Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Alhazred
Feb 16, 2011






Groovelord Neato posted:

Scalia defended Jack Bauer's use of torture during a panel discussion at a legal conference as if he and the actions he took were real.

At least in the first seasons torture is not only portrayed as ineffective but they frequently torture the wrong persons. The only way they make the bad guys talk is by cutting deals with them.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Groovelord Neato
Dec 6, 2014




Orange Devil posted:

God forbid people become more skeptical of the evidence provided by US prosecutors before condemning people to a life of slavery and torture. Truly, my heart bleeds for the poor prosecutors.

Yeah I'm pretty sure things have been swinging the other way and it turns out a lot of forensic science is a lot less science (or at least much less accurate) than we've been led to believe in the real world. I know "arson science" was straight up folklore that led to a conviction where we can 1000 percent say an innocent man was executed.

Shaman Tank Spec
Dec 26, 2003

*blep*




Groovelord Neato posted:

Yeah I'm pretty sure things have been swinging the other way and it turns out a lot of forensic science is a lot less science (or at least much less accurate) than we've been led to believe in the real world. I know "arson science" was straight up folklore that led to a conviction where we can 1000 percent say an innocent man was executed.

Yeah but that's not what's happening, though. It's not like Johnny Mouthbreather from Cousinkiss, Alabama is sitting there going "hmm, I am not sure about the merits of this untested field of science. The lack of credible, peer-reviewed publications indicates that possibly the foundation isn't as solid as they're claiming, and we should instead consider the following...", which would be good.

It's more like "if that guy did it, how come you don't have 8K satellite footage of him choking his wife to death like the prosecutors do on my shows? Not guilty" and -- even more troublingly -- "if that guy didn't do it, how come he ain't got 8K footage of him being at his cousin's wedding at the time shaking hands with a notary public like the defence attorneys do on my shows? Guilty!".

Questioning the claimed facts and maintaining a skeptical attitude? Good. Thinking TV shows are reality and if reality doesn't fit TV show reality, then TV shows should take precedence.

E: I absolutely think the American justice system is a joke, but it isn't made any better by people thinking TV is real life.

Shaman Tank Spec fucked around with this message at 11:04 on May 5, 2021

alpha_destroy
Mar 22, 2010

Billy Butler: Fat Guy by Day, Doubles Machine by Night


Shaman Tank Spec posted:

Yeah but that's not what's happening, though. It's not like Johnny Mouthbreather from Cousinkiss, Alabama is sitting there going "hmm, I am not sure about the merits of this untested field of science. The lack of credible, peer-reviewed publications indicates that possibly the foundation isn't as solid as they're claiming, and we should instead consider the following...", which would be good.

It's more like "if that guy did it, how come you don't have 8K satellite footage of him choking his wife to death like the prosecutors do on my shows? Not guilty" and -- even more troublingly -- "if that guy didn't do it, how come he ain't got 8K footage of him being at his cousin's wedding at the time shaking hands with a notary public like the defence attorneys do on my shows? Guilty!".

Questioning the claimed facts and maintaining a skeptical attitude? Good. Thinking TV shows are reality and if reality doesn't fit TV show reality, then TV shows should take precedence.

E: I absolutely think the American justice system is a joke, but it isn't made any better by people thinking TV is real life.

If anything you're one of the credulous parties here, having fallen for the narrative prosecutors created for the public.

Sure, studies showed that shows like CSI changed people's expectations when it came to evidence. But more importantly, shows like CSI lent credibility to the pseudoscientific methods and 'experts' cops and prosecutors use. The whole thing about it making prosecutors' jobs harder was made up, by them. The story doesn't even make sense if you think about it for a second: "help, the public thinks we are sexy superheroes and it's making our job of getting them to trust our bullshit harder."

Prosecutors and cops are lying, constantly. In the courtroom and out of it. CSI was an absolute boon for cops and prosecutors and some of the most effective copaganda around.

An insane mind
Aug 11, 2018



Think about it this way, if csi or law and order didn't help police and prosecutors why do they keep lending their assistance in creating these shows? Same with the military and movies.

