What TV series do you like?

[evme]

Just finished "The Staircase" on HBO and it was excellent. Up next is "Pachinko" on Apple TV+.

[EscapeVelocity2020]

Just finished "The Staircase" on HBO and it was excellent. Up next is "Pachinko" on Apple TV+.

The Staircase was really well done.  There is also 'The Staircase' on Netflix which is the French documentary.  Also fun to Google stuff referenced in the show (like 'Cabo Diet') to see what the Peterson family were like...  It's amazing, with all the publicity and scrutiny in the modern world, that people can seemingly get away with murder.

Tied up trying to catch up on Peaky Blinders now that a new season is out.  Also looking forward to Westworld returning in a couple weeks!  Good times

[HBFIRE]

+1 for Severance. Incredibly unnerving and mysterious. I still can't believe that this is (mostly) directed by Ben "Zoolander" Stiller.

Easily the best series I've seen since Breaking Bad.  Best finale of a season ever?  I think so.

[Tyson]

Watched Devs, based on the suggestions from this thread.  Holy hell, that was incredible.  More like an 8 hour movie than a TV show.  Reminded me quite a bit of Kubrick.  And Garland absolutely nailed the ending. 

[evme]

Watched Devs, based on the suggestions from this thread.  Holy hell, that was incredible.  More like an 8 hour movie than a TV show.  Reminded me quite a bit of Kubrick.  And Garland absolutely nailed the ending.

It's a little-seen gem.

[GuitarStv]

Watched Devs, based on the suggestions from this thread.  Holy hell, that was incredible.  More like an 8 hour movie than a TV show.  Reminded me quite a bit of Kubrick.  And Garland absolutely nailed the ending.

I really liked Devs.  From a cinematography perspective it's awesome, it raises some cool sci-fi questions . . . but I had trouble buying into one part of the ending.

Spoiler: show

The whole concept of Devs is that there isn't free will.  That's why it worked.  People are biomechanical machines who make decisions based upon the input they get.  If you understand the machine and the input well enough, then you can perfectly predict the future and the past.  That's why the Devs project worked.

Which makes the deaths at the ending hard for me to understand.  It was necessary for the plot that the writers wanted I suppose, but it didn't make sense from a logical perspective that the Devs machine couldn't perfectly predict what she was going to do.  It knew all her inputs, and it knew how she made decisions.  There shouldn't have been any uncertainty because there couldn't be.  What has happened in the future has happened in the future - as firmly as what has happened in the past has happened in the past.  There are branching universes based upon alternate possibilities . . . but in each given universe there is still only one path that can exist.  At least, that lines up with most of the modern physics stuff that I've read on the subject.

But the writers were like "fuck it".  Our protagonist has to be unique for <unspecified reason> because that advances the plot to where we want it.  That was a little unsatisfying part of an otherwise outstanding show.

[Tyson]

Watched Devs, based on the suggestions from this thread.  Holy hell, that was incredible.  More like an 8 hour movie than a TV show.  Reminded me quite a bit of Kubrick.  And Garland absolutely nailed the ending.

I really liked Devs.  From a cinematography perspective it's awesome, it raises some cool sci-fi questions . . . but I had trouble buying into one part of the ending.

Spoiler: show

The whole concept of Devs is that there isn't free will.  That's why it worked.  People are biomechanical machines who make decisions based upon the input they get.  If you understand the machine and the input well enough, then you can perfectly predict the future and the past.  That's why the Devs project worked.

Which makes the deaths at the ending hard for me to understand.  It was necessary for the plot that the writers wanted I suppose, but it didn't make sense from a logical perspective that the Devs machine couldn't perfectly predict what she was going to do.  It knew all her inputs, and it knew how she made decisions.  There shouldn't have been any uncertainty because there couldn't be.  What has happened in the future has happened in the future - as firmly as what has happened in the past has happened in the past.  There are branching universes based upon alternate possibilities . . . but in each given universe there is still only one path that can exist.  At least, that lines up with most of the modern physics stuff that I've read on the subject.

But the writers were like "fuck it".  Our protagonist has to be unique for <unspecified reason> because that advances the plot to where we want it.  That was a little unsatisfying part of an otherwise outstanding show.

I think you are right about the logic of it.  I read it a little differently.  Have you seen the series on Netflix called Dark?  It also deals with similar themes as Devs (fate, free will, responsibility, guilt, etc...).  From that perspective:

Spoiler: show

I felt like the tossing of the gun and the exercise of free will were put in there for 2 reasons.  First, for the people that would say something like "well if she knows what's going to happen why doesn't she just choose to NOT take those actions?"  She tries to do exactly that and in the Devs universe it's shown that that attempt is futile.  The 2nd reason is really the idea of fate (and this is where it has parallels with Dark).  If there are invisible rails (Devs) or a red thread (Dark), you can accept your fate, or not accept your fate, and it really doesn't matter, either way.

So, I really liked Devs because it took these ideas seriously and tried to work them out in a way that's interesting and dramatically compelling.  For myself, my own beliefs are that it's not either/or re: determinism and free will.  Like with most things human, it's a beautiful mixture of both.

