![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Reaction: new Beauty and the Beast series
I'm a huge fan of the '87 Linda Hamilton/Ron Perlman tv series, Beauty and the Beast. I heard a while ago they were rebooting it, and only recently found out this show is now actually airing, so I tried the pilot.
Fairytales: The current zeitgeist of fairytales is interesting to me. We've got all these Snow White movies and Once Upon a Time and a fair number of other things cropping up, and all of them suck. First of all--why now? Why didn't Ever After usher in a new age of fairy tale reboot? Second of all--why aren't traditional retellings considered good enough? Do you know we haven't gotten a tradition cinematic Beauty and the Beast on the big screen since Cocteau? Why not? It's popular! Why does it have to be these crazy cross-overs and/or historical and/or modern retellings? Go read Beauty by Robin McKinley; then tell me it can't done.
I hate the show Once Upon a Time. I stuck with it for a long time--longer than I should have--just because I love fairytales so damn much, and I thought the premise was really neat. Also, fairytales are about girls. They're not the most empowering stories there are about girls, but they're about girls. The central characters are usually girls. And even though sometimes the girls don't have a lot of agency, a lot of times they have as much agency as they possibly can given the context. So more fairy tales! But stop sucking.
Legacy of 1987 show: I love--I love I love I love, with an undying devotion--the 1980s B&B show with Linda Hamilton and Ron Perlman. That said, it's not actually a good show. It had some good elements. The beast looked great, Perlman was great in the role, and the attempt to build an mythos around him was laudable. Chandler was a very advanced feminist role for the time, but at the same time got to be sensitive and vulnerable.
Still, Hamilton was kind of awful (don't get me wrong; I love some of her later work), the plots were terrible, the mythos (laudable as it was) made no sense, Catherine at times was completely damseled to the point of destruction, and the writing was appalling. When I went online to read people's reactions to the new B&B, I was surprised to see that show held up to the skies. Come on, people. Don't gloss over what it really was.
However, one thing that it was was a show about a guy who looked different. Different to the point of deformity. I don't mean Vincent's deformity's were ugly or gross, because not all deformities are. Vincent, I'm sure many of us believe, is hot. However, it's also possible to believe he was hated and feared because of how he looked, and Catherine dealing with that was a big part of the show.
Since this new show isn't about that, I wish they wouldn't call it B&B. I wish they wouldn't use Catherine and Vincent's names. It just . . . makes me sad.
J.T.: So this guy is the new Father. HAHAHHAHAHA okay we'll see what they do with him. I really liked him playing chess with Vincent at the end. Can't remember if Father and Vincent played chess, but it seemed like something they would do.
NYPD etc: I like that the chief guy is a person of color. I also liked the way he said, "Hey, I'm trying to eat" while they were telling him something gruesome--it was a very small moment, but it suggests he could actually have a character. I'm looking forward to seeing more of him.
I also feel like I should hate the forensics guy, but I didn't. I don't know why, because a lot of times I hate the pretty guys who are supposed to be charming, and I just didn't.
I don't like that this show is a procedural. But hey, so was the old B&B. The plots were dumb for that show, and I just didn't care. Plus, some shows that start out as procedurals sort of fade that aspect out. BtVS wasn't a procedural, but it was very much one-plot-per-week, and then it wasn't. So, here's hoping.
Vargas: I'm excited that there is a female detective team. I was just thinking the other day (while watching Due South) that while we've managed to get the girls in cop shows, we still don't get buddy girl cops, while we still have buddy boy cops all the time (and some girl/boy buddy cops). I was thinking specifically about Law and Order, and about how I bet that show wouldn't go for two girl detectives. To get two girls who 1) appear to kick ass, 2) appear to have a good relationship and friendship, and 3) are people of color just kind of rocked my world. I really hope they keep and strengthen this friendship, and make it important to the characters.
Also, I would cast this actress as Elisa Maza. Because it is true that the closest thing to the 80s B&B was Disney's Gargoyles (a kickass show which always deserved a live action version).
Catherine: I had no idea this show had come out. I've heard rumors about it for years--basically ever since I had access to the internet. I cared about exactly three shows before I started watching BtVS, and they were, in this order, Christy, Gargoyles, and B&B (and far enough behind that it might not be worth mentioning, except I still liked it far better than all the other shows out there: Batman: the Animated Series). So anyway, more recently, like last year or something, I heard that they were actually going for it, but that the beast wasn't going to be a beast, and I was like, "Whatever, hope it flops; you hurt my soul, television."
But when I was thinking about the 80s show again today, I thought I'd check the status of the project, and lo and behold it was already out, and six eps had aired. Crazy sauce. So, without looking at any info about it, I found it on the CW site and started watching the pilot.
