![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
heroes
Still following Heroes on BBC2 each week, and still enjoying the ride. It's really interesting to see how polarised opinions of this show seem to be. Some people rave about it, others seem to get bored and give up very early on, usually citing too many characters and complicated plot as their reason. Me, I'm finding the characters engaging enough so far, not having any trouble keeping up with them all, and the storyline is holding my interest. I'm very impressed by the interweaving storylines of the various characters so far.
I'm always rather intrigued by the way different shows will hook different people for different reasons. I mean, I can usually say why I've become attached to a certain show - usually in mind-numbing detail, if anyone stands still long enough to listen! But I find I can very rarely define why I don't like/watch a show. 'It just didn't grab me' usually covers it, but I never really know why. Maybe because I haven't watched in enough detail to really understand my own reasoning...
It got me thinking about how shows often divide into two categories. The first category is bubblegum. These are shows that are easy for casual viewers to dip in and out of, that can be caught up on and followed with ease without requiring any commitment to viewing, because you are only expected to watch on a shallow, surface level. They are fun to watch, but often unsatisfying on a deeper level.
The other type is the more serious show, the kind with intricate ongoing mytharc plotting and character development. Sure, you can still skip in and out, watch on a surface level, but in order to really get the most out of these shows you have to really commit yourself to watching every episode with brain engaged, to thinking about what's happening, re-watching over and over in order to catch every subtle nuance. These shows can build up a huge cult following, or even a huge popular following, but are risky for networks because they are less likely to capture the casual viewers.
...I'm sure I had a point in there somewhere, but it escapes me now. Anyway. Yeah, I'm still enjoying Heroes. I haven't really attached to any of the characters yet, and long-term I do tend to need at least one character that I'm deeply attached to, who will keep me watching no matter what. But I do care about finding out what happens to them all, which counts for a lot. Plus, it's got the thrill factor of moments like Nathan shooting off into the sky and going supersonic last night, which was very cool and delighted me muchly. Now that Peter has more information and has hooked up with Isaac in search of answers, I'm engaging with him more and being less distracted by his silly hair and droopy mouth. Policeman Matt's wife is distracting me instead because I remember her from her Home & Away days, back when she had an Australian accent. Hiro isn't bugging me as much, although his cute-as-a-button shtick is getting old. So yeah, so far so good.
I'm always rather intrigued by the way different shows will hook different people for different reasons. I mean, I can usually say why I've become attached to a certain show - usually in mind-numbing detail, if anyone stands still long enough to listen! But I find I can very rarely define why I don't like/watch a show. 'It just didn't grab me' usually covers it, but I never really know why. Maybe because I haven't watched in enough detail to really understand my own reasoning...
It got me thinking about how shows often divide into two categories. The first category is bubblegum. These are shows that are easy for casual viewers to dip in and out of, that can be caught up on and followed with ease without requiring any commitment to viewing, because you are only expected to watch on a shallow, surface level. They are fun to watch, but often unsatisfying on a deeper level.
The other type is the more serious show, the kind with intricate ongoing mytharc plotting and character development. Sure, you can still skip in and out, watch on a surface level, but in order to really get the most out of these shows you have to really commit yourself to watching every episode with brain engaged, to thinking about what's happening, re-watching over and over in order to catch every subtle nuance. These shows can build up a huge cult following, or even a huge popular following, but are risky for networks because they are less likely to capture the casual viewers.
...I'm sure I had a point in there somewhere, but it escapes me now. Anyway. Yeah, I'm still enjoying Heroes. I haven't really attached to any of the characters yet, and long-term I do tend to need at least one character that I'm deeply attached to, who will keep me watching no matter what. But I do care about finding out what happens to them all, which counts for a lot. Plus, it's got the thrill factor of moments like Nathan shooting off into the sky and going supersonic last night, which was very cool and delighted me muchly. Now that Peter has more information and has hooked up with Isaac in search of answers, I'm engaging with him more and being less distracted by his silly hair and droopy mouth. Policeman Matt's wife is distracting me instead because I remember her from her Home & Away days, back when she had an Australian accent. Hiro isn't bugging me as much, although his cute-as-a-button shtick is getting old. So yeah, so far so good.
no subject
But the arc they span in the show is very intriguing and if I'd only found one character to latch on I might have watched it further, but in the end a great arc is nothing without emotional investment. I am just the opposite, the scene where Nathing shoots off in the sky had me laughing because I found it so ridiculous, one of the reasons I never fell for the Superman myth.
I can usually say why I don't like a show, not in as much detail as why I love a show, but well enough lol. It's usually that I don't get attached to the characters, even with bubblegum shows, I need to have a bond to the characters. I have always been a fan of character driven shows and it's rare that the mythology/theme of a show fascinates me more than the characters itself. Uhm, come to think of it .. that never happened. *lol*
I know that I have certain 'buttons' and if a show pushes them, it's more likely that I fall for the show. I prefer drama to comedy, dark shows to light shows, buddy shows to ensemble shows, I have a soft spot for shows that deal with the supernatural, fantasy, scifi, since they open new perspectives on the life as we know it, they highlighten reality by different angles, than a 'reality' show could, since it isn't limited to certain frames, but it always needs to be grounded in human emotion and relatability. I have always been fascinated by the psychology of characters, be it in books, movies or shows, so character development, exploration and integrity are the most important things in a show for me, if I really want to fall for it and not only watch it on a superficial entertainment level. So, if a show doesn't adress any of those categories, it's very unlikely that I am interested in it and this is my usual reasoning on why I don't like a show. ;)
no subject
I quite like Isaac, the junkie painter, although I keep feeling like I shouldn't because...junkie *G* I like Claire, too, but less for the character herself and more because I remember the actress in other things when she was much younger, so it's that sense of 'oh bless, she's all grown up' LOL Peter is starting to engage me more now that he's beginning to figure things out. So...I'm not attached to any of them to the point where I really care on a gut level about their fate, but I am beginning to care about finding out how things will spin out for them.
I find, on reflection, that the more 'serious' shows I watch also divide into two categories - the ones with the intense character development, that I watch for that development and the characters. Like SN. And the ones that are less character focused, which I am less attached to, don't worry if I miss, but try to avoid missing because I'm interested in seeing where the plot goes. Entertainment on a deeper level than pure bubblegum, but still fairly superficial. House tends to fall into that category, and so far Heroes does too, to a certain extent, but it might yet end up straddling the divide or switching completely. It's too early to say - I think it is safe to say that I'll give it the full season to make up my mind, though. :)
no subject
With SN it surely is the character development that grips me the most, but I find that the plot is so intricately woven into the characters and what drives them, that I am interested in the plot as well. As with most shows that I obsess over, it's the combination of characters and intriguing plot that completely suck me in. I admit that I have a hard time following a show for the plot alone, when the characters don't grip me, while I have less problems if it is the other way round.
no subject
It's a great show. Sure, it starts slowly, but by the 10th episode (or so), it's just so good.
It's not "Lost" good, but it's still the best new show on TV.
no subject
See, the Lost comparison doesn't do much for me because Lost never caught my imagination and I stopped watching. But Heroes is still holding my attention, which is good. :)
no subject
I came to Heroes after the 8th or 9th ep, but I love it because there's no focus on one character, the plotlines weave together nicely and I like most of the characters.
no subject