’d set up was to PLAY OUT WHAT EVERYBODY KNEW WAS COMING. They had the biggest chance for surprising and intelligent twists, cool reveals and sinister plots-inside-plots in the history of movies with that movie, they could justify a lot of TPM and AOTC’s weaknesses and do a surprising, clever movie. And in stead, they made a safe, easy pay-off on all the set-ups and encounters we basically knew was coming. They did these things rather well, sure, but they were still so much less than the movie could’ve been. They made RotS into a very good “final scenes”-movie paying off the buildup of everything else – when they COULD have made it into a fabulous, intricate chapter in the holistic story of the entire saga, and bring depth to all the five others, bettering the story as a whole. RotS was a great surf-ride taking advantage of most of what was good with the existing story without really adding anything of consequence to it. Except Qui-Gon’s discovery, which they bloody cut. Sigh.
A Rome-movie would be smashing indeed. Especially with Cæsar. (Augustus is awesome and all, but I’m a Cæsar-man)
Yeah, I think they failed miserably in several ways. I loved it when I watched it at the cinema with my two equally Star Wars enthusiastic friends, probably because we were so high on anticipation and excitement that we failed to take proper notice of the flaws. But when I watched it on DVD I was like “Is this the same movie”?. Sure, the movie has its good moments, but it is, as you pointed out, so obvious and unsurprising that it physically hurts at some points. They chose to buckle up for the risk-free and safety mode ride, in stead of letting go, and doing something different and daring.
What annoys me the most is the depiction of Anakin’s fall, as I feel they could have elaborated a hell of a deal more on the process of his turning to the Dark Side. In stead they went with the emotional, not-believable, and, in my oppinion, VERY rushed downfall, portraying Anakin as little more than an immature angst-ridden teenager. He had his moments, of course, it’s just that there were so damn few of them.
“A Rome-movie would be smashing indeed. Especially with Cæsar. (Augustus is awesome and all, but I’m a Cæsar-man)”
I find Caesar much more enjoyable and interesting than Augustus, especially when teamed up with Marc Antony.
Augustus was an unbelievably gifted (and ruthless) politician, and also a very capable administrator, knowing what he could do himself and what he could delegate. That makes him rather astonishingly intelligent in my book, but it also makes him a little too perfect to be truly awesome. Cæsar, on the other hand, was also a very gifted politician, but one much more proned to the big gambles than Augustus (as they heavily focus on in Rome’s first season), and he was also a rather gifted general, meaning he could do a lot more of the things himself. Ultimately, the man who built a pesudo-monarchy out of basically nothing all on his own and in the end just barely failed attracts me more than the seemingly infallible man who built his entire career on the first one’s legacy.
Also, let’s face it, Cæsar PICKED Augustus, which gives him awesome-credit for all the awesome stuff Augustus did too. (Of which there was a lot, barring his choice of successor) *nods*
Yeah, it’s kind of like a son profiting on his wealthy father’s position and status, when the time comes for him to enter the business life.
By the way, I’ve watched 5 episodes of Veronica Mars, and have to say, it’s pretty damn captivating!
Ah, yes, the allure of Ms Mars. I remember it like it was yesterday, the afternoon when I meant to sit down and watch an episode for dinner, and ended up watching the first 17 episodes in one sitting. A sitting, I might add, that only ended because I had an early lecture that morning.
Also, I remember liking The Boondocks when it ran in LGV. This sounds like a show worth checking out. (Not that I really watch TV shows any more, but hey.) I have to admit that I dropped out a bit during your discussion about what the attraction of the show is, what with Huey being “intelligent” yet being the way that he is, but I just gotta say that what I remember from the comic strip, the portrayal of Huey always seemed to me to be a kind of satire, too, only a satire of intelligent people who waste their idealism on pointless radicalism. That, however, might just be me self-projecting…
Oh, and Loki: I just remembered what Brisco County Jr. actually is (having seen you mentioning it here and there recently), and by golly! I’d well-nigh forgotten that second awesomest of awesome shows (Zorro rules supreme) of my childhood until now!
Wow. If you grew up watching THAT, then you were lucky. Because, damn, it’s rather good even now, but in my early teens, this would be The Pinnacle of Awesome – barring, of course, Zorro. (A fox so cunning and free!) Brisco County Jr. is so far (I’m halfway through it) a wonderful melding of genres that’d make even Joss Whedon stand up and pay attention, with the self-deprecating sillyness of Xena and Hercules yet with none of the utter lack of respect for history and realism that often came with it on those shows.