Only to see Lana.
I've only seen about nine episodes of Smallville. This was because the show was just so bad, I couldn't stand it. There were many, many bad things about it, none of which were named Michael Rosenbaum or Lex Luthor, but were named pretty much everything else. But two of the worst things were Clark Kent and Lana Lang. I just couldn't tell whether Tom Welling or KK were the worse actor. And I hated the way they did their makeup.
Well, now that someone competent is on her makeup, I really like looking at her face. Also am really glad they decided to cast someone who is mixed race. And? Her acting is not nearly as bad as I remember. Or she's vastly improved. Either way, she only hurt to watch a little. The best part is, I feel like there's room for her to grow into the role. Pilots--even first seasons--are almost always shaky. You've gotta cut 'em some slack and give them some room for them to get used to who they need to be, and then step back and judge. I am actually very eager to see where KK will take this part.
I enjoyed the throw-back to the old series, with the idea that Catherine initially wanted to be a lawyer, but ended up becoming a detective because of her mom. I think giving Catherine a new role is a good idea, so I don't have to compare it too much to the old one. Besides, a lot of times lawyers in action plots feels contrived--even more than reporters in action plots. It's not that lawyers never end up in the thick of action; it's just that they're less likely to than say, a cop. So, make her a cop! Good idea. It allows her to kick ass without having to come up with dumb reasons for it.
And I like that they obviously want to make Catherine kick ass. Yes, she's a tiny person so it might seem a little ridiculous, but she comes across as athletic enough that I can totally see her as this kind of wiry terror who has speed on her side in a fight. And no, a gal doesn't have to kick ass to be a strong character, but in plots where the boy has to bust out and save her all the time, it becomes sort of problematic. Yes, girls are statistically physically weaker, but god, that doesn't mean they can never throw a punch.
The tradition of this show, and the tradition of this type of story, has a lot lot lot of damsel in distress, just by it's very nature. The only way to really avoid that stereotype would be for once to make the beastly-type a girl, and the beauty a boy. Personally, I'd love that . . . but I'm also a great big sap for the other way around. That doesn't make it right. It probably means I'm a part of the problem instead of part of the solution, since something in me does get jazzed at innocent girls saved by guys with a darkness within them. But if you are going to do that kind of story, I want the "innocent" girl to have her own conflicts as well--something that can be bigger or just as important as the guy's darkness. Buffy/Angel, obviously, really did that for me, because Buffy basically loses her innocence and BtVS is about her conflict, not Angel's. I can't see this Catherine really living up to Buffy, but at least she's not a wilting violet.
Vincent: Ugh. I don't know what to say. Again, I'm disappointed that he can't just be a beast. I'm also flummoxed at the idea that in many respects, we seem to be going backwards from the place we got to in the narrative in the 1960s through early 90s. I feel like all of this rebooting of things like Sherlock etc is just an excuse to focus on white males because hey, making Sherlock black or a girl would be wrong. And making a guy actually look like a beast would be unappealing, whereas in the 80s, everyone wanted to push the envelope. (Actually, not everyone. The creators of the show wanted there to be more Catherine/Vincent romance, but the network would not allow the two to kiss, since it stank of interspecies romance, and they thought it would turn people off. Um, wut?)
OTOH, I like the Hulk. I have had and always will have a thing for the Hulk, so if I forget this is called B&B and that these folks are called Vincent and Catherine, I have some interest in it. Actually, a lot of interest, if you focus on his inability to control himself and the fact this might have been done to him, but this is also who he is. Who people are--animals, deep down. Anyway, there are some interesting directions to go with that.
Also, I like the government experiment stuff. It was suggested that Vincent in the old show was an experiment, but it never really got developed that much. I always wanted to know how exactly he came about, and I love origin stories, so dealing with Vincent's origins interests me.
I don't know how I feel about the actor. I usually pretty much automatically dislike guys TV shows expect me to find pretty. This is because I'm not really attracted to pretty; I often find them to be bad actors; and I have a different aesthetic than whoever's casting, I guess. This guy doesn't turn me off, exactly, but he's not doing wonders for me either. He weirdly reminds me of Keenau Reeves. I totally want to be on board with his manpain, because this kind of manpain interests me, but so far I just can't tell whether he's just going to seem mopey and overdramatic, or whether I'm going to be able to buy into it.
A lot of that has to do with the writing as well as the actor. I thought Boreanaz was atrocious, but I did find him hot. And I thought most of Angel's lines were actually quite dumb, but that the arc, background, and motivations of his character were really interesting. So, I can be persuaded to like things that aren't very good at first. The main question is whether they'll get better.
