2015 - 2016 TV Season

New/Returning Shows for the week Sunday February 14/2016 - Saturday February 20/2016:
http://www.cinemablend.com/televisi...ere-Schedule-Dates-Returning-Shows-99687.html

Monday, February 15
?:00 p.m. 11/22/63 - HULU
8:00 p.m. - Grammy Awards - CBS
9:00 p.m. - Major Crimes - TNT
10:00 p.m. - Better Call Saul - AMC

Tuesday, February 16
9:00 p.m. - Rizzoli & Isles - TNT

Geez - I just saw on my DVR schedule that Major Crimes AND Rizzoli and Isles start this week. I need to clean some stuff out of my DVR!
 
Better Call Saul marathon all day Monday starting at 11:15am EST leading up to the premiere at 10p! And there will be a "Talking Saul" talk show on afterwards! Wooooo hooooo!!! Thank goodness for Presidents Day! I get the day off work for a holiday!! :cheer2: :cheer: :cheer2:
 
I really like The Magicians too. I think the title of the show may be confusing to some. When i asked friends if they were watching it, they thought it was a new reality show. SYFY could have done a better job of promoting it. It's goooood.
 
X-files, episode 5....Stoned Mulder....WTF?? :rofl:

Yeah, my thoughts exactly. I thought it was a pity that out of only 6 episodes they split them up for this one and brought in other agents but even though the plot was very serious, the rest was kind of cute. They seem to have fun with it more than anything. Loved the end 'cause I'm a hopeless sucker for that kind of thing ;)

I'm not so sure what I think about the latest Lucifer episode. That Chloe shoots him and he bleeds was rather predictable and I somehow wish that they would somehow find a less predictable way to deal with it all. It could be fun if they went into a Hades-Persephone sort of direction; leave Lucifer the Lord of Underworld able to feel human feelings and let him end up with his queen or something like that. The way they're going now seems kind of trivial. But maybe they'll have some twists and turns along the way
(looks like his sidekick and the angel are going to team up against him after all, so that could get interesting)
and I'll just keep enjoying Tom Ellis otherwise :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nan
I have been obsessed with Mr. Robot and am watching it for the third time in order to figure out some of the secrets.

Just finished binge-watching "Mr. Robot". Um. Wow.

I just finished watching it, on your recommendations.

Not sure I want to watch the whole thing through again. It might be somewhat instructive to rewatch the first episode or two.

Much less closure/explanation than we get in most series' first seasons. I still don't understand what was really going on and I don't think a rewatch would provide answers, though it might clarify the questions.
 
Is Mr. Robot on Netflix or Amazon Prime? I've heard so much about this show.

This is kind of old now, but we just watched Top of the Lake (2013), with Elisabeth Moss, on Netflix. Anyone who hasn't seen this yet should check it out. I found it gripping, with very interesting (albeit often sordid) characters. It's odd but good.

I love Elisabeth Moss so much as an actress. I would watch her in anything. And I just read they're making a second series of the show, yay!
 
The season premieres of Girls and Togetherness are this Sunday on HBO at 10pm/10:30pm (after Vinyl).

Lena Dunham has already indicated that Girls' final season will be in 2017.
 
I just finished watching it, on your recommendations.

Not sure I want to watch the whole thing through again. It might be somewhat instructive to rewatch the first episode or two.

Much less closure/explanation than we get in most series' first seasons. I still don't understand what was really going on and I don't think a rewatch would provide answers, though it might clarify the questions.

MAJOR SPOILERS BELOW!!! DO NOT READ ON IF YOU HAVE NOT WATCHED MR ROBOT SEASON 1 EPISODE 8!!!!




If not watching the whole thing again, I recommend taking a look at the "easter eggs" they put out:
http://www.usanetwork.com/mrrobot/timeline-gallery/mr-robot-season-1-easter-eggs

The writing is dense and meticulous. The first time I watched the episodes, there were numerous scenes and dialogues that provoked a reaction of "huh?" in me. Things do not make sense. Is it sloppy writing? Has the writer forgotten what he just wrote? On second viewing, it slowly revealed that everything is meticulously mapped out and nothing is accidental. For example, in the opening scene of episode 3, Elliot's voiceover expressed surprise in seeing the two women in his hospital room, yet both women said, in essence, that he requested the hospital to contact them. I was so annoyed when I first saw this scene, and only later realized that the writer meant to drop a hint for Mr. Robot to take over his consciousness without Elliot's knowledge. He has these episodes of losing time, which becomes important in episode 10.

I felt compelled to rewatch all episodes for several issues, including how Sam Esmail visually managed scenes in which Elliot (Malek) and Mr. Robot (Slater) were together. People around them respond to one or the other, but not both. In most of these scenes, they both speak, but only one is speaking out loud and get responses and reactions from others. It's a delicate and meticulous dance. Only through observing these scenes closely can I tell which dialogues are spoken to the outside and which dialogues are internal. We know this person has dissociative personality disorder. The personality (and viewpoint character) known as "Elliot" has some but not complete access to his other personality known as "Mr. Robot." There are many subtle cues going on without exposition and can only be discovered through close viewing that turned out to be pleasurable and surprising to me.

