That isn't my point. My point with they made a meal of things is from an executive perspective, not a storyline perspective.
Yeah, that's going to need some further explanation, as I have no idea what you mean.
It's simple.
It goes back to my previous comment about being 'placed'.
It is like someone at an executive level said, well we want a gay, lesbian, racist etc thread in there so make room for one.
Just tick the checkboxes. It doesn't matter if those threads actually did anything more than simply 'be there'.
That is my criticism. Well, just one of many.
Pretty speculative though. And hardly damning even if true. Racism and homophobia are rampant in football, and have been getting increasing attention through the years. As a show about football it is very understandable that they'd want to address such issues. I don't really care if that comes from the executive level or the writing level, it only matters if it's written well.
The Colin Hughes storyline was written well, the Sam Obisanya was written fairly well, though a little undeveloped, and the Keeley Jones storyline was fairly incidental. Hell, a gay storyline being incidental is in itself a pretty bold move.
Each to their own but I thought none of those threads hit the mark well enough. Not surprising when you think they tried to cram it all into so few episodes.
Fair enough, but criticise them for not hitting the mark for you, no need to make up baseless rumours about executive interference. To my knowledge no one else has claimed that.
All good things must come to an end. It was great while it lasted and they did an excellent job of wrapping up the loose ends in the final season, especially in the last episode. The whole series was well done and I’m completely satisfied with the story reaching a conclusion. I have no desire for spin-offs, which usually reek of little more than brand merchandizing.
I think far too many serials go beyond their freshness date and become stale and formulaic, especially when the show’s original “hook” is no longer the main point of intrigue. When staleness sets in the writers and producers have to drum up a bunch of side stories and sub-plots to keep the thing going and it basically turns the show into soap opera, which is a never-ending story with often bizarre ways used to explain nonsensical plot changes among an essentially static cast, e.g., an inexplicably high occurrence of amnesia and forgotten twins.
I absolutely got hooked into serials like Manifest, Lost in Space, Night Sky, and Stranger Things, and others that are still in-process. Some of these were or still are unnaturally extended due to covid and writers strikes. Whenever they do start playing again it always takes me a while to pick-up where I left off and get over the fact that some of the cast members, usually child actors, are visibly older. If the previous season ended with a cliffhanger, you have to overlook the fact that the resolution of the cliffhanger has a freakishly long and unexplained time lapse. Plus, I don’t want to clutter my mind with too many pending stories.
Having a story play out in a completely satisfying way over a single sitting or, at most, a couple of seasons, is a thing of beauty and shows a high level of skill and craftsmanship by its creators, writers, and cast members. In the case of Manifest, they finally wrapped it up in a very clever way, but when it was all said and done I came to realize that much of the intervening material was forgettable filler intended to string the audience along for far too long without adding substantially to the storyline. But that’s just my opinion and it explains why I skip over many intriguing looking new material on all of the streaming sites when I see that it’s yet another series rather than a one-and-done movie or limited series.
"IT Crowd" was a case where the actor's/writer's careers had taken off over the span of the first four seasons, and so the producers settled on a single "finale" episode for Season 5. I'd say it worked our well.
The longer that "Ted Lasso" is in limbo on a Season 4, the less likely that all the cast members will be around to participate. I'd guess that most already have offers in the pipeline for other series, possibly a spinoff, and films. Personally, I think that we have seen the end of "Ted Lasso", and that isn't a bad thing.
That isn't my point. My point with they made a meal of things is from an executive perspective, not a storyline perspective.
Yeah, that's going to need some further explanation, as I have no idea what you mean.
It's simple.
It goes back to my previous comment about being 'placed'.
It is like someone at an executive level said, well we want a gay, lesbian, racist etc thread in there so make room for one.
Just tick the checkboxes. It doesn't matter if those threads actually did anything more than simply 'be there'.
That is my criticism. Well, just one of many.
Pretty speculative though. And hardly damning even if true. Racism and homophobia are rampant in football, and have been getting increasing attention through the years. As a show about football it is very understandable that they'd want to address such issues. I don't really care if that comes from the executive level or the writing level, it only matters if it's written well.
The Colin Hughes storyline was written well, the Sam Obisanya was written fairly well, though a little undeveloped, and the Keeley Jones storyline was fairly incidental. Hell, a gay storyline being incidental is in itself a pretty bold move.
Each to their own but I thought none of those threads hit the mark well enough. Not surprising when you think they tried to cram it all into so few episodes.
Fair enough, but criticise them for not hitting the mark for you, no need to make up baseless rumours about executive interference. To my knowledge no one else has claimed that.
It's an opinion and not baseless because it is based on how Apple actively likes to promote certain issues, be they pro something (gay/human/workers rights etc) or anti something (racism, bullying etc). Relief help etc. Other project proposals might never ever be considered (porn).
Any such guidelines, requirements, or prohibitions would be down to directives from executive levels.
Knowing for sure if there was executive leverage being applied is not possible without insider knowledge. I didn't make that claim either way.
I simply said it felt 'placed'.
The fact that no one else has mentioned it is irrelevant. It is just my opinion. Aired without issue. I'm not speaking for anyone but myself.
TV just so happens to be the perfect messenger medium for whatever message the executive board level wants to push.
It's exactly the same with the executive push from all media outlets.
That's how media works so no surprises there.
I've always been against Apple (the company) veering into issues beyond it's hardware/software business.
When it tried to get into ads years ago there was always a risk of executive influence having an impact on that arm of the business.
Having a business arm dedicated to TV/film production means that executive interference (direct or otherwise) is always going to throw a shadow over certain things. They have a veto after all.
I would still much rather Tim Cook didn't comment on a bunch of things but again, it's just an opinion.
That isn't my point. My point with they made a meal of things is from an executive perspective, not a storyline perspective.
Yeah, that's going to need some further explanation, as I have no idea what you mean.
It's simple.
It goes back to my previous comment about being 'placed'.
It is like someone at an executive level said, well we want a gay, lesbian, racist etc thread in there so make room for one.
Just tick the checkboxes. It doesn't matter if those threads actually did anything more than simply 'be there'.
That is my criticism. Well, just one of many.
Pretty speculative though. And hardly damning even if true. Racism and homophobia are rampant in football, and have been getting increasing attention through the years. As a show about football it is very understandable that they'd want to address such issues. I don't really care if that comes from the executive level or the writing level, it only matters if it's written well.
The Colin Hughes storyline was written well, the Sam Obisanya was written fairly well, though a little undeveloped, and the Keeley Jones storyline was fairly incidental. Hell, a gay storyline being incidental is in itself a pretty bold move.
Each to their own but I thought none of those threads hit the mark well enough. Not surprising when you think they tried to cram it all into so few episodes.
Fair enough, but criticise them for not hitting the mark for you, no need to make up baseless rumours about executive interference. To my knowledge no one else has claimed that.
It's an opinion and not baseless because it is based on how Apple actively likes to promote certain issues, be they pro something (gay/human/workers rights etc) or anti something (racism, bullying etc). Relief help etc. Other project proposals might never ever be considered (porn).
Any such guidelines, requirements, or prohibitions would be down to directives from executive levels.
Knowing for sure if there was executive leverage being applied is not possible without insider knowledge. I didn't make that claim either way.
I simply said it felt 'placed'.
The fact that no one else has mentioned it is irrelevant. It is just my opinion. Aired without issue. I'm not speaking for anyone but myself.
TV just so happens to be the perfect messenger medium for whatever message the executive board level wants to push.
It's exactly the same with the executive push from all media outlets.
That's how media works so no surprises there.
I've always been against Apple (the company) veering into issues beyond it's hardware/software business.
When it tried to get into ads years ago there was always a risk of executive influence having an impact on that arm of the business.
Having a business arm dedicated to TV/film production means that executive interference (direct or otherwise) is always going to throw a shadow over certain things. They have a veto after all.
I would still much rather Tim Cook didn't comment on a bunch of things but again, it's just an opinion.
Apple's culture has been "veering" into "issues" since its inception, and it hasn't hurt Apple's business in the slightest, and it absolutely strengthens Apple's resilience in an ever changing world.
Comments
The longer that "Ted Lasso" is in limbo on a Season 4, the less likely that all the cast members will be around to participate. I'd guess that most already have offers in the pipeline for other series, possibly a spinoff, and films. Personally, I think that we have seen the end of "Ted Lasso", and that isn't a bad thing.
Any such guidelines, requirements, or prohibitions would be down to directives from executive levels.
Knowing for sure if there was executive leverage being applied is not possible without insider knowledge. I didn't make that claim either way.
I simply said it felt 'placed'.
The fact that no one else has mentioned it is irrelevant. It is just my opinion. Aired without issue. I'm not speaking for anyone but myself.
TV just so happens to be the perfect messenger medium for whatever message the executive board level wants to push.
It's exactly the same with the executive push from all media outlets.
That's how media works so no surprises there.
I've always been against Apple (the company) veering into issues beyond it's hardware/software business.
When it tried to get into ads years ago there was always a risk of executive influence having an impact on that arm of the business.
Having a business arm dedicated to TV/film production means that executive interference (direct or otherwise) is always going to throw a shadow over certain things. They have a veto after all.
I would still much rather Tim Cook didn't comment on a bunch of things but again, it's just an opinion.
https://www.apple.com/diversity/
If anything, I fault Tim Cook for keeping his mouth shut on China's human rights violations, but that is the reality we live in.