Overall: I'm going to keep watching this show, at least until I've watched all the episodes that have aired so far (5 more). I didn't think the pilot was good, but it wasn't as awful as I was expecting. It has potential to be interesting if it can emerge from the quagmire that is often season 1 of a new show.
Fairytales: The current zeitgeist of fairytales is interesting to me. We've got all these Snow White movies and Once Upon a Time and a fair number of other things cropping up, and all of them suck. First of all--why now? Why didn't Ever After usher in a new age of fairy tale reboot? Second of all--why aren't traditional retellings considered good enough? Do you know we haven't gotten a tradition cinematic Beauty and the Beast on the big screen since Cocteau? Why not? It's popular! Why does it have to be these crazy cross-overs and/or historical and/or modern retellings? Go read Beauty by Robin McKinley; then tell me it can't done.
I hate the show Once Upon a Time. I stuck with it for a long time--longer than I should have--just because I love fairytales so damn much, and I thought the premise was really neat. Also, fairytales are about girls. They're not the most empowering stories there are about girls, but they're about girls. The central characters are usually girls. And even though sometimes the girls don't have a lot of agency, a lot of times they have as much agency as they possibly can given the context. So more fairy tales! But stop sucking.
Legacy of 1987 show: I love--I love I love I love, with an undying devotion--the 1980s B&B show with Linda Hamilton and Ron Perlman. That said, it's not actually a good show. It had some good elements. The beast looked great, Perlman was great in the role, and the attempt to build an mythos around him was laudable. Chandler was a very advanced feminist role for the time, but at the same time got to be sensitive and vulnerable.
Still, Hamilton was kind of awful (don't get me wrong; I love some of her later work), the plots were terrible, the mythos (laudable as it was) made no sense, Catherine at times was completely damseled to the point of destruction, and the writing was appalling. When I went online to read people's reactions to the new B&B, I was surprised to see that show held up to the skies. Come on, people. Don't gloss over what it really was.
However, one thing that it was was a show about a guy who looked different. Different to the point of deformity. I don't mean Vincent's deformity's were ugly or gross, because not all deformities are. Vincent, I'm sure many of us believe, is hot. However, it's also possible to believe he was hated and feared because of how he looked, and Catherine dealing with that was a big part of the show.
Since this new show isn't about that, I wish they wouldn't call it B&B. I wish they wouldn't use Catherine and Vincent's names. It just . . . makes me sad.
J.T.: So this guy is the new Father. HAHAHHAHAHA okay we'll see what they do with him. I really liked him playing chess with Vincent at the end. Can't remember if Father and Vincent played chess, but it seemed like something they would do.
NYPD etc: I like that the chief guy is a person of color. I also liked the way he said, "Hey, I'm trying to eat" while they were telling him something gruesome--it was a very small moment, but it suggests he could actually have a character. I'm looking forward to seeing more of him.
I also feel like I should hate the forensics guy, but I didn't. I don't know why, because a lot of times I hate the pretty guys who are supposed to be charming, and I just didn't.
I don't like that this show is a procedural. But hey, so was the old B&B. The plots were dumb for that show, and I just didn't care. Plus, some shows that start out as procedurals sort of fade that aspect out. BtVS wasn't a procedural, but it was very much one-plot-per-week, and then it wasn't. So, here's hoping.
Vargas: I'm excited that there is a female detective team. I was just thinking the other day (while watching Due South) that while we've managed to get the girls in cop shows, we still don't get buddy girl cops, while we still have buddy boy cops all the time (and some girl/boy buddy cops). I was thinking specifically about Law and Order, and about how I bet that show wouldn't go for two girl detectives. To get two girls who 1) appear to kick ass, 2) appear to have a good relationship and friendship, and 3) are people of color just kind of rocked my world. I really hope they keep and strengthen this friendship, and make it important to the characters.
Also, I would cast this actress as Elisa Maza. Because it is true that the closest thing to the 80s B&B was Disney's Gargoyles (a kickass show which always deserved a live action version).
Catherine: I had no idea this show had come out. I've heard rumors about it for years--basically ever since I had access to the internet. I cared about exactly three shows before I started watching BtVS, and they were, in this order, Christy, Gargoyles, and B&B (and far enough behind that it might not be worth mentioning, except I still liked it far better than all the other shows out there: Batman: the Animated Series). So anyway, more recently, like last year or something, I heard that they were actually going for it, but that the beast wasn't going to be a beast, and I was like, "Whatever, hope it flops; you hurt my soul, television."
But when I was thinking about the 80s show again today, I thought I'd check the status of the project, and lo and behold it was already out, and six eps had aired. Crazy sauce. So, without looking at any info about it, I found it on the CW site and started watching the pilot.
Only to see Lana.