[Luke Warm]

finished season 1 of 'patriot' last night. lots of moving parts and i'm not sure i followed all the plot lines. it was a pretty bizarre show, almost like an early coen brothers movie.

[SaucyAussie]

finished season 1 of 'patriot' last night. lots of moving parts and i'm not sure i followed all the plot lines. it was a pretty bizarre show, almost like an early coen brothers movie.

Loved it!  Will be interested to hear you take on Season 2.  You should also check out Perpetual Grace LTD.

[FIRE Artist]

finished season 1 of 'patriot' last night. lots of moving parts and i'm not sure i followed all the plot lines. it was a pretty bizarre show, almost like an early coen brothers movie.

I love that show, watched it about 4 times.  Makes me laugh every single time. 

[Metalcat]

finished season 1 of 'patriot' last night. lots of moving parts and i'm not sure i followed all the plot lines. it was a pretty bizarre show, almost like an early coen brothers movie.

I love that show, watched it about 4 times.  Makes me laugh every single time.

I LOVE "The Patriot"!!!

It takes a bit to figure out the tone and get into the weird vibe of the show, but once you do, it's frickin' phenomenal. The guys songs are the very, very best part of the show.

It's such an intelligent humour, and the acting is amazing. So, so many perfectly absurd scenes.

[Metalcat]

Watched Devs, based on the suggestions from this thread.  Holy hell, that was incredible.  More like an 8 hour movie than a TV show.  Reminded me quite a bit of Kubrick.  And Garland absolutely nailed the ending.

I really liked Devs.  From a cinematography perspective it's awesome, it raises some cool sci-fi questions . . . but I had trouble buying into one part of the ending.

Spoiler: show

The whole concept of Devs is that there isn't free will.  That's why it worked.  People are biomechanical machines who make decisions based upon the input they get.  If you understand the machine and the input well enough, then you can perfectly predict the future and the past.  That's why the Devs project worked.

Which makes the deaths at the ending hard for me to understand.  It was necessary for the plot that the writers wanted I suppose, but it didn't make sense from a logical perspective that the Devs machine couldn't perfectly predict what she was going to do.  It knew all her inputs, and it knew how she made decisions.  There shouldn't have been any uncertainty because there couldn't be.  What has happened in the future has happened in the future - as firmly as what has happened in the past has happened in the past.  There are branching universes based upon alternate possibilities . . . but in each given universe there is still only one path that can exist.  At least, that lines up with most of the modern physics stuff that I've read on the subject.

But the writers were like "fuck it".  Our protagonist has to be unique for <unspecified reason> because that advances the plot to where we want it.  That was a little unsatisfying part of an otherwise outstanding show.

I think you are right about the logic of it.  I read it a little differently.  Have you seen the series on Netflix called Dark?  It also deals with similar themes as Devs (fate, free will, responsibility, guilt, etc...).  From that perspective:

Spoiler: show

I felt like the tossing of the gun and the exercise of free will were put in there for 2 reasons.  First, for the people that would say something like "well if she knows what's going to happen why doesn't she just choose to NOT take those actions?"  She tries to do exactly that and in the Devs universe it's shown that that attempt is futile.  The 2nd reason is really the idea of fate (and this is where it has parallels with Dark).  If there are invisible rails (Devs) or a red thread (Dark), you can accept your fate, or not accept your fate, and it really doesn't matter, either way.

So, I really liked Devs because it took these ideas seriously and tried to work them out in a way that's interesting and dramatically compelling.  For myself, my own beliefs are that it's not either/or re: determinism and free will.  Like with most things human, it's a beautiful mixture of both.

Ugh, I just can't with Devs, I just can't.

I've been trying to watch it now for two months, I put it on and promptly fall asleep. Which has been a huge bonus because I normally don't fall asleep easily, so I'm sad it's going to end soon, because it's better than melatonin.

It's just so overwrought. I just can't with their perpetual flat affect and pseudo-intellectual, pseudo-philosophical blathering.

It's very pretty, and the art direction is amazing for generating a phenomenally cinematic mood, which is probably why I pass out within 10 minutes of turning it on.

It's like if someone taking first year philosophy and computer science got really high one night, stared for hours at their 2000s era hypnotic Windows screen saver, and thought "I have the perfect idea for a mini series."

That's not a theoretical example, I dated that guy.

I dated a lot of the cognitive science guys in undergrad, the degree that is basically a quadruple major of computer science, philosophy, psychology (neuroscience), and linguistics. And watching this show was exactly like getting high with them and listening to them opine on the state of the universe and the future of tech.

Which isn't something I enjoyed at the time, so no surprise I don't enjoy the show now. Other than as an excellent sleep aide.

[charis]

Started Devs last night thanks to this thread. The first episode was very intriguing. Will see how it goes

[Tyson]

Watched Devs, based on the suggestions from this thread.  Holy hell, that was incredible.  More like an 8 hour movie than a TV show.  Reminded me quite a bit of Kubrick.  And Garland absolutely nailed the ending.

I really liked Devs.  From a cinematography perspective it's awesome, it raises some cool sci-fi questions . . . but I had trouble buying into one part of the ending.

