So, The Leftovers on HBO

How hot was Nora? Jesus.

 

I call it lazy writing because it works from a false: plot and story inhibit character study or character development.
It is not necessary to jettison story and plot in order to analyze character. It's a cop out so the writers don't have to incorporate all parts.

Story and plot should inform each other, and they should work together to reveal and develop characters. Also character revelation and development should inform story and plot and work to move them forward.

When a child enters the third grade, the school does not jettison language studies because it has to concentrate on math. It is assumed that both things are needed and will be delivered.

The same it true in storytelling. Plot, story and characters are all integral ingredients. I am not opposed to nontraditional approaches, nor am I opposed to emphasizing one aspect more than the others.

What I oppose is the notion that one of those elements can be completely eschewed and the product still be considered good. That is why I call it lazy writing, because the writers are willfully ignoring two key elements and using the excuse that the show is 'about the characters' as if plot and story would somehow limit their attention to character.

 

Buck, that's fair. I think the whole "plot" was so inexorably tied in with the event itself that it was hard to get away from telling stories spinning off that event. From what I understand, the source material from the book is exhausted, so I'm interested in seeing what direction they go in season 2.

 

Different strokes, you know. I know a lot people who have enjoyed the show. There's even one in my house.
I think my animosity for the show, I think, is the result of my very real desire to like it.
I wanted to like the show because there is o mch about it that suits my aesthetic.
If I hadn't wanted to like it so much, I wouldn't be on a thread talking about it six of seven weeks after I'd stopped watching. I would've stopped watching and not given it much more thought.

 

That's a real interesting point. I, too, really wanted to like it. Probably why I stuck through the whole season.

 

I thought the episode was going along great until the final scene, which went completely over my head. Where did Tommy and Laurie go, and why did they leave a newborn sitting on the porch for Nora to find? And why did Nora find holding the baby to be so … cathartic, I guess?

The last scene was a bit of a mystery to me, but not the kind of cliffhanger that makes me say, "I need to know what happens next."

The rest of the episode did have me wondering what happens next, so I'll probably check out next season as well. I don't love the show, I don't hate it, but I find it interesting enough to stick with it.

 

So .. with all the source material gone, The Leftovers is moving to a new town. Yet some of the cast members will remain, but not all. Could be a massive fail or great idea. How's that for analysis?

http://deadline.com/2014/12/leftovers-cast-shakeup-season-2-series-moves-new-town-hbo-1201311608/

 

Sounds like a rudderless show. It had potential, but I'm not sure I'll stick with it next season. Maybe I'll give the premiere a shot.

 

I didn't realize they burned through all of the source material in one season.

 

Yup, one book. I was intrigued by the concept and read the book before the show came out.

The book makes the show look like a happy, good time.

 

How does Ann Dowd remain a cast lead when her character's dead?I understand flashbacks and all, but ...

 

Has anyone been watching this season?

Last week featured another outstanding Christopher Eccleston-centered episode. It was bonkers. Really, really enjoying this year, especially Kevin getting Rick rolled in the third episode.