The Netflix Thread

[boombox]

Originally Posted by bfm612

SEX EDUCATION. The basic/initial premise is that it follows a couple of students who run a sex therapy clinic at their secondary ed (high school) in the UK. Really fun and interesting characters, hilarious, very sex positive, and just open and empathetic.

Sorry, had to correct that. The school's location is entirely fictional, but the series is actually filmed very near me in Wales on the site of an old university college which is currently being torn down, so Season 3 may well have to be the last. Many of the shops,etc are local too, although Otis' house is just over the border in England, which is interesting as it would make his daily bike ride to school over 20 miles. As to the series, count me in as a fan too.

[619TF]

Originally Posted by tbeltrans

"Necessary" in the sense that those creating the product need to create what sells, so yes we are in agreement on that.

I just don't understand people's fascination with that stuff. There can certainly be a good story without it.

Tony

You may not understand it but sex and violence are such a deeply rooted part of human nature that stories containing one or both are as old as storytelling itself. As you said, if you don't like it you don't have to watch. Sadly that also means you'll likely miss out on some of the greatest movies of our time.

[bfm612]

Originally Posted by boombox

Sorry, had to correct that. The school's location is entirely fictional, but the series is actually filmed very near me in Wales on the site of an old university college which is currently being torn down, so Season 3 may well have to be the last. Many of the shops,etc are local too, although Otis' house is just over the border in England, which is interesting as it would make his daily bike ride to school over 20 miles. As to the series, count me in as a fan too.

Thank you for the correction! You live in an absolutely gorgeous spot in the world!

[tbeltrans]

Originally Posted by 619TF

You may not understand it but sex and violence are such a deeply rooted part of human nature that stories containing one or both are as old as storytelling itself. As you said, if you don't like it you don't have to watch. Sadly that also means you'll likely miss out on some of the greatest movies of our time.

As a Vietnam combat veteran I saw it for real, not just cheap entertainment. I probably should have added that having seen the real thing, I can't understand the fascination. However, absent any other rational explanation, I would have to accept your insights.

I guess if that is what people want, they already have it, lots of it, in real life in the news every day. Many cities across the US are experiencing real spikes in crime so go out and enjoy it. Most every day in our local news there are violent crimes and maybe your explanation helps to understand that people just crave this stuff and can't get enough of it.

There was a movie made many years ago now that depicted Jack the Ripper travelling in time and being chased by detectives. In one scene, he is sitting in a hotel room in the (then) current time, flipping through TV channels that had war movies, football, boxing, etc. He commented to the detective that he should go back to his own time because Jack had found his time, pointing out the incessant violent programming he was seeing on TV. I suppose that also serves to prove your point.

It is a sad aspect of human nature, almost as if earth is one big "Lord of the Flies" scene playing out, but on thinking about it, you are most probably correct.

One area we will disagree:

You said: Sadly that also means you'll likely miss out on some of the greatest movies of our time

My outlook is different: Sadly, people still rely on vicarious violence to be entertained. In other words, they want to watch somebody else do the thing so the person watching doesn't get hurt, but gets the thrill. I think many people who are unfortunate to experience the real thing (i.e. those who have been there or been the victim of a violent crime, would lose their hunger for such entertainment). To those for whom it still isn't real, it probably IS entertaining as you claim.


Tony

[tbeltrans]

Originally Posted by buddyhu

Shtisel was VERY good, and unlike anything else I’ve watched. One of the few series I would consider watching again.

Enjoyed Tokyo stories. Easy to watch, often rather uplifting. We would watch an episode as the last thing before turning off the TV.

We avoid anything that has more than a few
moments of violence. Watching graphic violence isn’t going to enhance my life or improve my sleep, so why invest time in such things?

Portrayals of sex and sexual situations is complex subject. I will pass on that topic.

We are currently watching and I enjoying “Anxious People”. Hope to see the last episode tonight. But half way through….I am intrigued. My wife loved the book.

We watched “Sex Education” on the recommendation of a friend, who also urged us to watch at least 3 episodes before making a decision about the series. We did so, and I suspect we will go back to it, because the relationship dynamics are interesting. But it hasn’t been riveting for us.

I am glad that there are at least a few of us who feel this way. Glennwillow expressed a similar opinion.

Tony

[tbeltrans]

Originally Posted by Glennwillow

The first time my wife and I tried to watch "Godless" on Netflix, we baled out of it because of the violent beginning. But later, we went back and watched the whole series. In the end it was an excellent series, and Michelle Dockery did a terrific acting job. Jeff Daniels did a great job of being really scary and evil. I went back recently and watched the whole thing again. The whole series was very well done.

A much longer series that my wife and I have watched and were really hooked on is "Longmire." However, we would watch "Longmire" for one episode and then switch to some fluffy show before bedtime. This approach seemed to result in fewer troubling dreams.

We have watched "The Crown" and "Queen's Gambit" a couple of times through, also.

I agree with Tony, though, that the extreme violence in many shows is a problem for us.