Spoiler: show

The whole concept of Devs is that there isn't free will.  That's why it worked.  People are biomechanical machines who make decisions based upon the input they get.  If you understand the machine and the input well enough, then you can perfectly predict the future and the past.  That's why the Devs project worked.

Which makes the deaths at the ending hard for me to understand.  It was necessary for the plot that the writers wanted I suppose, but it didn't make sense from a logical perspective that the Devs machine couldn't perfectly predict what she was going to do.  It knew all her inputs, and it knew how she made decisions.  There shouldn't have been any uncertainty because there couldn't be.  What has happened in the future has happened in the future - as firmly as what has happened in the past has happened in the past.  There are branching universes based upon alternate possibilities . . . but in each given universe there is still only one path that can exist.  At least, that lines up with most of the modern physics stuff that I've read on the subject.

But the writers were like "fuck it".  Our protagonist has to be unique for <unspecified reason> because that advances the plot to where we want it.  That was a little unsatisfying part of an otherwise outstanding show.

I think you are right about the logic of it.  I read it a little differently.  Have you seen the series on Netflix called Dark?  It also deals with similar themes as Devs (fate, free will, responsibility, guilt, etc...).  From that perspective:

Spoiler: show

I felt like the tossing of the gun and the exercise of free will were put in there for 2 reasons.  First, for the people that would say something like "well if she knows what's going to happen why doesn't she just choose to NOT take those actions?"  She tries to do exactly that and in the Devs universe it's shown that that attempt is futile.  The 2nd reason is really the idea of fate (and this is where it has parallels with Dark).  If there are invisible rails (Devs) or a red thread (Dark), you can accept your fate, or not accept your fate, and it really doesn't matter, either way.

So, I really liked Devs because it took these ideas seriously and tried to work them out in a way that's interesting and dramatically compelling.  For myself, my own beliefs are that it's not either/or re: determinism and free will.  Like with most things human, it's a beautiful mixture of both.

Ugh, I just can't with Devs, I just can't.

I've been trying to watch it now for two months, I put it on and promptly fall asleep. Which has been a huge bonus because I normally don't fall asleep easily, so I'm sad it's going to end soon, because it's better than melatonin.

It's just so overwrought. I just can't with their perpetual flat affect and pseudo-intellectual, pseudo-philosophical blathering.

It's very pretty, and the art direction is amazing for generating a phenomenally cinematic mood, which is probably why I pass out within 10 minutes of turning it on.

It's like if someone taking first year philosophy and computer science got really high one night, stared for hours at their 2000s era hypnotic Windows screen saver, and thought "I have the perfect idea for a mini series."

That's not a theoretical example, I dated that guy.

I dated a lot of the cognitive science guys in undergrad, the degree that is basically a quadruple major of computer science, philosophy, psychology (neuroscience), and linguistics. And watching this show was exactly like getting high with them and listening to them opine on the state of the universe and the future of tech.

Which isn't something I enjoyed at the time, so no surprise I don't enjoy the show now. Other than as an excellent sleep aide.

Interesting.  I'm curious, do you find other directors with elevated artistic styles overwrought, too?  Or just Garland?  Specifically I'm thinking of people like Kubrick, Malick, Wes Andersen, Bela Tarr, Ari Aster?

[Metalcat]

Interesting.  I'm curious, do you find other directors with elevated artistic styles overwrought, too?  Or just Garland?  Specifically I'm thinking of people like Kubrick, Malick, Wes Andersen, Bela Tarr, Ari Aster?

Nope, not usually. I have no idea if I've seen any other Garland though, or if it's just Devs that makes me eye-roll so hard it hurts.

It's not the artistry of it, I already said I appreciate that, it's the plot and characterization. I've actually laughed out loud a few times. When whats-her-face says in total earnestness that she's the "lawyer for the defense" in their oh-so-philosophical discussion about why Offerman is even doing all of this, I actually snort laughed and said "oh fuck off" out loud.

[Tyson]

Interesting.  I'm curious, do you find other directors with elevated artistic styles overwrought, too?  Or just Garland?  Specifically I'm thinking of people like Kubrick, Malick, Wes Andersen, Bela Tarr, Ari Aster?

Nope, not usually. I have no idea if I've seen any other Garland though, or if it's just Devs that makes me eye-roll so hard it hurts.

It's not the artistry of it, I already said I appreciate that, it's the plot and characterization. I've actually laughed out loud a few times. When whats-her-face says in total earnestness that she's the "lawyer for the defense" in their oh-so-philosophical discussion about why Offerman is even doing all of this, I actually snort laughed and said "oh fuck off" out loud.

I've experienced in my own life similar levels of trauma and grief that's depicted in Devs.   That sort of hollowed-out, flat-affect, well it accurately portrays how certain parts of the grief process feels. 

Look, I'm not expecting to change your mind about anything, after all, we like what we like and we don't like what we don't like.  I do think your reactions have mostly been mockery and contemptuous dismissal.  My only point is that maybe consider that others feel differently.  For me, Devs definitely connected with me and helped me in my healing process (which is still a bit raw, to be honest).

[Metalcat]

Interesting.  I'm curious, do you find other directors with elevated artistic styles overwrought, too?  Or just Garland?  Specifically I'm thinking of people like Kubrick, Malick, Wes Andersen, Bela Tarr, Ari Aster?