I've only seen about nine episodes of Smallville. This was because the show was just so bad, I couldn't stand it. There were many, many bad things about it, none of which were named Michael Rosenbaum or Lex Luthor, but were named pretty much everything else. But two of the worst things were Clark Kent and Lana Lang. I just couldn't tell whether Tom Welling or KK were the worse actor. And I hated the way they did their makeup.
Well, now that someone competent is on her makeup, I really like looking at her face. Also am really glad they decided to cast someone who is mixed race. And? Her acting is not nearly as bad as I remember. Or she's vastly improved. Either way, she only hurt to watch a little. The best part is, I feel like there's room for her to grow into the role. Pilots--even first seasons--are almost always shaky. You've gotta cut 'em some slack and give them some room for them to get used to who they need to be, and then step back and judge. I am actually very eager to see where KK will take this part.
I enjoyed the throw-back to the old series, with the idea that Catherine initially wanted to be a lawyer, but ended up becoming a detective because of her mom. I think giving Catherine a new role is a good idea, so I don't have to compare it too much to the old one. Besides, a lot of times lawyers in action plots feels contrived--even more than reporters in action plots. It's not that lawyers never end up in the thick of action; it's just that they're less likely to than say, a cop. So, make her a cop! Good idea. It allows her to kick ass without having to come up with dumb reasons for it.
And I like that they obviously want to make Catherine kick ass. Yes, she's a tiny person so it might seem a little ridiculous, but she comes across as athletic enough that I can totally see her as this kind of wiry terror who has speed on her side in a fight. And no, a gal doesn't have to kick ass to be a strong character, but in plots where the boy has to bust out and save her all the time, it becomes sort of problematic. Yes, girls are statistically physically weaker, but god, that doesn't mean they can never throw a punch.
The tradition of this show, and the tradition of this type of story, has a lot lot lot of damsel in distress, just by it's very nature. The only way to really avoid that stereotype would be for once to make the beastly-type a girl, and the beauty a boy. Personally, I'd love that . . . but I'm also a great big sap for the other way around. That doesn't make it right. It probably means I'm a part of the problem instead of part of the solution, since something in me does get jazzed at innocent girls saved by guys with a darkness within them. But if you are going to do that kind of story, I want the "innocent" girl to have her own conflicts as well--something that can be bigger or just as important as the guy's darkness. Buffy/Angel, obviously, really did that for me, because Buffy basically loses her innocence and BtVS is about her conflict, not Angel's. I can't see this Catherine really living up to Buffy, but at least she's not a wilting violet.
Vincent: Ugh. I don't know what to say. Again, I'm disappointed that he can't just be a beast. I'm also flummoxed at the idea that in many respects, we seem to be going backwards from the place we got to in the narrative in the 1960s through early 90s. I feel like all of this rebooting of things like Sherlock etc is just an excuse to focus on white males because hey, making Sherlock black or a girl would be wrong. And making a guy actually look like a beast would be unappealing, whereas in the 80s, everyone wanted to push the envelope. (Actually, not everyone. The creators of the show wanted there to be more Catherine/Vincent romance, but the network would not allow the two to kiss, since it stank of interspecies romance, and they thought it would turn people off. Um, wut?)
OTOH, I like the Hulk. I have had and always will have a thing for the Hulk, so if I forget this is called B&B and that these folks are called Vincent and Catherine, I have some interest in it. Actually, a lot of interest, if you focus on his inability to control himself and the fact this might have been done to him, but this is also who he is. Who people are--animals, deep down. Anyway, there are some interesting directions to go with that.
Also, I like the government experiment stuff. It was suggested that Vincent in the old show was an experiment, but it never really got developed that much. I always wanted to know how exactly he came about, and I love origin stories, so dealing with Vincent's origins interests me.
I don't know how I feel about the actor. I usually pretty much automatically dislike guys TV shows expect me to find pretty. This is because I'm not really attracted to pretty; I often find them to be bad actors; and I have a different aesthetic than whoever's casting, I guess. This guy doesn't turn me off, exactly, but he's not doing wonders for me either. He weirdly reminds me of Keenau Reeves. I totally want to be on board with his manpain, because this kind of manpain interests me, but so far I just can't tell whether he's just going to seem mopey and overdramatic, or whether I'm going to be able to buy into it.
A lot of that has to do with the writing as well as the actor. I thought Boreanaz was atrocious, but I did find him hot. And I thought most of Angel's lines were actually quite dumb, but that the arc, background, and motivations of his character were really interesting. So, I can be persuaded to like things that aren't very good at first. The main question is whether they'll get better.
Overall: I'm going to keep watching this show, at least until I've watched all the episodes that have aired so far (5 more). I didn't think the pilot was good, but it wasn't as awful as I was expecting. It has potential to be interesting if it can emerge from the quagmire that is often season 1 of a new show.