In the first episodes, Elliot as we see him appears to be a very benign person who refused to kill anybody or directly harm innocent bystanders. At places I thought that was too much of a trope. But once it's revealed that Elliot and the obnoxious and callous Mr. Robot are the same person, this character as a whole immediately takes on a different color. He is in fact quite capable of ruthless behaviors. Is he a good guy in the conventional sense. Not any more.

One of the themes of the series is self-deception, or the unreliability of our perception of self, others, and the world. Only upon second (and third) viewing have I been able to (incompletely) distinguish the subjective and unreliable narrative in Elliot's head (eg, everyone says "Evil Corp") and the objective reality outside his head. In a roundabout way, Esmail is illustrating universal psychological mechanisms of reality and perception. What we hold to be solid, unshakable truth is often a belief and a fantasy. It's how the mind works even for people without any psychiatric disorders.

Another major theme of the series, which is buried even deeper, is how people relate to each other now in our Internet-dominant culture. The conditions are ripe for people like Elliot who can only form uni-directional connection with others, in which he can access their lives via hacking, while others hit a wall of lies and evasion around him. This setup insulates him from the risk and pain of real relationships; it also imprisons him. The Internet allows us to fake normal and fake happiness, easier than ever. I have never seen any movie or TV series that "gets it" so well. It gets how our lives have been subtly but deeply altered by technology.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, Jun Y -- stuff to think about.

You might want to label that post as a spoiler for the benefit of folks who haven't watched yet but want to.
 
Apparently, Chicago Law is already a real thing since they're already hiring a cast. https://tvline.com/2016/02/19/chicago-law-spinoff-cast-philip-winchester-nbc/

I wonder if the writing staff of Chicago Med will move over to Chicago Law. I'm wondering if that's what happened from Chicago Fire to Chicago Med. The latter has been so much better than Chicago Fire. Especially about a month ago when the fire department staff were creating havoc at the hospital. And then Herman torments the abused kid and never admits to crossing a line. That is so unlike Herman, he's such a good guy. From him to not be aware that "no means no" from that kid actually meant, "NO"! does not fit in with who Herman is at all. Of course, Herman didn't deserve to be stabbed for what he did, but if he had acted a bit more sensitively, that knife would have never been drawn... :( Now a kid is in jail because of Herman's "good ol' boy" schtick. :rolleyes:
 
I wonder if the writing staff of Chicago Med will move over to Chicago Law. I'm wondering if that's what happened from Chicago Fire to Chicago Med. The latter has been so much better than Chicago Fire. Especially about a month ago when the fire department staff were creating havoc at the hospital.

Nope, it's not. Olmstead, Brandt and Haas are also writing for PD, but none of them is actively involved in Med and the rest of the writing staff for PD and Fire is different, too. Med has different showrunners, maybe that makes the difference?

And then Herman torments the abused kid and never admits to crossing a line. That is so unlike Herman, he's such a good guy. From him to not be aware that "no means no" from that kid actually meant, "NO"! does not fit in with who Herman is at all. Of course, Herman didn't deserve to be stabbed for what he did, but if he had acted a bit more sensitively, that knife would have never been drawn... :( Now a kid is in jail because of Herman's "good ol' boy" schtick. :rolleyes:

The kid is in jail because he committed a crime. I have to admit, I don't follow Fire closely enough to really remember if Herman may have acted inappropriately or not, but no matter what Herman did, the kid pulled the knife and the kid stabbed him. Herman's actions may have contributed to the kids behavior yet he's not responsible for how the kid chooses to behave. He's only responsible for his own actions, just like the kid is responsible for his own actions as well.
 
The kid is in jail because he committed a crime. I have to admit, I don't follow Fire closely enough to really remember if Herman may have acted inappropriately or not, but no matter what Herman did, the kid pulled the knife and the kid stabbed him. Herman's actions may have contributed to the kids behavior yet he's not responsible for how the kid chooses to behave. He's only responsible for his own actions, just like the kid is responsible for his own actions as well.

All people are responsible for all of their actions. The kid made an attempt on Herman's life and will not spend many years (or decades) in jail for his crime. Herman's abusive and disrespectful behaviour...no consequences. :(
 
All people are responsible for all of their actions. The kid made an attempt on Herman's life and will not spend many years (or decades) in jail for his crime. Herman's abusive and disrespectful behaviour...no consequences. :(

What did he do that was abusive? He called him a name in jest, and the kid took offensive, asked him to take it back, Herrman wouldn't because he said the kid needs to get used to it, and was stabbed. How can you say he didn't have consequences, when he was stabbed? All for calling the kid a name. Did something else happened that I forgot?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information