Nope, not usually. I have no idea if I've seen any other Garland though, or if it's just Devs that makes me eye-roll so hard it hurts.

It's not the artistry of it, I already said I appreciate that, it's the plot and characterization. I've actually laughed out loud a few times. When whats-her-face says in total earnestness that she's the "lawyer for the defense" in their oh-so-philosophical discussion about why Offerman is even doing all of this, I actually snort laughed and said "oh fuck off" out loud.

I've experienced in my own life similar levels of trauma and grief that's depicted in Devs.   That sort of hollowed-out, flat-affect, well it accurately portrays how certain parts of the grief process feels. 

Look, I'm not expecting to change your mind about anything, after all, we like what we like and we don't like what we don't like.  I do think your reactions have mostly been mockery and contemptuous dismissal.  My only point is that maybe consider that others feel differently.  For me, Devs definitely connected with me and helped me in my healing process (which is still a bit raw, to be honest).

Dude, I literally am studying clinical psychology, I know about flat affect. What's ridiculous is that everyone in the show basically has the same flat affect.

I'm allowed to find the show ridiculous and others are allowed to like it, a lot of people hate shows I love. I think the show is silly, so yes, my reaction to the show is dismissive and mocking because I personally don't like the show.

But no one should take my personal opinion about a tv show personally. I'm just sharing my personal opinion on a tv show, which is what we do in this thread. I personally enjoy hearing why people hate shows, especially ones I really like. It's interesting.

I hate a lot of shows and movies that people love: Seinfeld, Harry Potter, Breaking Bad, musicals (all of them), etc, etc

[Tyson]

Interesting.  I'm curious, do you find other directors with elevated artistic styles overwrought, too?  Or just Garland?  Specifically I'm thinking of people like Kubrick, Malick, Wes Andersen, Bela Tarr, Ari Aster?

Nope, not usually. I have no idea if I've seen any other Garland though, or if it's just Devs that makes me eye-roll so hard it hurts.

It's not the artistry of it, I already said I appreciate that, it's the plot and characterization. I've actually laughed out loud a few times. When whats-her-face says in total earnestness that she's the "lawyer for the defense" in their oh-so-philosophical discussion about why Offerman is even doing all of this, I actually snort laughed and said "oh fuck off" out loud.

I've experienced in my own life similar levels of trauma and grief that's depicted in Devs.   That sort of hollowed-out, flat-affect, well it accurately portrays how certain parts of the grief process feels. 

Look, I'm not expecting to change your mind about anything, after all, we like what we like and we don't like what we don't like.  I do think your reactions have mostly been mockery and contemptuous dismissal.  My only point is that maybe consider that others feel differently.  For me, Devs definitely connected with me and helped me in my healing process (which is still a bit raw, to be honest).

Dude, I literally am studying clinical psychology, I know about flat affect. What's ridiculous is that everyone in the show basically has the same flat affect.

I'm allowed to find the show ridiculous and others are allowed to like it, a lot of people hate shows I love. I think the show is silly, so yes, my reaction to the show is dismissive and mocking because I personally don't like the show.

But no one should take my personal opinion about a tv show personally. I'm just sharing my personal opinion on a tv show, which is what we do in this thread. I personally enjoy hearing why people hate shows, especially ones I really like. It's interesting.

I hate a lot of shows and movies that people love: Seinfeld, Harry Potter, Breaking Bad, musicals (all of them), etc, etc

Studying psychology doesn't actually give you first hand experience of grief.  The flat affect of the whole show is exactly how the entire world feels when you are in that state.  I thought Devs what quite brilliant in it's ability to reproduce the feel of that experience. 

[GuitarStv]

I just liked Devs for the predestination discussion.  The theory they were playing around with regarding pre-destination is probably the best supported explanation that physics currently has for the 'free will' question.

[Metalcat]

Studying psychology doesn't actually give you first hand experience of grief.  The flat affect of the whole show is exactly how the entire world feels when you are in that state.  I thought Devs what quite brilliant in it's ability to reproduce the feel of that experience.

Yeah, I'm not going to get into my personal experience with grief in a thread about tv shows (I blather plenty in my journal if you want to know my history). I think it's an annoying, overwrought, contrived show. You think it's brilliant, we're allowed to disagree and it says nothing about either of us as people.

Sorry if I hit a sore spot with you on this, I was just casually shit talking a show that I find kind of laughable. That's what I find fun about this thread.

Feel free to shit on any show I love.

[Metalcat]

I just liked Devs for the predestination discussion.  The theory they were playing around with regarding pre-destination is probably the best supported explanation that physics currently has for the 'free will' question.

Yeah, that's probably my issue with it, way too much time spent with cog sci and physics PhDs in my lifetime. It's all bringing me back too much to my 20s. 

[Tyson]

Studying psychology doesn't actually give you first hand experience of grief.  The flat affect of the whole show is exactly how the entire world feels when you are in that state.  I thought Devs what quite brilliant in it's ability to reproduce the feel of that experience.

Yeah, I'm not going to get into my personal experience with grief in a thread about tv shows (I blather plenty in my journal if you want to know my history). I think it's an annoying, overwrought, contrived show. You think it's brilliant, we're allowed to disagree and it says nothing about either of us as people.

Sorry if I hit a sore spot with you on this, I was just casually shit talking a show that I find kind of laughable. That's what I find fun about this thread.

Feel free to shit on any show I love.

Ah no worries.  Normally I'm not this sensitive (well, at least not publicly).  In a way I'm kind of proud of myself.  I was raised in the hyper-masculine toxic culture that is small town South here in the US and my 'programmed' response in the past would have been to go full knives out.  I'm glad that's not my only reaction nowadays. 

ETA - we do agree on Patriot, fabulous show.

[Metalcat]

Studying psychology doesn't actually give you first hand experience of grief.  The flat affect of the whole show is exactly how the entire world feels when you are in that state.  I thought Devs what quite brilliant in it's ability to reproduce the feel of that experience.

Yeah, I'm not going to get into my personal experience with grief in a thread about tv shows (I blather plenty in my journal if you want to know my history). I think it's an annoying, overwrought, contrived show. You think it's brilliant, we're allowed to disagree and it says nothing about either of us as people.

Sorry if I hit a sore spot with you on this, I was just casually shit talking a show that I find kind of laughable. That's what I find fun about this thread.

Feel free to shit on any show I love.

Ah no worries.  Normally I'm not this sensitive (well, at least not publicly).  In a way I'm kind of proud of myself.  I was raised in the hyper-masculine toxic culture that is small town South here in the US and my 'programmed' response in the past would have been to go full knives out.  I'm glad that's not my only reaction nowadays. 

ETA - we do agree on Patriot, fabulous show.

I also just noticed that you're new and therefore have no clue who I am or about my distinctive posting style. If you ever want to chat about feelings, my journal is the place for that. That's 99.9% of my content here over the past decade, frickin' feelings, I'm pretty known for it. Although I rarely, rarely post outside my journal right now.

...but I couldn't resist trashing Devs ;) lol

[evme]

So my favorite TV subject is the spy genre. I love spy shows and wanted to list the ones I've seen below including my rating and where you can watch them. I'm also looking for recommendations on any really good ones I might have missed.

The Spy -- this stars Sacha Baron Cohen in a serious role. I remember liking this a lot and wishing it was longer (it's only 6 episodes). 8/10 (available on Netflix).
The Bureau -- French show that is sometimes compared to "The Wire". Very sophisticated and believable with terrific plotting that feels like it was taken from actual events. 9/10 (available on DVD, stream on Sundance Now).
The Americans -- possibly my all-time favorite show, this originally aired on FX for six seasons and kind of flew under the radar. The acting and writing are outstanding and it has a deeply (for me) satisfying conclusion. 9.5/10 (stream on Amazon Prime)
Deutschland 83 -- German language drama set in East and West Germany during the Cold War. Great suspense. Followed by two sequels that I haven't watched yet (Deutschland 86/89). 8/10 (stream on Hulu)
The Night Manager -- mini-series starring Hugh Laurie. I haven't seen it since it first came out but I really enjoyed it at the time. It was like a James Bond movie in mini-series format. 8/10 (stream on Amazon)
Homeland -- this went on for much too long but the early seasons 1, 2, and 4 were riveting. I never did finish it all the way to the end though. Early seasons rating: 8/10
Jack Ryan -- I guess this is technically a spy show? It's much more action-y compared to other shows on my list. I was very impressed with the production values on this series (they clearly spent $$$ on it). Season 1 was very good, season 2 was pretty mediocre. Hopefully it bounces back with a strong season 3. 7/10 (Stream on Amazon)

On my watch list (not yet seen):
Babylon Berlin
Rubicon
Turn
Condor
Counterpart
Berlin Station
The Little Drummer Girl
The Ipcress File

[caracarn]

So my favorite TV subject is the spy genre. I love spy shows and wanted to list the ones I've seen below including my rating and where you can watch them. I'm also looking for recommendations on any really good ones I might have missed.

The Spy -- this stars Sacha Baron Cohen in a serious role. I remember liking this a lot and wishing it was longer (it's only 6 episodes). 8/10 (available on Netflix).
The Bureau -- French show that is sometimes compared to "The Wire". Very sophisticated and believable with terrific plotting that feels like it was taken from actual events. 9/10 (available on DVD, stream on Sundance Now).
The Americans -- possibly my all-time favorite show, this originally aired on FX for six seasons and kind of flew under the radar. The acting and writing are outstanding and it has a deeply (for me) satisfying conclusion. 9.5/10 (stream on Amazon Prime)
Deutschland 83 -- German language drama set in East and West Germany during the Cold War. Great suspense. Followed by two sequels that I haven't watched yet (Deutschland 86/89). 8/10 (stream on Hulu)
The Night Manager -- mini-series starring Hugh Laurie. I haven't seen it since it first came out but I really enjoyed it at the time. It was like a James Bond movie in mini-series format. 8/10 (stream on Amazon)
Homeland -- this went on for much too long but the early seasons 1, 2, and 4 were riveting. I never did finish it all the way to the end though. Early seasons rating: 8/10
Jack Ryan -- I guess this is technically a spy show? It's much more action-y compared to other shows on my list. I was very impressed with the production values on this series (they clearly spent $$$ on it). Season 1 was very good, season 2 was pretty mediocre. Hopefully it bounces back with a strong season 3. 7/10 (Stream on Amazon)

On my watch list (not yet seen):
Babylon Berlin
Rubicon
Turn
Condor
Counterpart
Berlin Station
The Little Drummer Girl
The Ipcress File

I really enjoyed Alias with Jennifer Garner and was surprised not to see on your list.  Another one I enjoyed that might be a little like Jack Ryan, in "is it a spy show?", but the main character was a spy using his skills and that was The Equalizer (the original series not the newer one).  No idea if you can find either of these anywhere now (assume Alias might be on Hulu given it was ABC).

[charis]

Also loved the Americans and agree that the ending is one of the best I've seen.

[iris lily]

Also loved the Americans and agree that the ending is one of the best I've seen.

Yep. Love that last episode it was stunning!

[Metalcat]

Also loved the Americans and agree that the ending is one of the best I've seen.

Yep. Love that last episode it was stunning!

Just finished it, great ending.

[sonofsven]

Also loved the Americans and agree that the ending is one of the best I've seen.

Yep. Love that last episode it was stunning!

Just finished it, great ending.

I'll have to go back and watch then, I quit watching it a number of years ago.

[Metalcat]

Also loved the Americans and agree that the ending is one of the best I've seen.

Yep. Love that last episode it was stunning!

Just finished it, great ending.

I'll have to go back and watch then, I quit watching it a number of years ago.

It's nothing crazy, it's just that so few shows end really well in a way that's tonally and contextually consistent with the rest of the show. It's just well planned and we'll executed. Not the kind of ending that would have people posting on social media or anything. Just solid, well done narrative.

[GuitarStv]

it's just that so few shows end really well in a way that's tonally and contextually consistent with the rest of the show

I get the feeling that most shows are really just a half-baked decent idea . . . and then it surprises everyone (including the writers) when the idea works.  So usually everything after the second season is the writers losing their minds trying to figure out how to resolve stuff while keeping viewers happy, and as ratings drop eventually they just throw in the towel.

[Luke Warm]

it's just that so few shows end really well in a way that's tonally and contextually consistent with the rest of the show

I get the feeling that most shows are really just a half-baked decent idea . . . and then it surprises everyone (including the writers) when the idea works.  So usually everything after the second season is the writers losing their minds trying to figure out how to resolve stuff while keeping viewers happy, and as ratings drop eventually they just throw in the towel.

I'm hoping this doesn't happen with 'Severence'

[GuitarStv]

it's just that so few shows end really well in a way that's tonally and contextually consistent with the rest of the show

I get the feeling that most shows are really just a half-baked decent idea . . . and then it surprises everyone (including the writers) when the idea works.  So usually everything after the second season is the writers losing their minds trying to figure out how to resolve stuff while keeping viewers happy, and as ratings drop eventually they just throw in the towel.

I'm hoping this doesn't happen with 'Severence'

Me too!

[Metalcat]

it's just that so few shows end really well in a way that's tonally and contextually consistent with the rest of the show

I get the feeling that most shows are really just a half-baked decent idea . . . and then it surprises everyone (including the writers) when the idea works.  So usually everything after the second season is the writers losing their minds trying to figure out how to resolve stuff while keeping viewers happy, and as ratings drop eventually they just throw in the towel.

I read Shonda Rhimes bio on vacation awhile back and it really helped me understand the process of show writing. She described show writing as a totally batshit insane process akin to laying track for an oncoming train.

So many pilots get made and so few picked up, so fleshing out an idea beyond just the basics is generally a HUGE waste of time. Plus, often the team of writers that are brought in to make a shoe are different from the writers who write the pilot, so there isn't always a chance to actually plan anything in advance.

Then once a show is picked up, production drives the pace, and that's when the writers have to scramble to lay the track for the steaming along engine of production.

That's how Game of Thrones ended up so jacked at the end, because production dictated a pace and timeline that the writers just couldn't manage.

None of what she said was revelatory, but she did help me have a more vivid image of how and why tv shows go off the rails so easily.

[GuitarStv]

it's just that so few shows end really well in a way that's tonally and contextually consistent with the rest of the show

I get the feeling that most shows are really just a half-baked decent idea . . . and then it surprises everyone (including the writers) when the idea works.  So usually everything after the second season is the writers losing their minds trying to figure out how to resolve stuff while keeping viewers happy, and as ratings drop eventually they just throw in the towel.

I read Shonda Rhimes bio on vacation awhile back and it really helped me understand the process of show writing. She described show writing as a totally batshit insane process akin to laying track for an oncoming train.

So many pilots get made and so few picked up, so fleshing out an idea beyond just the basics is generally a HUGE waste of time. Plus, often the team of writers that are brought in to make a shoe are different from the writers who write the pilot, so there isn't always a chance to actually plan anything in advance.

Then once a show is picked up, production drives the pace, and that's when the writers have to scramble to lay the track for the steaming along engine of production.

That's how Game of Thrones ended up so jacked at the end, because production dictated a pace and timeline that the writers just couldn't manage.

None of what she said was revelatory, but she did help me have a more vivid image of how and why tv shows go off the rails so easily.

That sounds 100% consistent with what I remember from watching the rebooted Battlestar Galactica.  The first season was cool!  Fun ideas, reasonable plot, some intrigue.  Then the second season started to go off the rails . . . where it seemed like the writers were throwing darts at a wall of characters and making everyone the darts landed on a cylon, and there were a lot of weird unanswered questions.  Then the third season gave up even trying to be coherent and just barfed out an ending of sorts, plot holes and loose ends be damned.  It very much collapsed under it's own weight.

At least we got to hear a sitar version of Hendix's version of 'All Along the Watchtower' for some reason.

[EscapeVelocity2020]

it's just that so few shows end really well in a way that's tonally and contextually consistent with the rest of the show

I get the feeling that most shows are really just a half-baked decent idea . . . and then it surprises everyone (including the writers) when the idea works.  So usually everything after the second season is the writers losing their minds trying to figure out how to resolve stuff while keeping viewers happy, and as ratings drop eventually they just throw in the towel.

I read Shonda Rhimes bio on vacation awhile back and it really helped me understand the process of show writing. She described show writing as a totally batshit insane process akin to laying track for an oncoming train.

So many pilots get made and so few picked up, so fleshing out an idea beyond just the basics is generally a HUGE waste of time. Plus, often the team of writers that are brought in to make a shoe are different from the writers who write the pilot, so there isn't always a chance to actually plan anything in advance.

Then once a show is picked up, production drives the pace, and that's when the writers have to scramble to lay the track for the steaming along engine of production.

That's how Game of Thrones ended up so jacked at the end, because production dictated a pace and timeline that the writers just couldn't manage.

None of what she said was revelatory, but she did help me have a more vivid image of how and why tv shows go off the rails so easily.

That sounds 100% consistent with what I remember from watching the rebooted Battlestar Galactica.  The first season was cool!  Fun ideas, reasonable plot, some intrigue.  Then the second season started to go off the rails . . . where it seemed like the writers were throwing darts at a wall of characters and making everyone the darts landed on a cylon, and there were a lot of weird unanswered questions.  Then the third season gave up even trying to be coherent and just barfed out an ending of sorts, plot holes and loose ends be damned.  It very much collapsed under it's own weight.

At least we got to hear a sitar version of Hendix's version of 'All Along the Watchtower' for some reason.

Same thing with 'Lost'.  They got to the end and just caved in to giving us exactly what internet chat rooms had expected all along.  I spent so much time dreaming up some great, unique  explanation - they were on a plane when a nuclear WW3 cataclysm happened or some unforeseen interaction of magnetic waves or solar flare ended up sending them to a parallel reality.  I would've loved it had they blown my mind at the end, even if it was as bonkers as the rest of it, even something along the lines of how Twin Peaks ended...  le sigh, still bitter...

[evme]

I really enjoyed Alias with Jennifer Garner and was surprised not to see on your list.  Another one I enjoyed that might be a little like Jack Ryan, in "is it a spy show?", but the main character was a spy using his skills and that was The Equalizer (the original series not the newer one).  No idea if you can find either of these anywhere now (assume Alias might be on Hulu given it was ABC).

I only started watching a lot of TV in the last 10-15 years so anything before 2007/2008 I likely missed. Also, I tend to like more subtle shows and I'm not sure Alias fits the bill but it looks like it could be fun like Jack Ryan.

[evme]

Also loved the Americans and agree that the ending is one of the best I've seen.

Yep. Love that last episode it was stunning!

Just finished it, great ending.

I'll have to go back and watch then, I quit watching it a number of years ago.

It's nothing crazy, it's just that so few shows end really well in a way that's tonally and contextually consistent with the rest of the show. It's just well planned and we'll executed. Not the kind of ending that would have people posting on social media or anything. Just solid, well done narrative.

Yeah, so many shows try to go out with a bang that it usually feels ridiculously over the top. The Americans was always great at subverting expectations and I also loved how

Spoiler: show

there was very little if any violence in the series finale.

[evme]

I'll have to go back and watch then, I quit watching it a number of years ago.

I quit watching The Americans at some point too (I think Season 2 or 3). The marriage stuff just got too intense for me, but eventually I went back to it and really glad I did. As I mentioned it ended up becoming an all-time fave.

[Tyson]

I really enjoyed Alias with Jennifer Garner and was surprised not to see on your list.  Another one I enjoyed that might be a little like Jack Ryan, in "is it a spy show?", but the main character was a spy using his skills and that was The Equalizer (the original series not the newer one).  No idea if you can find either of these anywhere now (assume Alias might be on Hulu given it was ABC).

I only started watching a lot of TV in the last 10-15 years so anything before 2007/2008 I likely missed. Also, I tend to like more subtle shows and I'm not sure Alias fits the bill but it looks like it could be fun like Jack Ryan.

Alias is a lot of fun.  It's over the top but it knows how ridiculous it is and is playful about it.

[Metalcat]

it's just that so few shows end really well in a way that's tonally and contextually consistent with the rest of the show

I get the feeling that most shows are really just a half-baked decent idea . . . and then it surprises everyone (including the writers) when the idea works.  So usually everything after the second season is the writers losing their minds trying to figure out how to resolve stuff while keeping viewers happy, and as ratings drop eventually they just throw in the towel.