Sky Shadowing
Feb 13, 2012

At least we're not the Thalmor (yet)


I imagine that just as the jury gets confused about what forensic science can find, so too might the suspects.

The real-life labs saying "we found blood at the scene but all we can say right now is it didn't belong to the victim."

The interrogators get to say to the suspect, "we found blood at the scene and we know it wasn't the victims", and if the suspect is guilty, they might go, "hey I can explain why MY blood was at the scene..." because CSI has convinced him that means that the lab is going to tell them it was his blood.

Shaman Tank Spec
Dec 26, 2003

*blep*




Sky Shadowing posted:

I imagine that just as the jury gets confused about what forensic science can find, so too might the suspects.

That reminds me of this bit in David Simon's Homicide, which was also used in The Wire.

quote:

Not long ago, several veteran homicide detectives in Detroit were publicly upbraided and disciplined by their superiors for using the office Xerox machine as a polygraph device. It seems that the detectives, when confronted with a statement of dubious veracity, would sometimes adjourn to the Xerox room and load three sheets of paper into the feeder.

“Truth,” said the first.

“Truth,” said the second.

“Lie,” said the third.

Then the suspect would be led into the room and told to put his hand against the side of the machine. The detectives would ask the man’s name, listen to the answer, then hit the copy button.

Truth.

And where do you live?

Truth again.

And did you or did you not kill Tater, shooting him down like a dog in the 1200 block of North Durham Street?

Lie. Well, well: You lying motherfucker.

In Baltimore, the homicide detectives read newspaper accounts of the Detroit controversy and wondered why anyone had a problem. Polygraph by copier was an old trick; it had been attempted on more than one occasion in the sixth-floor Xerox room. Gene Constantine, a veteran of Stanton’s shift, once gave a mindless wonder the coordination test for drunk drivers (“Follow my finger with your eyes, but don’t move your head ... Now stand on one foot”), then loudly declared that the man’s performance indicated obvious deception.

“You flunked,” Constantine told him. “You’re lying.”

Convinced, the suspect confessed.

alpha_destroy posted:

Sure, studies showed that shows like CSI changed people's expectations when it came to evidence. But more importantly, shows like CSI lent credibility to the pseudoscientific methods and 'experts' cops and prosecutors use.

Well that's also bad! In fact probably even worse!

At this point we're about 5000 miles (so a week's march for Cersei's troops) away from Game of Thrones, but it was pretty shocking to watch some of those recent(ish) true crime documentaries, like The Staircase and The Jinx, where the jury is told by some "scientist" that his absolutely rock-solid science says X, and when the documentarians very lightly scratched the surface it turns out that the "scientist" is some guy with almost literally a weekend's training in some guy's garage, and there is absolutely zero scientific theory behind the bullcrap that led him to his "to a reasonable scientific certainty" statements.

Shaman Tank Spec fucked around with this message at 14:08 on May 5, 2021

Groovelord Neato
Dec 6, 2014




Exhibit A was the best of the slew of documentaries on the subject. Didn't quite get as much buzz as the Confession Tapes (which is also great).

PeterCat
Apr 8, 2020

Believe women.


bobjr posted:

Thinking about that I wonder how much of the audience agreed with Dany burning that woman even though she was all “your people raped me and murdered my people, why would I help you?”

Mirror Master was the real hero of the people.

LoL that she slaughtered Kal Drogos horse on him as a "gently caress you."

Pattonesque
Jul 14, 2004
johnny jesus and the infield fly rule

https://twitter.com/RottenTomatoes/status/1389960012097744900

An insane mind
Aug 11, 2018




I know it's not on purpose but they all look incredibly constipated...

Vichan
Oct 1, 2014

I'LL PUNISH YOU ACCORDING TO YOUR CRIME


Corlys Velaryon looks loving amazing.

Zaphod42
Sep 13, 2012

If there's anything more important than my ego around, I want it caught and shot now.


Sky Shadowing posted:

I imagine that just as the jury gets confused about what forensic science can find, so too might the suspects.

