News: Please refresh your browser on every visit as modifications are implemented relevant to the recent upgrade.

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 

Author Topic: "Missing" Variety Review  (Read 5068 times)

Offline patch

  • News Hound
  • Ulric's Lady
  • *
  • Posts: 19461

Offline najinboulder

  • Frisk-eh's Playhouse
  • Kyle's Kitten
  • *
  • Posts: 2269
Re: "Missing" Variety Review
« Reply #1 on: March 10, 2012, 05:51:59 AM »
 :wellll:  :frustrate:Not sure I like that review.  We will wait and see and make up our own mind.

Offline lighty

  • First Acolyte
  • Loki's Lady
  • *
  • Posts: 4119
Re: "Missing" Variety Review
« Reply #2 on: March 10, 2012, 10:40:53 AM »
The danger of borrowing plot lines from one genre and translating them to another is that someone is going to notice - and usually not in a positive fashion.  Practically everyone who has commented on "Missing" has noted the similarity to "Taken", as well as on the gender switch.

Gender switching like this is problematic for many reasons, imo. 

It looks transparent ("ooh - I know!  Let's have a petite, elfin woman play the role and no one will notice that it was originally played by a huge, hairy dude . . .")

It plays to reverse stereotype ("ooh - I know!  Let's make sure that the petite, elfin woman has the ability to accurately fire a shoulder mounted missile whilst running down a cobblestone street in four-inch heels!  And she should regularly use really tough language!  And generally behave like a huge, hairy dude . . . but very occasionally show her gentle side!")

It refuses to bow to reality in any way, essentially turning a woman into a man.  This has become a real problem in film and television writing, primarily because women are not considered interesting when they act like - well - real women.  Ditzy is okay; irrational is okay; ball-busting is okay; slutty is okay . . . as is completely innocent.  But the well-rounded woman who is, as are most women, a combination of all those things plus a whole lot more - that's not okay. 

Offline patch

  • News Hound
  • Ulric's Lady
  • *
  • Posts: 19461
Re: "Missing" Variety Review
« Reply #3 on: March 12, 2012, 01:09:16 AM »
Quote
The supporting performances are all very solid, including Sean Bean as Becca's husband, Paul.


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/03/11/DD1A1NJ00E.DTL
« Last Edit: March 12, 2012, 01:12:46 AM by patch »


Offline najinboulder

  • Frisk-eh's Playhouse
  • Kyle's Kitten
  • *
  • Posts: 2269
Re: "Missing" Variety Review
« Reply #5 on: March 14, 2012, 05:20:45 AM »
Only one day to go and we can make up our own  minds.

Offline patch

  • News Hound
  • Ulric's Lady
  • *
  • Posts: 19461
Re: "Missing" Variety Review
« Reply #6 on: March 15, 2012, 01:13:35 AM »
Quote
The first two episodes are enormously predictable. And if Sean Bean’s “deceased” CIA dad isn’t behind the kidnapping? I’ll eat kibble out of my poodle’s dish.

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/54288



Offline galamb

  • Frisk-eh's Playhouse
  • Vronsky's Vixen
  • *
  • Posts: 3597
Re: "Missing" Variety Review
« Reply #7 on: March 15, 2012, 01:04:29 PM »
"Missing" will be in Spain next 12 th april in AXN and GOT, second season next 23 th april in canal plus , channel 1, I'll be lucky

Offline patch

  • News Hound
  • Ulric's Lady
  • *
  • Posts: 19461
Re: "Missing" Variety Review
« Reply #8 on: March 16, 2012, 01:27:47 AM »

Offline najinboulder

  • Frisk-eh's Playhouse
  • Kyle's Kitten
  • *
  • Posts: 2269
Re: "Missing" Variety Review
« Reply #9 on: March 16, 2012, 06:58:44 AM »
Good review but the reviewer is right.  If they resolve the son's kidnapping and find him at the end of season 1 what do they do in season 2.

Offline lighty

  • First Acolyte
  • Loki's Lady
  • *
  • Posts: 4119
Re: "Missing" Variety Review
« Reply #10 on: March 16, 2012, 12:06:30 PM »
Good review but the reviewer is right.  If they resolve the son's kidnapping and find him at the end of season 1 what do they do in season 2.

Find the presumably dead dad?  I wonder if Sean would commit to a second season?

Offline Sable899

  • Goddess Divine
  • Mellor's Mistress
  • *
  • Posts: 6667
Re: "Missing" Variety Review
« Reply #11 on: March 16, 2012, 12:10:14 PM »
He didn't look like he minded the red carpet treatment at the Istanbul hotel, so if they offer him a decent shooting schedule and his role is kept to a bare bones one like it appears now and send him to some exotic places I can see him taking it on.  If the role gets expanded so that the shooting schedule will be a bit grinding and time-consuming then he'd likely pass.

Offline lighty

  • First Acolyte
  • Loki's Lady
  • *
  • Posts: 4119
Re: "Missing" Variety Review
« Reply #12 on: March 16, 2012, 01:21:31 PM »
He didn't look like he minded the red carpet treatment at the Istanbul hotel, so if they offer him a decent shooting schedule and his role is kept to a bare bones one like it appears now and send him to some exotic places I can see him taking it on.  If the role gets expanded so that the shooting schedule will be a bit grinding and time-consuming then he'd likely pass.
:mutley:

Offline patch

  • News Hound
  • Ulric's Lady
  • *
  • Posts: 19461
Re: "Missing" Variety Review
« Reply #13 on: March 25, 2012, 01:08:46 AM »
Quote
It’s been a long time since we’ve seen an American network spy show actually filmed overseas on a regular basis (maybe even since I Spy in the Sixties!), and for me the Rome and Paris settings were a highlight of the show.
 


http://doubleosection.blogspot.com/2012/03/tv-review-missing-2012.html

Offline najinboulder

  • Frisk-eh's Playhouse
  • Kyle's Kitten
  • *
  • Posts: 2269
Re: "Missing" Variety Review
« Reply #14 on: March 25, 2012, 08:13:12 AM »
Given the fact that according to IMDB he is not very busy at all, I would say yes he would do season 2.

Offline Cora

  • Frisk-eh's Playhouse
  • Ian's Treasure
  • *
  • Posts: 204
Re: "Missing" Variety Review
« Reply #15 on: May 21, 2012, 02:38:39 AM »
It refuses to bow to reality in any way, essentially turning a woman into a man.  This has become a real problem in film and television writing, primarily because women are not considered interesting when they act like - well - real women.  Ditzy is okay; irrational is okay; ball-busting is okay; slutty is okay . . . as is completely innocent.  But the well-rounded woman who is, as are most women, a combination of all those things plus a whole lot more - that's not okay. 

I couldn’t agree more and this has become a real pet peeve of mine. It implies that women can't portray strength and courage, unless they act like men. It happens in a lot of “re-visioning” projects – remakes of fairy tales, myths and old movies. Heroines can’t be heroic unless they’re beating people up.