- Glenn

We watched "Queen's Gambit" and also found it interesting.

Tony

[KevWind]

Being in the process of editing my Music video performance cover of M. M. Murphy song "Geronimo's Cadillac" : ::
I watched Geronimo last night on Netflix and found it an interesting approach (from the view of one of the US Calvary officers involved )and wondered how historically accurate it may or may not be.

[tbeltrans]

Originally Posted by KevWind

Being in the process of editing my Music video performance cover of M. M. Murphy song "Geronimo's Cadillac" : ::
I watched Geronimo last night on Netflix and found it an interesting approach (from the view of one of the US Calvary officers involved )and wondered how historically accurate it may or may not be.

That is always an interesting question about history. Any time there is an event observed and/or participated in by more than one person, each of these people will have their own manner of retelling that event.

Are these accurate? To me, there are two aspects involved:

1. The facts that the event occurred.
2. The interpretation of what happened.

#1 I would expect the various people involved would agree on.
#2 can be wildly varying, depending on the retelling person's perspective.

The cliché example of this is 5 people observe a traffic accident. They all agree the accident occurred, but then when they tell what occurred in the event, there is a certain amount of differing interpretation.

Different people will tend to emphasize different aspects of the event and possibly ignore other aspects altogether, or even remember aspects that didn't happen at all. The importance given to various aspects of an event can certainly change the understanding of the event on the part of the listener.

So in the end, whose retelling of the event is the most accurate?

Tony

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by tbeltrans

That is always an interesting question about history. Any time there is an event observed and/or participated in by more than one person, each of these people will have their own manner of retelling that event.

Are these accurate? To me, there are two aspects involved:

1. The facts that the event occurred.
2. The interpretation of what happened.

#1 I would expect the various people involved would agree on.
#2 can be wildly varying, depending on the retelling person's perspective.

The cliché example of this is 5 people observe a traffic accident. They all agree the accident occurred, but then when they tell what occurred in the event, there is a certain amount of differing interpretation.

Tony

Yes not only the idea of eye witness accounts being notoriously inaccurate and or varied, but add to that the concept of history typically being written by the winners,,,, and it can be a real question mark at best.

[tbeltrans]

Originally Posted by KevWind

Yes not only the idea of eye witness accounts being notoriously inaccurate and or varied, but add to that the concept of history typically being written by the winners,,,, and it can be a real question mark at best.

Vert true. That was the other cliché I as trying to remember "the concept of history typically being written by the winners". Thank you for bringing that into the conversation.

I have heard more than one attorney say that eye witnesses can be easily discredited for the reasons so far noted. It is interesting that until college level, history is often taught as being interpreted from just one perspective, and then it gets to be argued in the courts what that perspective should be and what should be excluded rather than teaching a more open approach that begins to introduce critical thinking.

Tony

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by tbeltrans

Vert true. That was the other cliché I as trying to remember "the concept of history typically being written by the winners". Thank you for bringing that into the conversation.

I have heard more than one attorney say that eye witnesses can be easily discredited for the reasons so far noted. It is interesting that until college level, history is often taught as being interpreted from just one perspective, and then it gets to be argued in the courts what that perspective should be and what should be excluded rather than teaching a more open approach that begins to introduce critical thinking.

Tony

Agreed critical thinking has taken huge hits in today's climate (and I will stop at that)

Unfortunately the historical fact and subject of the song was not addressed in the video or post log . Apparently Geronimo was give an automobile (albeit a Locomobile and not a Cadillac) I am guessing Mr. Murphy took the artistic liberty that Ca-dil-lac,,,, worked better syllabically with Take me Back

[tbeltrans]

Originally Posted by KevWind

Agreed critical thinking has taken huge hits in today's climate (and I will stop at that)

Unfortunately the historical fact and subject of the song was not addressed in the video or post log . Apparently Geronimo was give an automobile (albeit a Locomobile and not a Cadillac) I am guessing Mr. Murphy took the artistic liberty that Ca-dil-lac,,,, worked better syllabically with Take me Back

As an example of the teaching of history, I had not heard the same historical time frame of our history from the Native American perspective until college, though it was around then that this history was being heard in the media too.

Considering the little discussion about extreme violence in movies these days, it would be my hope that we as a society could (very) eventually learn to grow out of such human tendencies and rather than celebrate them in the media, seek to understand how to avoid them through more peaceful means. Including our history from the perspective of not the victors as well as the main party line, could serve to aid that process.

I suppose I should take your lead and stop there too, but I hope this observation didn't cross whatever line there is here on this subject.

Tony

[Dirk Hofman]

Anyone have any movie or show recommendations?

[619TF]

Originally Posted by tbeltrans

As a Vietnam combat veteran I saw it for real, not just cheap entertainment. I probably should have added that having seen the real thing, I can't understand the fascination. However, absent any other rational explanation, I would have to accept your insights.