If you grew up watching this, you should go straight out to buy it on DVD, I promise you that there’s no way you won’t be pleased with it. The few weaknesses it has all comes from it being rather dated by now, but it’s got so many good and modern aspects to it that combined with the nostalgia you should be feeling from remembering it from your childhood, there’s no way you won’t be blown away. Much like I was when I bought season 1 of Zorro (Zorro! He makes the sign of the Z!) on DVD last year.
Shirgaal: Hooray for the Mars-watching! I hope you’ll keep enjoying it.
As for Augustus… Caesar’s choice of heir was the guy who won a fourty-year long era of civil war, gathered onto himself more honours and offices than anyone in Roman history before him ever had, and expanded virtually all of Rome’s borders during his reign. Augustus’ choice of heir (admittedly not his first (or second, or third, or fourth) choice though) was the guy who rubbed crabs in friendly fishermen’s faces and appointed Caligula emperor. I kinda feel that gives the medal to Caesar…
“I have to admit that I dropped out a bit during your discussion about what the attraction of the show is, what with Huey being “intelligent” yet being the way that he is, but I just gotta say that what I remember from the comic strip, the portrayal of Huey always seemed to me to be a kind of satire, too, only a satire of intelligent people who waste their idealism on pointless radicalism. That, however, might just be me self-projecting…”
I seem to recall at least a few strips taking stabs at the issue of Huey’s over-zealous activism, clouding his intelligence and rationality. Regarding pointless radicalism, I suppose it depends on the individual viewer’s opinion and views. Also, I am uncertain of the requirements for being considered a radical these days.
“Hooray for the Mars-watching! I hope you’ll keep enjoying it”
More than half way through it, and still loving it.
Rubbing crabs in fishermen’s faces is an honest occupation, and should not be scoffed at.
By the way, who were Augustus’ first-fourth choices?
Zorro (If we’re talking about the live-action series that ran in the early 90’s, and not the animated) was, as far as I recall, pretty damn smashing. Would be interesting to see what it’s like today, through I am pretty skeptical towards digging up early childhood shows an films, as tends to brutally shatter your nostalgic illusions. Learned that from Mortal Kombat.
More than half way through it, and still loving it.
Yeah, it’s the one that ran on TV2 in the nineties – the ancient Disney live action series starring Guy Williams that was originally black-and-white and was coloured (rather splendidly) before they started re-airing it in the eighties or somesuch. I was incredibly worried about re-watching Zorro – and this despite my having almost all of it recorded on VHS and having seen it a ton of times growing up – but I was just so incredibly pleasantly surprised at how excellent it was even today. Sure, a tiny bit dated in some few ways, but that you gladly accept. Like the episode where Sergeant Garcia fails to deliver a letter for Don Diego and heroically makes up for it near the end of the show in a battle of life and death – how many show would do something that awesome with their main comic relief-character? Sadly, only season 1 exists on DVD – and true enough, season 2 was far weaker due to having gotten imposed much shorter plotlines onto itself, but I’d still like to see that for sale too.
Augustus’ heirs? The man ran out of relatives quicker than I out of coke. In many ways you can consider his only big and lasting political failure to be his inability to find a decent heir.
His right-hand-man Agrippa was never his actual heir, but during a period of severe illness where Augustus was thought to be on his deathbed he ran things, and in many ways he could be considered the number two man in the Roman empire despite his humble birth. Still, had he outlived Augustus I think things would have gone drastically different – he did not, though.
Augustus’ first choice of heir was the son of Octavia, Marcellus, who he had wed to his own daughter Julia to ensure people’s view of him as his clear heir. He was in such a rush to get them married, in fact, that he let them hold the ceremony while he himself was not in Rome, having Agrippa stand in as father of the bride (that’s how important Agrippa was). Marcellus died young of illness – some conspiracy theorists have ascribed his death to Livia, Augustus’ wife, how was trying to further her own sons Tiberius and Drusus.
[this computer is a little unsteady, so I'm posting this and then keep writing in a new one to avoid the risk of a crash where I have to retype all of this]
*who was trying to further her own sons Tiberius and Drusus.
Augustus’, deprived of his imagined heir (who he could obviously never CALL so, as he was simply the first man of the state and held no one single position he could pass on) decided to strengthen his ties to Agrippa, and wed Julia (his only biological child, from his first marriage) to him. Their two eldest sons, Gaius Caesar and Lucius Caesar, quickly turned into Augustus’ new favourites, and he did several attempts at elevating them in the public’s eye. He also adopted them – yeah, I know, his own grandchildren, but that’s NOIHING, believe me, the man adopted his own WIFE posthumously so she could get the name “Augusta” – to rid them of the issue of Agrippa’s humble birth and make their status as heirs more apparent, if you’ll pardon the pun. Presumably this all happened with Agrippa’s blessings, his by far best chance of keeping his position after Augustus died without usurping it himself would probably be with one of his own sons as the main heir.
