-
[QUOTE=Sundown;3902892]... If they can focus on the couple in the context of a different story, it could possibly work (I just [B]don't recall having seen it much in pop culture[/B]). ...[/QUOTE]
[B]This.[/B] I have no idea who most those characters Ambaryerno mentioned are. Worf was Star Trek, I think, DS9 maybe.
-
[QUOTE=Heroine Addict;3902938][B]This.[/B] I have no idea who most those characters Ambaryerno mentioned are. Worf was Star Trek, I think, DS9 maybe.[/QUOTE]
Chuck and Sarah: Chuck
[img]http://media.comicbook.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/chuck_sarah.jpg[/img]
Aeryn and Crichton: FarScape
[img]http://images6.fanpop.com/image/photos/36700000/Farscape-image-farscape-36758030-1920-1080.jpg[/img]
Wash and Zoe: Firefly
[img]https://i.pinimg.com/originals/03/30/e9/0330e918edec16ea741b1fb101170bf6.jpg[/img]
I mean what the heck, were you raised in a barn?
-
[QUOTE=Gambit, King of Thieves;3902916]They've both got digitals ongoing.[/QUOTE]
Okay, I didn't know either had anything going. The last I can recall them was a cameo in Wolverine.
-
[QUOTE=Ambaryerno;3902956]... I mean what the heck, were you raised in a barn?[/QUOTE]
Sorry to offend your seemingly skewed sensibilities, but I vaguely remember watching only a few eps of Farscape, and that's it. Wasn't compelled to do the same with either of the others, and am even less so, now.
-
Oh hey, Firefly! That was a good show, although with it only lasting a season and them already being married at the start, it's not really a big huge thing.
I still need to see Serenity.
-
[QUOTE=Gambit, King of Thieves;3903325]Oh hey, Firefly! That was a good show, although with it only lasting a season and them already being married at the start, it's not really a big huge thing.
I still need to see Serenity.[/QUOTE]
I'd say don't. A lot of the fanbase didn't like some of the decisions they made during the film.
The key thing about these three shows is that while the characters' relationships were a significant part of their story, they weren't the ONLY part. They had lives and conflicts of their own, and didn't NEED constant artificial drama keeping them apart or breaking them up to generate interesting stories (in fact every time the writers did so the fanbase was NOT pleased, especially when the writers tried to find increasingly convoluted means of dragging out the final hookup).
And that's GOOD WRITING. Too many writers focusing on romance subplots hook the couple up and then shrug and say, "Now what?" because they can't think past the Will They/Won't They angst and find other things to mine for stories. It's like they forget the characters have lives outside the relationship and can't evolve the story telling past the drama. Well, IRL couples have challenges and conflicts of their own, and it isn't 24/7 partner drama. I'd rather see stories where one partner is experiencing a problem of their own, and the other supports them through it. For example, the primary conflict through the first half of season 4 of Chuck was whether Chuck's mother was good or bad. One of Sarah's main roles in the plot was protecting Chuck's "blindspot," since he admitted he wasn't able to trust his own judgment where she was concerned. It played to the strengths of their relationship and generated some secondary conflicts between them, (particularly when Sarah has Chuck's mother arrested behind his back after her cover story fails to check out) but without introducing dysfunction or toxicity (I still say that anyone writing relationships should be made to sit down and watch Chuck, because that staff nailed it).
-
[QUOTE=Ambaryerno;3903366]I'd say don't. A lot of the fanbase didn't like some of the decisions they made during the film.
The key thing about these three shows is that while the characters' relationships were a significant part of their story, they weren't the ONLY part. They had lives and conflicts of their own, and didn't NEED constant artificial drama keeping them apart or breaking them up to generate interesting stories (in fact every time the writers did so the fanbase was NOT pleased, especially when the writers tried to find increasingly convoluted means of dragging out the final hookup).
And that's GOOD WRITING. Too many writers focusing on romance subplots hook the couple up and then shrug and say, "Now what?" because they can't think past the Will They/Won't They angst and find other things to mine for stories. It's like they forget the characters have lives outside the relationship and can't evolve the story telling past the drama. Well, IRL couples have challenges and conflicts of their own, and it isn't 24/7 partner drama. I'd rather see stories where one partner is experiencing a problem of their own, and the other supports them through it. For example, the primary conflict through the first half of season 4 of Chuck was whether Chuck's mother was good or bad. One of Sarah's main roles in the plot was protecting Chuck's "blindspot," since he admitted he wasn't able to trust his own judgment where she was concerned. It played to the strengths of their relationship and generated some secondary conflicts between them, (particularly when Sarah has Chuck's mother arrested behind his back after her cover story fails to check out) but without introducing dysfunction or toxicity (I still say that anyone writing relationships should be made to sit down and watch Chuck, because that staff nailed it).[/QUOTE]
Eh, still going to see it at some point.
And this Chuck you speak of sounds interesting. Is it on Netflix?
-
[QUOTE=Gambit, King of Thieves;3903390]Eh, still going to see it at some point.
And this Chuck you speak of sounds interesting. Is it on Netflix?[/QUOTE]
Unfortunately, no, it's not. GREAT show, though. It's a light spoof of spy fiction that succeeds in ACTUALLY being a great bit of spy fiction in of itself. Yvonne Strahovski (Sarah) would have been my choice for Captain Marvel. The guy who plays Chuck (Zachary Levi) is now playing the OTHER Captain Marvel in Shazam (he also played Fandral in the last two Thor movies). You've also got Adam Baldwin rounding out the main cast, and yeah, there's one or two Firefly references (in fact, there's a LOT of self-referential humor; Scott Bakula, who appears in seasons 2 and 3, gets an "Oh boy").
There's been talk of a reunion movie off and on to follow up on the series. The main reason I'm hoping Shazam is a success is because that could give Levi the clout to get 'er done.
-
[QUOTE=Ambaryerno;3903406]Unfortunately, no, it's not. GREAT show, though. It's a light spoof of spy fiction that succeeds in ACTUALLY being a great bit of spy fiction in of itself. Yvonne Strahovski (Sarah) would have been my choice for Captain Marvel. The guy who plays Chuck (Zachary Levi) is now playing the OTHER Captain Marvel in Shazam (he also played Fandral in the last two Thor movies). You've also got Adam Baldwin rounding out the main cast, and yeah, there's one or two Firefly references (in fact, there's a LOT of self-referential humor; Scott Bakula, who appears in seasons 2 and 3, gets an "Oh boy").
There's been talk of a reunion movie off and on to follow up on the series. The main reason I'm hoping Shazam is a success is because that could give Levi the clout to get 'er done.[/QUOTE]
Have you seen Keeping up with the Joneses? From the trailer for Chuck, they seem similar.
-
[QUOTE=Ambaryerno;3903406]Unfortunately, no, it's not. GREAT show, though. It's a light spoof of spy fiction that succeeds in ACTUALLY being a great bit of spy fiction in of itself. Yvonne Strahovski (Sarah) would have been my choice for Captain Marvel. The guy who plays Chuck (Zachary Levi) is now playing the OTHER Captain Marvel in Shazam (he also played Fandral in the last two Thor movies). You've also got Adam Baldwin rounding out the main cast, and yeah, there's one or two Firefly references (in fact, there's a LOT of self-referential humor; Scott Bakula, who appears in seasons 2 and 3, gets an "Oh boy").
There's been talk of a reunion movie off and on to follow up on the series. The main reason I'm hoping Shazam is a success is because that could give Levi the clout to get 'er done.[/QUOTE]
Chuck really was great. I just wish I watched the rest of it, I think I stopped during the season Brandon Routh was the villain.
-
[QUOTE=Gambit, King of Thieves;3903412]Have you seen Keeping up with the Joneses? From the trailer for Chuck, they seem similar.[/QUOTE]
No....the two of....No just No
-
[QUOTE=PrezValentine;3903989]Chuck really was great. I just wish I watched the rest of it, I think I stopped during the season Brandon Routh was the villain.[/QUOTE]
It’s funny, everyone hated him as a good guy, but as soon as he did his Heel Turn he became a much more enjoyable character.
-
[QUOTE=Ambaryerno;3904016]It’s funny, everyone hated him (...)[/QUOTE]
You should probably spoiler tag that.
-
[QUOTE=Maestroneto;3904049]You should probably spoiler tag that.[/QUOTE]
Pretty sure the statue of limitations has passed on something that aired 10 years ago and is a well-established part of the show mythology. I mean it’s right in the very first paragraph of the character’s article on Wikipedia.
-
[QUOTE=Ambaryerno;3903366]I'd say don't. A lot of the fanbase didn't like some of the decisions they made during the film.
The key thing about these three shows is that while the characters' relationships were a significant part of their story, they weren't the ONLY part. They had lives and conflicts of their own, and didn't NEED constant artificial drama keeping them apart or breaking them up to generate interesting stories (in fact every time the writers did so the fanbase was NOT pleased, especially when the writers tried to find increasingly convoluted means of dragging out the final hookup).
And that's GOOD WRITING. Too many writers focusing on romance subplots hook the couple up and then shrug and say, "Now what?" because they can't think past the Will They/Won't They angst and find other things to mine for stories. It's like they forget the characters have lives outside the relationship and can't evolve the story telling past the drama. Well, IRL couples have challenges and conflicts of their own, and it isn't 24/7 partner drama. I'd rather see stories where one partner is experiencing a problem of their own, and the other supports them through it. For example, the primary conflict through the first half of season 4 of Chuck was whether Chuck's mother was good or bad. One of Sarah's main roles in the plot was protecting Chuck's "blindspot," since he admitted he wasn't able to trust his own judgment where she was concerned. It played to the strengths of their relationship and generated some secondary conflicts between them, (particularly when Sarah has Chuck's mother arrested behind his back after her cover story fails to check out) but without introducing dysfunction or toxicity (I still say that anyone writing relationships should be made to sit down and watch Chuck, because that staff nailed it).[/QUOTE]
This is so true.