The real-life labs saying "we found blood at the scene but all we can say right now is it didn't belong to the victim."

The interrogators get to say to the suspect, "we found blood at the scene and we know it wasn't the victims", and if the suspect is guilty, they might go, "hey I can explain why MY blood was at the scene..." because CSI has convinced him that means that the lab is going to tell them it was his blood.

There's a story I heard once about some guys who got arrested and the cops took them back to the copier machine and told them it was a lie detector. They wrote the word "Truth" and "Lie" on pieces of paper and hit the copy button while the suspect had his hand over the scanner. Scan -> Truth. Scan -> Truth. Scan - > Lie. Dude fell for it.

Cops aren't your friends.

Shaman Tank Spec posted:

That reminds me of this bit in David Simon's Homicide, which was also used in The Wire.

E:FB


Casting Matt Smith was really smart, I had zero interest in this and now I may actually give it a chance.

But honestly I'll just be watching it to see how bad it is.

Zaphod42 fucked around with this message at 18:14 on May 5, 2021

stev
Jan 22, 2013

Please be excited.





Watch how no one watches that series.

LividLiquid
Apr 13, 2002

YOUNG CUCKS YOU CAN'T BEAT US YOU'RE LAUGHABLE, TRUMP REALLY WON WE GOTTA STORM THE CAPITAL

THE ACCLAIMED ARE MAKING AMERICA GREAT AGAIN


stev posted:

Watch how no one watches that series.
I imagine the pilot will get some attention, though not nearly as much as the first show.

An insane mind
Aug 11, 2018



Game of Thrones: Doctor Who vs the Valyrians.

Sydney Bottocks
Oct 15, 2004

Eh.




I'm sure there are a bunch of people out there who're excited for this, but (like a lot of goons ITT, I'm sure), I honestly just could not give a poo poo. I think it's because I mainly dislike prequels in general; I saw how things ended up in GoT over eight seasons, I don't need another four or five telling me how we got to where we were at the start of the original series (probably the biggest exception to that rule for me was Fargo season 2, but that's because it was so drat good).

Pattonesque
Jul 14, 2004
johnny jesus and the infield fly rule

Sydney Bottocks posted:

I'm sure there are a bunch of people out there who're excited for this, but (like a lot of goons ITT, I'm sure), I honestly just could not give a poo poo. I think it's because I mainly dislike prequels in general; I saw how things ended up in GoT over eight seasons, I don't need another four or five telling me how we got to where we were at the start of the original series (probably the biggest exception to that rule for me was Fargo season 2, but that's because it was so drat good).

yeah I don't particularly care but I can see how it could be quite good. If you take the behind-the-scenes people who aren't Benioff and Weiss and give them an already completed story so they know how everything ends up and won't have to freelance when they run out of book, you might get a p. decent show out of it.

Vichan
Oct 1, 2014

I'LL PUNISH YOU ACCORDING TO YOUR CRIME

Open Source Idiom posted:

In addition to everything said above, HBO brought on a script fixer to add two episodes worth of content to the first season when the show underran. By all accounts, that scene was written by Jane Espenson.

Is there a source for this?

stev
Jan 22, 2013

Please be excited.





Sydney Bottocks posted:

(probably the biggest exception to that rule for me was Fargo season 2, but that's because it was so drat good).

I don't think you can really call that a prequel. It's just a different story in the anthology at a different time with one or two of the same characters.

Pattonesque posted:

yeah I don't particularly care but I can see how it could be quite good. If you take the behind-the-scenes people who aren't Benioff and Weiss and give them an already completed story so they know how everything ends up and won't have to freelance when they run out of book, you might get a p. decent show out of it.

I think it could turn out good, but wringing a compelling narrative out of that backstory is a very different task from adapting ASOIAF. The latter is already a very good linear story, but the former will have to expand on snippets from an already dull history book that only the hardest of core fans bought let alone enjoyed. It's like trying to adapt The Silmarillion as a follow up to the LOTR trilogy and aiming it at the same audience.

stev fucked around with this message at 21:19 on May 5, 2021

Homora Gaykemi
Apr 30, 2020
Probation
Can't post for 33 minutes!


