hbabcock_28
Entrou em jul. de 2001
Bem-vindo(a) ao novo perfil
Nossas atualizações ainda estão em desenvolvimento. Embora a versão anterior do perfil não esteja mais acessível, estamos trabalhando ativamente em melhorias, e alguns dos recursos ausentes retornarão em breve! Fique atento ao retorno deles. Enquanto isso, Análise de Classificação ainda está disponível em nossos aplicativos iOS e Android, encontrados na página de perfil. Para visualizar suas Distribuições de Classificação por ano e gênero, consulte nossa nova Guia de ajuda.
Selos2
Para saber como ganhar selos, acesse página de ajuda de selos.
Avaliações23
Classificação de hbabcock_28
Well, apparently this show really ticked off some people. I'm not totally sure why.
This is a "modern retelling" of Greek Myths, which does seem to be very now-now. I guess if you're super committed to the original stories and offended by any change this is not the show for you. Happily you have all the various contradictory versions of the myths to satisfy. Because we all know Homer, Euripides, Sophocles, and assorted buds never changed one iota of the original myths to suit their own narrative or thematic purposes...
The main thrust of the story is Zeus's midlife crisis/slide into paranoid dictator, played with zeal by Jeff Goldblum (The cast overall does a fantastic job). This is mirrored in Dionysus's desire to be the god of more than just a good time. The story is told by Prometheus as a narrator/outside observer and weaves in elements of Orpheus and Eurydice and Ariadne. The only story I wanted to be a bit more clear was Hera's. Loved the performance, but her motivations were a bit opaque. I'm willing to give the show the benefit of the doubt and hope there's clarity in future.
Does "Kaos" change elements of the myths? Well... Yeah. In more ways than just a modern retelling. The entire series is focused on the power of stories; how they're built, who they benefit, and what gets left in or out. All mythology picks and chooses what to focus on to serve a political or societal agenda. This show merely makes an argument for why this version of Zeus built his mythology just so.
The modern versions of the characters work and add something new to these stories. Afterall, isn't that the point of adaptation? This version of Zeus retains his spiteful and temperamental nature and pairs it with a serious New Money vibe (clever, given his insecurities surrounding his goodhood). A testament to how power and wealth doesn't mean you have taste. This version of Eurydice actually grapples with how underwritten she is in every version of her myth.
It's a clever show full of humour, wit, and fun. Give it a go.
This is a "modern retelling" of Greek Myths, which does seem to be very now-now. I guess if you're super committed to the original stories and offended by any change this is not the show for you. Happily you have all the various contradictory versions of the myths to satisfy. Because we all know Homer, Euripides, Sophocles, and assorted buds never changed one iota of the original myths to suit their own narrative or thematic purposes...
The main thrust of the story is Zeus's midlife crisis/slide into paranoid dictator, played with zeal by Jeff Goldblum (The cast overall does a fantastic job). This is mirrored in Dionysus's desire to be the god of more than just a good time. The story is told by Prometheus as a narrator/outside observer and weaves in elements of Orpheus and Eurydice and Ariadne. The only story I wanted to be a bit more clear was Hera's. Loved the performance, but her motivations were a bit opaque. I'm willing to give the show the benefit of the doubt and hope there's clarity in future.
Does "Kaos" change elements of the myths? Well... Yeah. In more ways than just a modern retelling. The entire series is focused on the power of stories; how they're built, who they benefit, and what gets left in or out. All mythology picks and chooses what to focus on to serve a political or societal agenda. This show merely makes an argument for why this version of Zeus built his mythology just so.
The modern versions of the characters work and add something new to these stories. Afterall, isn't that the point of adaptation? This version of Zeus retains his spiteful and temperamental nature and pairs it with a serious New Money vibe (clever, given his insecurities surrounding his goodhood). A testament to how power and wealth doesn't mean you have taste. This version of Eurydice actually grapples with how underwritten she is in every version of her myth.
It's a clever show full of humour, wit, and fun. Give it a go.
I enjoyed the different take on the characters. Definitely had some strong YA moments, but overall enjoyable. The supernatural elements likely would have pleased Sir ACD, as a fervent believer in the supernatural himself.
Apparently some people see a person of colour on screen and go all weak in the knees. Give your head a shake. London, as a port city and center of an Empire, was much more diverse in the past than the bedsheet crowd would have you believe.
But, if my valid historical argument doesn't sway you, then... This is clearly intended to be entertainment, not history, unless I missed the "murder birds" segment of my 'British History from 1851-1914' course. But every time certain people see a lead of colour on screen they decide it's 'forced wokeness' or some rubbish and rate it low. If you can't look past a character's race on screen, there are bigger issues for you then a show about street urchins working for Holmes and Watson.
Apparently some people see a person of colour on screen and go all weak in the knees. Give your head a shake. London, as a port city and center of an Empire, was much more diverse in the past than the bedsheet crowd would have you believe.
But, if my valid historical argument doesn't sway you, then... This is clearly intended to be entertainment, not history, unless I missed the "murder birds" segment of my 'British History from 1851-1914' course. But every time certain people see a lead of colour on screen they decide it's 'forced wokeness' or some rubbish and rate it low. If you can't look past a character's race on screen, there are bigger issues for you then a show about street urchins working for Holmes and Watson.
Look, I can appreciate enjoying this movie. I've liked many a fluffy piece of garbage, but something about this movie just didn't come together. I could never figure out the relationship of the leads. So, he likes her (ostensibly because she's beautiful, since that's the only compliment he offers) and she just sorta goes with it. He gets all pissy that the woman dumped on live TV by her husband isn't ready to date a couple weeks after her public humiliation and she just sorta... Goes with it anyway and dates him while not dating him and dating she's not really dating him. I guess? I do not understand the motives of either of them. Mae Whitman is the best part of this movie, and I normally quite like Sandra Bullock. The whole thing just sorta happens to you, wandering from one plot point to the next with no real sense of a larger purpose or real message. Oof.