"Each first-season episode was written by English screenwriter Steven Knight (Eastern Promises and Peaky Blinders)"
I am all in! I'm ready for the bloody violence and quiet, reluctant hero.
See, like three of the other debut shows, has been renewed already for a second season, although The Hollywood Reporter revealed recently that a different creative team will be running the series going forward -- and we think this is a good thing.
It continues the trend, with the new Apple TV+ shows, that the series with an entrenched creator are more successful out of the gate than those without one.
Huh? So it's good that they are changing the creative team but shows that don't change creative teams are more successful? Color me confused.
I agree with another comment above, too much comparison to GoT but this has been the trend no matter what reviews you read about a much hyped TV release. It appears GoT is the gold standard that all of these newly released TV shows will be compared to. When expectations are that high you can end up missing out on a really good TV show.
Case in point: I just recently got done with the first season of Carnival Row on Amazon Prime and that was amazing to me. I really enjoyed it and yet there are no shortages of GoT comparisons by various writers. I guess this trend won't stop until a few years from now.
Kinda sad that the only thing that matters is how the show compares to GoT. While, of course, that's not the only thing you mentioned, it still was mentioned far too often. That shouldn't be one of the main factors.
Is this a Game of Thrones knockoff? If not, I just don't get these reviews/comparisons.
I'll want to see this one, but I can see one plot point that I want explained before seeing a single episode. How can people who can't see tell that a couple of babies, who presumably have the same lack of communication skills that real world babies do, can see?
I'll want to see this one, but I can see one plot point that I want explained before seeing a single episode. How can people who can't see tell that a couple of babies, who presumably have the same lack of communication skills that real world babies do, can see?
Reading books.
That's the part I can't sort out. Who taught them to read?
Dude it isn't even out yet and you're calling it a bomb? The audience may love it and may be a reason to subscribe for them. Heck YOU might even like it. Can you stop spamming this comment on TV+ Shows?
I'll want to see this one, but I can see one plot point that I want explained before seeing a single episode. How can people who can't see tell that a couple of babies, who presumably have the same lack of communication skills that real world babies do, can see?
Reading books.
When was the last time you saw the average baby reading a book? A couple of the previews I've seen suggest that the adults realize it when the kids are still infants. Seem far-fetched to me.
It helps when you base a story (TV series) on a well known and liked book.
Apple...there’s thousands of them out there. Pick one!
I think I read somewhere that Apple is doing a show on Issac Asimov's Foundation series? That will be a good one. Sorry can't fact-check my own post...but I believe I did read that. Excited.
You did. It's coming, but not for launch.
This story, recently updated, seems to imply otherwise. Am I mis-reading it?
I'll want to see this one, but I can see one plot point that I want explained before seeing a single episode...
Huh? You don't think that will be explained as the story unfolds, in due course?? I'm sure if you wait, there will be spoilers all over the 'net to help you cope with viewing.
I interpreted his comment as "Even though I haven't seen a single episode I am intrigued by ..." rather than "if this isn't explained I won't watch a single episode."
I had the same reaction. If everyone is blind (and has been for generations) it's going to be tough to be good parents to seeing kids.
Kinda, but I would really like to know that there is an explanation sufficient to suspend my disbelief before seeing it. If not by the time it's revealed that the kids can actually see, then very shortly thereafter.
It helps when you base a story (TV series) on a well known and liked book.
Apple...there’s thousands of them out there. Pick one!
I think I read somewhere that Apple is doing a show on Issac Asimov's Foundation series? That will be a good one. Sorry can't fact-check my own post...but I believe I did read that. Excited.
You did. It's coming, but not for launch.
This story, recently updated, seems to imply otherwise. Am I mis-reading it?
It helps when you base a story (TV series) on a well known and liked book.
Apple...there’s thousands of them out there. Pick one!
It also helps when you base a story not on a book. Star Wars, Star Trek, BSG, Friends, CSI, Miami Vice, ER, Hill Street Blues, Lost, Seinfeld, etc., etc. Sure there are TONS of examples of hits based on prior works, but that's hardly the only path to success.
It is nearly impossible to convert a well loved book to the screen, and usually such conversions are not faithful to the original premise, which are their greatest sins. The well worn phrase “not as good as the book” exists for a reason.
It helps when you base a story (TV series) on a well known and liked book.
Apple...there’s thousands of them out there. Pick one!
It also helps when you base a story not on a book. Star Wars, Star Trek, BSG, Friends, CSI, Miami Vice, ER, Hill Street Blues, Lost, Seinfeld, etc., etc. Sure there are TONS of examples of hits based on prior works, but that's hardly the only path to success.
It is nearly impossible to convert a well loved book to the screen, and usually such conversions are not faithful to the original premise, which are their greatest sins. The well worn phrase “not as good as the book” exists for a reason.
They don’t have to be exactly faithful, and of course there are plenty examples of success there in TV and movies.
This sounded utterly lame from the moment Jason Momoa appeared on stage back in the Spring at that Apple Event and asked everyone to close their eyes. Apple will quickly learn that throwing millions of dollars at rubbish will still still give you rubbish. To be honest, I haven't seen a single trailer for anything on AppleTV+ that's made me think Oh, wow. I have to see that.
HBO's Watchmen is currently the most compelling thing on TV, in my opinion.
Watchmen is good. But so is Billions (Showtime), Succession (HBO), Ozarks (Netflix), Kidding (Showtime)
I remember reading that there was a lot of executive interference from Apple, including from Cook himself when it comes to the Apple TV+ shows. It seems to be materializing in all these lackluster upcoming shows! I fear this experiment from Apple is going to be the first of all these upcoming streaming services to flop big time! Unless they manage to really get their act together, and quickly!
As far as TV+ is concerned, Tim Cook reminds me of Dan Snyder, the owner of the Redskins. Neither can keep from interfering, and let the people alone who actually have to make the decisions and do the job.
Cook needs to worry about iPhones, Macs, Wearables, Security, Privacy, Chinese and Indian Sales, Warren's intention to break up Big Tech, and the R&D programs. IMO, that's more than enough.
He should leave the TV+ to those who really understand the idiom.
Just my two cents from a guy who owned one of the first B&W TV sets.
I’ve seen the first 2 episodes and all I can say is WOW, is it GOT, No, but it doesn’t need to be. (PS the last season sucked big time in my opinion so much it destroyed the good vibes I had about GOT, it’s that easy to screw up). I was skeptical at first as the given of lost sight seemed a bit to thin, but after 2 episodes I can see this can run much much further then I anticipated. Also a nice one is that there are scenes that I thought would never pass the prudent filter of Apple, but it did ... I like it and it’s a breath of fresh air in the see of to much content, I see the benefit of releasing slow and one by one.
My concern with AppleTV+ is not really the quality of the shows, given enough money there will be a few good ones and a few bad ones. My question is - 'what does apple bring to the table?'.
Apple has always been meticulous is choosing to enter spaces where they can bring something to the table. whether it is wearables, phones, music players, iTunes etc. I don't see anything that apple can do in streaming shows that others can't or don't have the ability to do. I am not convinced this is a great investment.
Okay, here’s the deal. There are countless examples of films that were panned by critics that went on to become viewer favorites, even Oscar winners, and make tons of money in spite of what some critic said. That penultimate asshole Rex Reed comes to mind. And when Liberace was asked if he was depressed about the way critics were panning his shows he replied, “Yes, I cry all the way to the bank.” It’s kind of like the Apple critics who live here and constantly trash the company yet Apple stills continues to succeed in spite of their tripe.
I remember reading that there was a lot of executive interference from Apple, including from Cook himself when it comes to the Apple TV+ shows. It seems to be materializing in all these lackluster upcoming shows! I fear this experiment from Apple is going to be the first of all these upcoming streaming services to flop big time! Unless they manage to really get their act together, and quickly!
What you’re referring to was a rumor, and one refuted by named sources such as Cue.
As far as TV+ is concerned, Tim Cook reminds me of Dan Snyder, the owner of the Redskins. Neither can keep from interfering, and let the people alone who actually have to make the decisions and do the job.
Cook needs to worry about iPhones, Macs, Wearables, Security, Privacy, Chinese and Indian Sales, Warren's intention to break up Big Tech, and the R&D programs. IMO, that's more than enough.
He should leave the TV+ to those who really understand the idiom.
Just my two cents from a guy who owned one of the first B&W TV sets.
Care to share just a shred of evidence to back up your absurd claim?
Comments
I am all in! I'm ready for the bloody violence and quiet, reluctant hero.
Huh? So it's good that they are changing the creative team but shows that don't change creative teams are more successful? Color me confused.
Is this a Game of Thrones knockoff? If not, I just don't get these reviews/comparisons.
SPOILER ALERT!!
Ah... spoiler redeemed. More tension.
Dude it isn't even out yet and you're calling it a bomb? The audience may love it and may be a reason to subscribe for them. Heck YOU might even like it. Can you stop spamming this comment on TV+ Shows?
https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/09/10/here-are-the-apple-tv-shows-that-you-can-watch-at-launch-and-whats-coming-soon
Kinda, but I would really like to know that there is an explanation sufficient to suspend my disbelief before seeing it. If not by the time it's revealed that the kids can actually see, then very shortly thereafter.
This couldn’t be - GOT at the end had flying dragons, burning cities and great battles. What could be taking the budget here?
Isn’t that what Netflix did?
Cook needs to worry about iPhones, Macs, Wearables, Security, Privacy, Chinese and Indian Sales, Warren's intention to break up Big Tech, and the R&D programs. IMO, that's more than enough.
He should leave the TV+ to those who really understand the idiom.
Just my two cents from a guy who owned one of the first B&W TV sets.
My question is - 'what does apple bring to the table?'.
Apple has always been meticulous is choosing to enter spaces where they can bring something to the table. whether it is wearables, phones, music players, iTunes etc. I don't see anything that apple can do in streaming shows that others can't or don't have the ability to do. I am not convinced this is a great investment.
Care to share just a shred of evidence to back up your absurd claim?