Hopefully this works out better for Matt Smith than his last couple of attempts at joining existing franchises after leaving Dr. Who

Chris James 2
Aug 9, 2012



Homora Gaykemi posted:

Hopefully this works out better for Matt Smith than his last couple of attempts at joining existing franchises after leaving Dr. Who

Terminator Genisys sucked

The Crown ruled
Charlie Says ruled

Last Night in Soho is gonna rule
Morbius...will probably suck

I think he has a pretty good track record still, all things considered. Not his fault the Terminator franchise will never die

LividLiquid
Apr 13, 2002

YOUNG CUCKS YOU CAN'T BEAT US YOU'RE LAUGHABLE, TRUMP REALLY WON WE GOTTA STORM THE CAPITAL

THE ACCLAIMED ARE MAKING AMERICA GREAT AGAIN


I'm the only person on the planet who enjoyed Genisys and even I was disappointed at how little Matt Smith we got. He's barely in the thing. Weird that it bombing should have such a dramatic effect on his career over a role so small.

lezard_valeth
Mar 14, 2016


The main problem I have with the prequel is that the main show really didn't make me care about any of this.

If, for example, a studio came and said they would make a prequel for Lord of the Rings (and The Hobbit trilogy didn't exist as an indicator to how they treat this IP as a milk cow) that delved on how Sauron rose to power and created the One ring I would definitely be interested. Sauron is the main antagonist, and enough is mentioned in the movies to have you intrigued to know more.

Meanwhile, I can't recall if they even mentioned Daemon Targaryen in the show, and I'm most certainly sure they didn't even bothered giving a name to the other 2 Kingsguard accompanying Arthur Dayne. I did not come out of watching the finale thinking "oh gee, I wonder what happened during the Targaryen succession wars" or "i would like to know more about the story of the family of the knight to the left of Arthur Dayne".

The show stopped giving a crap about world building even sooner than it stopped giving a crap about compelling storytelling, so why should I give a crap? Specially even more so since the events of the Dance of Dragons hardly have any direct impact on how the events of the show unfold. And the core elements of the show were handled so poorly that it's probably why they discarded the idea for a White Walker prequel series and Robert Rebellion's prequel series.

Contrast this with the books where a part that I really liked (and was dissapointed was left out of the show) was when Tyrion, Aegon and co. were sailing through a segment of a river called The Sorrows which were the ruins of a very ancient and advanced civilization that fell to the greyscale plague mixed with some supernatural elements on the Shrouded Lord. I remember thinking something along the lines of "wow this could be it's own short story and there are multiple other places like this with which gurm could write his own Silmarillion".

Sky Shadowing
Feb 13, 2012

At least we're not the Thalmor (yet)


It's kind of funny that they're going with the Targaryen prequel show when the end of the show did its best to say "no actually Targaryens are evil, only Starks are good."

Pattonesque
Jul 14, 2004
johnny jesus and the infield fly rule

Not only did they not give a name to the other two Kingsguard at the Tower of Joy, they removed one of them entirely!

TOOT BOOT
May 25, 2010



I thought the Dance was interesting enough for what it was. No idea whether it'll land with a general audience though.

Xealot
Nov 25, 2002

Showdown in the Galaxy Era.



lezard_valeth posted:

Meanwhile, I can't recall if they even mentioned Daemon Targaryen in the show, and I'm most certainly sure they didn't even bothered giving a name to the other 2 Kingsguard accompanying Arthur Dayne.

Yeah, they never did. I'm pretty sure the scene with Shireen describing the Dance of the Dragons is the most explicit the show got about this period.

But also, I don't think it matters. I'm sure the thought behind this show is, "let's call a do-over on Game of Thrones without literally doing that." They're probably hoping to revive whatever good will they can for the Good Seasons, and just transpose "new" characters into very similar roles. I fully anticipate there's a de facto Cersei, a de facto Dany / Arya, a kind-of Jon Snow, etc. But with more dragons! And we won't gently caress it up this time! Promise!

