A war for the sighted is brewing in Apple's season two trailer for 'See'

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
A new trailer for critically acclaimed Apple TV+ show "See" picks up right after the events of season one as Baba Voss must face his past and begin the fight for those who can see.

'See' season two premieres on August 27
'See' season two premieres on August 27


Dave Bautista joins the cast as the brother of Baba Voss (Jason Mamoa) in this post-apocalyptic drama. The latest trailer shows a war is brewing around those who can see, and the potential of using sight as a weapon.





"See" is set hundreds of years in the future where mankind has lost their vision due to a strange virus. The ability to see had been lost for so long, that it had become a myth.

Season one followed the events of two sighted children on a journey to find their father. The brutal drama has drawn obvious comparisons to "Game of Thrones," and reviews didn't make it out to be quite the hit Apple had seemed to hope.

This show was a big part of Apple's promotional material when the company launched Apple TV+. It has already been renewed for a third season ahead of the season two premier.

Subscribers can watch "See" season two on Apple TV+ when it premieres on August 27. The service costs $4.99 per month or is included in every tier of Apple One.

Read on AppleInsider

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 11
    thrangthrang Posts: 892member
    The huge problem for me with this show is I can never get over the fact they the characters move, behave, and act as though they are sighted even while the conceit of the entire story is they are blind. They traverse great distance, engage in complicated interactions, fights, and other movements, often with group orchestration. That's all I see and cannot understand.

    I mean, they do things most sighted slobs like us could not do. So the main dramatic element is constantly undermined and ultimately unnecessary. And while I understand that other senses would become heightened to compensate to the loss of vision, the action here seems far beyond this compensation...

    Otherwise, there would be a lot to like about this show....
    edited July 29
  • Reply 2 of 11
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 9,455member
    thrang said:
    The huge problem for me with this show is I can never get over the fact they the characters move, behave, and act as though they are sighted even while the conceit of the entire story is they are blind. They traverse great distance, engage in complicated interactions, fights, and other movements, often with group orchestration. That's all I see and cannot understand.

    I mean, they do things most sighted slobs like us could not do. So the main dramatic element is constantly undermined and ultimately unnecessary. And while I understand that other senses would become heightened to compensate to the loss of vision, the action here seems far beyond this compensation...

    Otherwise, there would be a lot to like about this show....
    Who ever said Science Fiction had to be based on reality or historical accuracy? That’s the thing that gets me about criticisms like yours. In any drama those who look for such things will always find discrepancies, factual errors, plot holes. What about ‘For All Mankind’ for example. The crux of the series NEVER happened. The Russians did NOT beat the U.S. to the Moon. The producers of the movie ‘Interstellar’ consulted some of the top theoretical physicists in the world, including Nobel Laureate Kip Thorn to try and get the science right when it came to black holes and Einstein/Rosen bridges (wormholes). The movie was still criticized by the reality crowd. Science Fiction just that, FICTION, and not based on reality.
    edited July 29 Hank2.0
  • Reply 3 of 11
    The show just isn’t believable even as science fiction unless they have some additional power beyond hearing, like sonar. It’s just impossible to watch.
  • Reply 4 of 11
    mknelsonmknelson Posts: 824member
    lkrupp said:
    Who ever said Science Fiction had to be based on reality or historical accuracy? That’s the thing that gets me about criticisms like yours. In any drama those who look for such things will always find discrepancies, factual errors, plot holes. What about ‘For All Mankind’ for example. The crux of the series NEVER happened. The Russians did NOT beat the U.S. to the Moon. The producers of the movie ‘Interstellar’ consulted some of the top theoretical physicists in the world, including Nobel Laureate Kip Thorn to try and get the science right when it came to black holes and Einstein/Rosen bridges (wormholes). The movie was still criticized by the reality crowd. Science Fiction just that, FICTION, and not based on reality.
    The problem I had with Interstellar is why they went to the planet closest to the black hole first? That's just bad time management!
  • Reply 5 of 11
    crowleycrowley Posts: 8,725member
    lkrupp said:
    thrang said:
    The huge problem for me with this show is I can never get over the fact they the characters move, behave, and act as though they are sighted even while the conceit of the entire story is they are blind. They traverse great distance, engage in complicated interactions, fights, and other movements, often with group orchestration. That's all I see and cannot understand.

    I mean, they do things most sighted slobs like us could not do. So the main dramatic element is constantly undermined and ultimately unnecessary. And while I understand that other senses would become heightened to compensate to the loss of vision, the action here seems far beyond this compensation...

    Otherwise, there would be a lot to like about this show....
    Who ever said Science Fiction had to be based on reality or historical accuracy? That’s the thing that gets me about criticisms like yours. In any drama those who look for such things will always find discrepancies, factual errors, plot holes. What about ‘For All Mankind’ for example. The crux of the series NEVER happened. The Russians did NOT beat the U.S. to the Moon. The producers of the movie ‘Interstellar’ consulted some of the top theoretical physicists in the world, including Nobel Laureate Kip Thorn to try and get the science right when it came to black holes and Einstein/Rosen bridges (wormholes). The movie was still criticized by the reality crowd. Science Fiction just that, FICTION, and not based on reality.
    Even within fiction you need plausibility within the conceit to enable suspension of disbelief.  Evidently some people aren't getting that with See, and your personal hurdle for plausibility would seem to be lower than it is for others.