Lucius, the youngest, died off illness at 19, and eighteen months later Gaius died at 24 from a campaign-wound.
(I can imagine Augustus must have been bumping his head quite firmly against a number of walls at this point)
Meanwhile, not only had Agrippa died, but also Augustus’ favourite stepson Drusus (youngest son of Livia from her previous marriage, Tiberius’ younger brother) who was also immensely popular with the people had died on his way home from a victorious campaign in Germania, falling off his horse.
Augustus, then, had only two close male relatives left; his other stepson Tiberius, and Gaius and Lucius’ younger brother Agrippa Postumus, named so because of having been born after his father’s death. Augustus also could not get any more heirs through his only daughter, as she had been banished to a small island after a most embarrassing sex-scandal. A sex-scandal taking place, I might add, during her marriage to Tiberius, that they both were forced into by Augustus and Livia after Agrippa’s death.
Augustus thus adopted both his options, Tiberius being an already old man who’d served him well for years at this point despite them apparently having quite the clash of personalities. Agrippa Postumus was very young, and unpopular, being considered rude and brutish. Around his eighteenth or nineteenth year he was banished by Augustus to an island for some reason we don’t have the sources for – likely he either had finally been too overly rude, or, according to rumours, he’d part-taken in a plot against Augustus.
This left only Tiberius – a choice Augustus never was that happy with. His favourite at this time was Germanicus, the eldest son of Drusus, and thus Tiberius’ nephew. He for a long time considered adopting him and making him heir, but finally, probably under his wife’s constant nagging on Tiberius’ behalf, made Tiberius heir – though with the express instruction for Tiberius to adopt Germanicus and make him his heir over Tiberius’ own son. Tiberius did so, but the very popular Germanicus was poisoned some years later, probably on Tiberius’ order, and Tiberius had most of Germanicus’ children, barring Caligula who sleezed his way into Tiberius’ favours, arrested and killed.
During his last year of life Augustus is additionally rumoured to have visited Agrippa Postumus in his exile, but none know if this is true, and Tiberius had him executed in his exile immediately after Augustus’ death.
So, yeah. There you have it. Marcellus, Gaius, Lucius, Agrippa, Agrippa Postumus, Drusus and Germanicus – seven people Augustus liked better than Tiberius, four of them was his express heirs and the latter one his preferred option to Tiberius’ own son.
(And I haven’t even told you the horrible stuff Augustus and Livia did to Tiberius all his life, forcing him into a political position he never wanted in the first place…)
I am reminded of Henry VIII and his wives. Livia appears very ruthless, no wonder I got a bad vibe from her in Rome.
I can imagine Augustus’ obsession with finding a proper heir to rule Rome after his demise, due to his own first-experience with decades of turmoil as a result of the lack of a steady rule.
Have to say, Augustus was either extremely unlucky, or someone conspired heavily against him on the issue of succession. It seems likely that Livia would conspire to raise her son to the throne, thus securing more power for herself post-Augustus.
And “Caligula” and “sleezing” somehow sounds as well-fitting together as “bread” and “butter”.
And thanks for the great insight into Augustus’ struggles with finding a worthy successor.
Well, in the very well-known novel “I, Claudius” and the BBC TV-show of the same name, she’s made out to be the manipulative master-villain (while Augustus, oddly, is portrayed as a well-meaning and rather kind old man), and her portrayal in Rome is consciously made to foreshadow this. How historically correct this is is questionable, what’s rather certain is that she was a very influential woman and that she was a vital force in making her son Tiberius – whom Augustus never really liked – the heir. Ironically, Tiberius ended up hating her guts for it.
Your second paragraph is the exact assumption behind “I, Claudius”, and also a though many Romans of the time are likely to have had (and, according to the sources there are, in many instances had)
“And thanks for the great insight into Augustus’ struggles with finding a worthy successor”
No problem, I had fun writing it. I was just finishing up on “The Age of Augustus”, an entry-level biography of the man that I bought on impulse and found quite fun and easy-read and from which I learned a lot about the areas of which I knew little – primarily his military exploits. The second-to-last chapter was basically a refresher-course in what I just outlined to you, with no big glossing overs except for Agrippa Postumus (whom the author might have neglected to mention to avoid the mystery of why he was banished in an otherwise straightforward narrative).
Caligula is fun. I much prefer him to Nero, as bonkers Julio-Claudians go.