I also assume it'll premiere to huge numbers, and then atrophy into moderate ones when people realize lightning doesn't strike twice and that D&D seriously poisoned the well.

stev posted:

I don't think you can really call that a prequel. It's just a different story in the anthology at a different time with one or two of the same characters.

Pretty much. Which is also what the Amazon Middle Earth show is going to be. Though I'm guessing that show is also going to be "basically Lord of the Rings but not literally," with new characters and conflicts that feel like find-replace substitutions of the famous ones. Which is exactly what Peter Jackson did to The Hobbit, I guess.

lezard_valeth
Mar 14, 2016


TOOT BOOT posted:

I thought the Dance was interesting enough for what it was. No idea whether it'll land with a general audience though.

Oh yeah, I'm not arguing it's not one of the many "interesting own stories" I mentioned before in the books. But the way this is being presented, it's not it's own thing. It's a prequel to the show, trying to hype people up by what little good will they have left, come learn the origin story of the Targaryens!...it's just not working for me.

Instead I'm very skeptical. This feels like HBO's desperate attempt to reanimate their dead cow. And if that's the case then you can bet the execs will have their hands in. Instead of artistic liberty the show will be mandated by "The Starks are popular and the good guys, put them into the story somewhere! People loved Arya's anime ninja powers, we need to have more magic ninja plot this time! We need to have evil Lannisters too! Ooooh and have a not-Ramsay in the background too! People loved Ramsay!", just like in the episodic games.

I hope we are all wrong and that the show, while probably not being able to achieve the impossible task of cleaning the bad taste in the mouth the main series left, manages to breathe some fresh air into the IP.

Groovelord Neato
Dec 6, 2014




The right move would've been Robert's Rebellion but then again I'm not the execs of a channel that let their showrunners cut their cash cow way short and completely gently caress up the landing.

Sanguinia
Jan 1, 2012

#RXT REVOLUTION~!
2000





Groovelord Neato posted:

The right move would've been Robert's Rebellion but then again I'm not the execs of a channel that let their showrunners cut their cash cow way short and completely gently caress up the landing.

If they were going to do a Roberts Rebellion Prequel the smart move would have been to make it a mid-quel that aired sometime after Season 5 or 6, like Bleach's "Turn Back The Pendulum," arc, setting the stage for the final battle by revealing all the secret origins and whatnot. Once you give away that Rhaegar and Lyanna were lovers who got married rather than Rhaegar having dishonored himself by kidnapping her you give away a lot of the intrigue about the War not being what it seemed to be from all the descriptions we got from the characters who were there.

Not that I think Prequels which depict events we KNOW are going to happen can never be good, but that would have been a much better delivery mechanism in terms of preserving mystery and setting up big twists and whatnot.

Zaphod42
Sep 13, 2012

If there's anything more important than my ego around, I want it caught and shot now.


Xealot posted:

Pretty much. Which is also what the Amazon Middle Earth show is going to be. Though I'm guessing that show is also going to be "basically Lord of the Rings but not literally," with new characters and conflicts that feel like find-replace substitutions of the famous ones. Which is exactly what Peter Jackson did to The Hobbit, I guess.

Nah, Hobbit has a million flaws but Jackson wanting it to be LOTR isn't one of them. The studio wanting to get LOTR money and forcing 3 films was the closest it came to that.

The big issues (Focusing on the invented love story over the relationship of Bilbo and the dwarves) weren't trying to be more like LOTR, but more just focus tested stupidity. Its not like Arwyn was the most important character in LOTR or anything, and Tauriel isn't even really like her either.

Its just bad in its own way, mostly all stemming from production issues when they decided to not have Del Toro direct, but decided to go ahead and make the movies anyways with Jackson, but also not let him do pre-production.

Xealot posted:

Yeah, they never did. I'm pretty sure the scene with Shireen describing the Dance of the Dragons is the most explicit the show got about this period.