    It's ok, you get to enjoy more things, have fun with it.  No need to complain about other people not enjoying things, that's their problem.
    byronlthrangJaphey
  • Reply 6 of 11
    byronlbyronl Posts: 149member
    The show just isn’t believable even as science fiction unless they have some additional power beyond hearing, like sonar. It’s just impossible to watch.
    apple car lidar😍
  • Reply 7 of 11
    thrangthrang Posts: 892member
    lkrupp said:
    thrang said:
    The huge problem for me with this show is I can never get over the fact they the characters move, behave, and act as though they are sighted even while the conceit of the entire story is they are blind. They traverse great distance, engage in complicated interactions, fights, and other movements, often with group orchestration. That's all I see and cannot understand.

    I mean, they do things most sighted slobs like us could not do. So the main dramatic element is constantly undermined and ultimately unnecessary. And while I understand that other senses would become heightened to compensate to the loss of vision, the action here seems far beyond this compensation...

    Otherwise, there would be a lot to like about this show....
    Who ever said Science Fiction had to be based on reality or historical accuracy? That’s the thing that gets me about criticisms like yours. In any drama those who look for such things will always find discrepancies, factual errors, plot holes. What about ‘For All Mankind’ for example. The crux of the series NEVER happened. The Russians did NOT beat the U.S. to the Moon. The producers of the movie ‘Interstellar’ consulted some of the top theoretical physicists in the world, including Nobel Laureate Kip Thorn to try and get the science right when it came to black holes and Einstein/Rosen bridges (wormholes). The movie was still criticized by the reality crowd. Science Fiction just that, FICTION, and not based on reality.
    Not at all. Fictional content can certainly invent its own rules and reality, and I enjoy a lot of different films (my favorite part of Interstellar was the end, and the infinite parallel universes, which many did not get).

    But those rules and reality must be believable within the context of its own universe, and See fails in this manner, primarily because the primary conceit is rooted in something most of us are acutely and very literally familiar with - sight (and the inverse of no sight when blindfolded or in pitch dark). There is no attempt to even invent how they are able to do what they do without sight, much less how well they accomplish complicated things singularly and as a group. Dune will have Mentats -  human computers - and I suspect we'll be much more likely to accept that as part of the larger universe they will be part of, partly because we don't have an immediate comparative to prove/disprove (and I say this referring to our subconscious response). I didn't set out watching See with a preconceived notion of this option. But as first episode progressed, it became acutely evident this was a problem.

    Good stories and scripts do not rely on "anything goes" just because its fiction. That's bad writing. Good scripts will make it believable enough for the audience's reality and plausible enough in the movie's reality to be effective.

    And See is not science fiction as much as a real drama set in a dystopian future in the aftermath of calamity. It's not Star Wars-ish, which by it's popcorn-munching comic book nature, probably has a wider berth for accepting less-than-plausible things.

    Rather than the conceit of no sight, perhaps they should have been afflicted by the inability to learn new things, or invent, or communicate ideas/pass down information in certain ways, (some affliction of the brain that happened long ago), inexorably dimming their future existence - until the the children come along that have this ability, and the conflicts ensue around that. Or whatever...


    edited July 29 muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 8 of 11
    I have absolutely no problem with the world of See and the abilities of its sightless (some of which are mysterious), I can suspend disbelief without any problems. 

    For me, however, See became increasingly problematic as the first season wore on — I was engaged with the story in the beginning, but it had lost me by the end. I forget exactly what bothered me, but regardless it was really just a half-season — I felt almost cheated, like I had gone to a production of an opera that ended unexpectedly at intermission. 

    I guess that’s the nature of this kind of exclusive, streaming-first “bingeable”production. The producers know they’ve got another season coming, because the streaming service needs complete stories for its catalogue in the long run. But I think that knowledge can lead to a sort of complacency, and ultimately disappointing endings. 

    I will give it another chance, but it needs a course correction, IMHO. We’ll see. 
  • Reply 9 of 11
    thrang said:

    … But as first epidote progressed, it became acutely evident this was a problem. …
    Wait, sorry, but does this mean your comments here are based on having only watched the first episode?
    edited July 29
  • Reply 10 of 11
    thrangthrang Posts: 892member
    thrang said:

    … But as first episode progressed, it became acutely evident this was a problem. …
    Wait, sorry, but does this mean your comments here are based on having only watched the first episode?
    No I gave up into the fourth... but for me the issue was unavoidable that early on...
  • Reply 11 of 11
    Hank2.0Hank2.0 Posts: 126member
    I have very mixed feelings about this show. Being a long time fan of Sci-Fi, i know that I have to suspend reality and accept that Sci-Fi is fiction. On the other hand, there is only so much unbelievability that I can accept. I watched the show in great part because I'm a fan of Jason Momoa, but reluctantly for the same reasons as Thrang's first post.
    They say when we lose one sense, the other senses improve to compensate. So as I watched the first season, I rationalized to myself that in many, many  thousands of years maybe humans could develop sightless capabilities to "...traverse great distance, engage in complicated interactions, fights..."

    The problem with that idea is the setting of the story doesn't match such an advanced development. IMHO the 
    clothing, weapons, utensils, habitats, etc. are more appropriate to a post-apocalyptic world of only a few generations at best. The humans in the story may be blind but they still have eyeballs. So, to my mind, the show comes out looking like someone took typical dystopian movie (think "The Postman") and simply made the characters blind.
Sign In or Register to comment.