I guess if that is what people want, they already have it, lots of it, in real life in the news every day. Many cities across the US are experiencing real spikes in crime so go out and enjoy it. Most every day in our local news there are violent crimes and maybe your explanation helps to understand that people just crave this stuff and can't get enough of it.

There was a movie made many years ago now that depicted Jack the Ripper travelling in time and being chased by detectives. In one scene, he is sitting in a hotel room in the (then) current time, flipping through TV channels that had war movies, football, boxing, etc. He commented to the detective that he should go back to his own time because Jack had found his time, pointing out the incessant violent programming he was seeing on TV. I suppose that also serves to prove your point.

It is a sad aspect of human nature, almost as if earth is one big "Lord of the Flies" scene playing out, but on thinking about it, you are most probably correct.

One area we will disagree:

You said: Sadly that also means you'll likely miss out on some of the greatest movies of our time

My outlook is different: Sadly, people still rely on vicarious violence to be entertained. In other words, they want to watch somebody else do the thing so the person watching doesn't get hurt, but gets the thrill. I think many people who are unfortunate to experience the real thing (i.e. those who have been there or been the victim of a violent crime, would lose their hunger for such entertainment). To those for whom it still isn't real, it probably IS entertaining as you claim.


Tony

I'm happy we've come to an understanding. Yes, that type of entertainment isn't everyone's cup of tea as they say but that's why there's so much choice in entertainment these days. As I said, much of it does contain "offensive" content but everyone is offended about something it seems so you can't please them all.

As to missing out on some great movies I still believe I'm right. One only has to look at "Citizen Kane" - often considered one of the greatest of all time - to witness sex and drunkenness that was, at that time, as far as Wells could push it with the old movie censor board. I know people who remember the release of that movie saying how scandalous it was (also "Gone With The Wind" was criticized for language and violence as well though I'm not sure that's one of Hollywood's greatest). As a final point, take a look at all the violence in The Wizard of Oz and consider how it's shown mostly to kids on commercial TV. Yes, Jack The Ripper may be comfortable in this time but the sensationalistic news makes it seem like violence is rampant in every town in America when it's not so I'd take that with a grain of salt. Enjoy what you enjoy and let's hope they continue to turn out product on both sides of the spectrum so that we can all just have some fun. Finally, thank you for your service. It makes sense why after seeing what you likely did that you've had your fill. Nobody should have to deal with memories like that.

[tbeltrans]

Originally Posted by 619TF

I'm happy we've come to an understanding. Yes, that type of entertainment isn't everyone's cup of tea as they say but that's why there's so much choice in entertainment these days. As I said, much of it does contain "offensive" content but everyone is offended about something it seems so you can't please them all.

As to missing out on some great movies I still believe I'm right. One only has to look at "Citizen Kane" - often considered one of the greatest of all time - to witness sex and drunkenness that was, at that time, as far as Wells could push it with the old movie censor board. I know people who remember the release of that movie saying how scandalous it was (also "Gone With The Wind" was criticized for language and violence as well though I'm not sure that's one of Hollywood's greatest). As a final point, take a look at all the violence in The Wizard of Oz and consider how it's shown mostly to kids on commercial TV. Yes, Jack The Ripper may be comfortable in this time but the sensationalistic news makes it seem like violence is rampant in every town in America when it's not so I'd take that with a grain of salt. Enjoy what you enjoy and let's hope they continue to turn out product on both sides of the spectrum so that we can all just have some fun. Finally, thank you for your service. It makes sense why after seeing what you likely did that you've had your fill. Nobody should have to deal with memories like that.

After rereading your response, I do feel I should respond. Perhaps what I originally said got lost in the exchange somehow. What I said about not wanting to see the violence in the Netflix movies that were being discussed, please realize that this thread is discussing current movies and TV shows that people are watching on Netflix. To me, many of these have what I consider over-the-top graphic violence and sex. You are taking an all-or-nothing interpretation that I never intended and should not have been interpreted as such if taken within the context of this thread.

I see the same problem with my reference to a movie about Jack the Ripper. My reference had nothing to do with news of today (I went back to reread it to be sure). It was a movie I saw many years ago that was simply a form of science fiction involving detectives casing Jack the Ripper through time. When Jack saw war movies and football games on TV, his comment was that these were the times he belonged in. I said nothing about the current rise in violence in the news other than that if violence is such a deeply embedded part of human nature, then it seems to me that we live in a big Lord of the Flies situation here on earth. If you read that story, then hopefully it will make sense. Otherwise, let's just move on. That was a general comment because looking back over our history, it certainly does have its share of valence of humans toward each other.

If you are right about your comments regarding movies, fine, but it has nothing to do with what I was saying, so it really doesn't apply to me. You took what I said way out of context and I really don't want to continue going around and around on it. I was simply participating in the discussion about Netflix movies and TV shows, with no intention of getting stuck in one of these discussions that (at least to me) feels as if we are talking past each other rather than communicating.

Thanks for your comments about my military service, but please, can we stop this now?

Tony