But also, I don't think it matters. I'm sure the thought behind this show is, "let's call a do-over on Game of Thrones without literally doing that." They're probably hoping to revive whatever good will they can for the Good Seasons, and just transpose "new" characters into very similar roles. I fully anticipate there's a de facto Cersei, a de facto Dany / Arya, a kind-of Jon Snow, etc. But with more dragons! And we won't gently caress it up this time! Promise!

I also assume it'll premiere to huge numbers, and then atrophy into moderate ones when people realize lightning doesn't strike twice and that D&D seriously poisoned the well.

Yeah, its just trying to find an excuse of a time period to do GOT 2.0, and I agree with you, I would expect an obvious Cersei analog and an obvious Jon Snow analog.

And yeah, it'll probably be popular for the first two episodes as everybody talks about the old show and what a flop the ending was and tries the new show out of curiosity, but its unlikely to have the same staying power.

Not to mention GOT got popular because S1 was so good, and yet D&D immediately started trying to downplay the fantasy elements and play up the sex and violence and shock for more mainstream attention.

I have little faith that whoever HBO has running this won't make the same mistake. Unless the showrunner is GRRM. But he's not.

Zaphod42 fucked around with this message at 03:43 on May 6, 2021

TOOT BOOT
May 25, 2010



lezard_valeth posted:

But the way this is being presented, it's not it's own thing. It's a prequel to the show, trying to hype people up by what little good will they have left, come learn the origin story of the Targaryens!...it's just not working for me.

It's only a prequel in the sense that it takes place before the main narrative. Otherwise they're almost entirely unconnected.

LividLiquid
Apr 13, 2002

YOUNG CUCKS YOU CAN'T BEAT US YOU'RE LAUGHABLE, TRUMP REALLY WON WE GOTTA STORM THE CAPITAL

THE ACCLAIMED ARE MAKING AMERICA GREAT AGAIN


Why the gently caress does everything have to always be prequels? Show me what happens next. I promise more people would care about that, be it five years or 500. Just make it later so we can get this taste out of our mouths.

LividLiquid fucked around with this message at 07:37 on May 6, 2021

Orange Devil
Sep 30, 2010

CUNT


Bran gets brutally shanked like 10 minutes after the end of the show.

Whoever did it quips "heh, guess you didn't see *that* coming".

Orange Devil
Sep 30, 2010

CUNT


5 seasons of characters trying to warn about a building threat beyond the wall and nobody in power taking them seriously because "lol these white walkers were absolute chumps last time".

stev
Jan 22, 2013

Please be excited.





Orange Devil posted:

Bran gets brutally shanked like 10 minutes after the end of the show.

Whoever did it quips "heh, guess you didn't see *that* coming".

Given how this whole society operates I wouldn't be surprised if the new democratic rule was overthrown and replaced with some mad King within six months.

Shaman Tank Spec
Dec 26, 2003

*blep*




Orange Devil posted:

Bran gets brutally shanked like 10 minutes after the end of the show.

Whoever did it quips "heh, guess you didn't see *that* coming".

It's completely baffling that they elected Bran as their god-emperor, knowing that his body is essentially the vassal of a timeless supernatural being who doesn't give a rat's rear end about human morality.

Mantis42
Jul 26, 2010



They just kind of forgot that Bran was an elder god now.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Xealot
Nov 25, 2002

Showdown in the Galaxy Era.



LividLiquid posted:

Why the gently caress does everything have to always be prequels? Show me what happens next. I promise more people would care about that, be it five years or 500. Just make it later so we can get this taste out of our mouths.

I also have this complaint. Every goddamn genre franchise winds up in this place where the original thing is the most important event in its fictional history, so everything else becomes a supplement or coda to it. Like, the Night King dying and the Iron Throne melting is the End of History. The One Ring being destroyed is the End of History. Nothing important can possibly happen after. But, here's a random and less-important story that precedes it, replete with winks and nods to the original while never quite justifying its own existence as a unique thing.

I'd be perfectly happy with a Fourth Age of Middle Earth story, a story about Westeros entering a magic-infused Age of Exploration. Anything that doesn't carry this weight on its shoulders because nothing that surprising or significant can happen without stepping on the toes of the original.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply