criterionforum.org

The 2nd half of that interview with Sepinwall is excellent as well. Can't wait to see where things go from here.

Bryan Fuller: ... and because of other interests that had stepped forward and said, "If NBC doesn't pick up the show, we want to." So I knew there was going to be a second season. I just didn't know whether it was going to be on NBC."

I actually wouldn't mind this show being moved to a cable-network, like AMC or FX.

I'll admit that's what I was hoping for. My worry is that the 2nd season doesn't pick up any momentum and all interest by those networks are lost as a result.

If NBC does drop it after the 2nd season, and if it's still one of the most lauded shows, it wouldn't surprise me if a cable network picked it up even if the ratings were still unimpressive and if the foreign money was still covering a good portion. "A cheap, critically loved show that'll add to our brand? Why the hell not?" type of mindset.

I hope so. I really want to see the seven-season arc Fuller has planned to it's end.

For a second I was wondering why Nicolas Winding Refn was being included in the picture.

Great interview with Kevin Pollak and Bryan, about lots of topics other than the show (like his time on Star Trek: Voyager).

Watched the episodes 1 & 2, was wondering will this series get better or does it stay on this pretty standard CSI, Medium etc. level? Because all the hype, I believed this was good. Generic Phantom camera slomo, all the cool noughties VFX stuff seemed little tired, also the guy playing Will Graham is not very interesting or good.

Then I wouldn't recommend that you keep watching.

Ugggg sad to hear that this is another case of a show with potential getting bogged down under network TV level production values. I'll still check it out at some point, but Under the Dome proved unwatchable for the same reason. Really have become spoiled by the talent behind and pacing of cable TV dramas.

mfunk9786 wrote:sad to hear that this is another case of a show with potential getting bogged down under network TV level production values...

I wouldn't say it gets entirely bogged down under network production values, but it is hindered slightly from achieving its full potential by the necessities of network TV. Having said that, I still think it's one of the stronger series on network TV. I just don't think it's a productive use of anyone's time if they are getting annoyed by the production values and the episodic structure of the plots. It should be noted that the weekly-case-to-solve format is abandoned after a while to focus on the events from a few select cases and more of the serialized story between the main characters. But if you can't stand the performance of the actor playing the main character and you don't enjoy the fact that the show features some slick production and applies a handful of flashy visual tricks, then I think the show isn't going to grow on you very much. This was one of the rare instances of network TV where I found the visual methods served a purpose for the story being told, even though I thought they lingered a little too long on the gore. As the season moved forward, I thought Fuller & Co. really did well at exploring and playing with the dynamic of their central relationship between the two lead characters (though, early on, I was kind of weary of Dancy's casting since he seemed far too frail for the part), but I can't say that it will be the same for everyone. However, as is usually the case nowadays, if someone approaches any creative endeavor believing that the praise of the project is actually merely hype, I don't see much hope for the project succeeding in the eyes of the beholder.

mfunk9786 wrote:I'll still check it out at some point, but Under the Dome proved unwatchable for the same reason. Really have become spoiled by the talent behind and pacing of cable TV dramas.

This show couldn't be further away from Under The Dome. I found nearly every level of it to be engaging, especially towards the end of the season. Looking back I can see some weaknesses in the early episodes, but they were replaced gradually by more compelling elements.

Thanks Andre Jurieu for the longer post. That's a shame... I was waiting for a good TV-thriller, something in the vein of the excellent Danish-Swedish serial killer series "The Bridge". And I love the first two books by Thomas Harris and "Manhunter" and "Silence of The Lambs". The fault was in my expectations. But I have to add that it was not just the effects + other visual stuff but the overall uninspiredness and tiredness in story, characters, plot, acting.

That's great casting because I always just assumed Pit was playing a disturbed, emotionless, self-involved, sociopath in every project he's participated in.

I cannot wait for tonight's premiere. I have every confidence, from what I've heard so far, that this season will be even more twisted, sad and profound than the first.

I think the second season has the strongest hook so far right from the getgo and that is how will everything end. Like if Will will ever be found innocent and how Hannibal is found out by Jack Crawford.

Agreed. I don't watch a lot of horror, but the visceral reaction I get to this show came back like it never left. And that was a hell of a strong opening.

To get any kind of discussion going, here's some possible controversy. I think this show is better than True Detective.

I'll second that! And I like "True Detective." "Kaiseki" was especially full of beautifully composed and controlled sequences, like the one above. Tim Hunter is such a reliably good director, too, but this episode I found particularly excellent. I felt it greatly furthered the sense that the series is developing something very rich and strange with its themes of subjectivity and consumption combined with a very sensual and seductive visual strategy, that is something very different from what television, even cable, typically delivers. Fingers crossed!

And I will chime in, though I haven't seen True Detective yet. By now, I am under Hannibal's strange spell, though the appeal of the show is difficult to explain. One of the most interesting aspects is the employment of many modern horror tropes, only for their expressionistic rather than shock value. A good example of this is in last week's episode, where a soon-to-be-victim steps into his driveway in the middle of the night, woken by his car's alarm. A plastic sheet sloughing from the trunk flags that something is not quite right, and as he approaches it... rather than the jump scare we've seen a thousand times, we see the killer's feet approach, and then... cut. The same goes for for the "it was just a dream" shock-scares, which the show deploys as a veritable storytelling technique and barometer for Will Graham's mental state.

One of my initial quibbles was how far the show forgoes realism and believability in its procedural aspects, soon silenced by the mounting psychological headiness. I am surprised that they are keeping with the monster-of-the-week form now that the main plot is so meaty (and would be even more surprised still if it stays around and Fuller perseveres in his desire to make season four a Red Dragon adaptation), but by now the investigations have become a clear red herring, foils for the mental struggles of the key protagonists. Besides, as with the new episode, the show flagrantly disregards said structure anyway. The show is often sickeningly violent, in excess of most R-rated fare even, but I have come to terms with the gore's thickening of the stew, as it were (no more food euphemisms, I swear). Even the constant "Viewer Discretion Advised" tags have become part of its unique charm.