I read Shonda Rhimes bio on vacation awhile back and it really helped me understand the process of show writing. She described show writing as a totally batshit insane process akin to laying track for an oncoming train.

So many pilots get made and so few picked up, so fleshing out an idea beyond just the basics is generally a HUGE waste of time. Plus, often the team of writers that are brought in to make a shoe are different from the writers who write the pilot, so there isn't always a chance to actually plan anything in advance.

Then once a show is picked up, production drives the pace, and that's when the writers have to scramble to lay the track for the steaming along engine of production.

That's how Game of Thrones ended up so jacked at the end, because production dictated a pace and timeline that the writers just couldn't manage.

None of what she said was revelatory, but she did help me have a more vivid image of how and why tv shows go off the rails so easily.

That sounds 100% consistent with what I remember from watching the rebooted Battlestar Galactica.  The first season was cool!  Fun ideas, reasonable plot, some intrigue.  Then the second season started to go off the rails . . . where it seemed like the writers were throwing darts at a wall of characters and making everyone the darts landed on a cylon, and there were a lot of weird unanswered questions.  Then the third season gave up even trying to be coherent and just barfed out an ending of sorts, plot holes and loose ends be damned.  It very much collapsed under it's own weight.

At least we got to hear a sitar version of Hendix's version of 'All Along the Watchtower' for some reason.

Yeah, the new Battlestar was awesome until mid season 2 when they went off air for awhile and then came back with season 2.5 where the entire show tone changed and they decided to go batshit crazy with an ultra-rapey plotline out of frickin' nowhere. It's just went into total meltdown after that point.

I *think* that was around of the time of the writers strike though. A lot of tv shows went totally off the rails at that time.

[mspym]

I have a fondness for Korean dramas specifically because they are scripted with the knowledge that it’s 16 episodes (standard) one session only, 3 smaller arcs within the main story arc and all story threads will be satisfactorily resolved by the end. Occasionally if something is a smash hit they will extend it by a few episodes or have a second session but there isn’t the tendency to extend it for as long as possible and lose the cohesive narrative structure.

[evme]

I have a fondness for Korean dramas specifically because they are scripted with the knowledge that it’s 16 episodes (standard) one session only, 3 smaller arcs within the main story arc and all story threads will be satisfactorily resolved by the end. Occasionally if something is a smash hit they will extend it by a few episodes or have a second session but there isn’t the tendency to extend it for as long as possible and lose the cohesive narrative structure.

Sounds like a good way operate so that the writers can plan a complete story arc and resolution. Can you recommend some Korean dramas?

[Tyson]

I have a fondness for Korean dramas specifically because they are scripted with the knowledge that it’s 16 episodes (standard) one session only, 3 smaller arcs within the main story arc and all story threads will be satisfactorily resolved by the end. Occasionally if something is a smash hit they will extend it by a few episodes or have a second session but there isn’t the tendency to extend it for as long as possible and lose the cohesive narrative structure.

Sounds like a good way operate so that the writers can plan a complete story arc and resolution. Can you recommend some Korean dramas?

Itaewan Class on Netflix is excellent. 

[StarBright]

Yeah, the new Battlestar was awesome until mid season 2 when they went off air for awhile and then came back with season 2.5 where the entire show tone changed and they decided to go batshit crazy with an ultra-rapey plotline out of frickin' nowhere. It's just went into total meltdown after that point.

I *think* that was around of the time of the writers strike though. A lot of tv shows went totally off the rails at that time.

There are so many shows that I occasionally think "Huh, what the heck happened" and they are frequently from 2008/2009 and had writers strike issues. Off the top of my head: Heroes, Friday Night Lights, Sara Connor Chronicles, Doll House, Pushing Daisies, and totally the back half of Battlestar. It isn't even that all of them went bad, some just sort of went bonkers or disappeared. 

[Fresh Bread]

The Bureau -- French show that is sometimes compared to "The Wire". Very sophisticated and believable with terrific plotting that feels like it was taken from actual events. 9/10 (available on DVD, stream on Sundance Now).

Another vote and big double thumbs up for The Bureau. I think we are in the middle of the fourth or fifth season, I can't remember. I am so emotionally invested that I had to have a little break from it after a particularly intense episode.

[GuitarStv]

Yeah, the new Battlestar was awesome until mid season 2 when they went off air for awhile and then came back with season 2.5 where the entire show tone changed and they decided to go batshit crazy with an ultra-rapey plotline out of frickin' nowhere. It's just went into total meltdown after that point.

I *think* that was around of the time of the writers strike though. A lot of tv shows went totally off the rails at that time.

There are so many shows that I occasionally think "Huh, what the heck happened" and they are frequently from 2008/2009 and had writers strike issues. Off the top of my head: Heroes, Friday Night Lights, Sara Connor Chronicles, Doll House, Pushing Daisies, and totally the back half of Battlestar. It isn't even that all of them went bad, some just sort of went bonkers or disappeared.

I entirely forgot about the writer's strike!  Maybe that explains some of the bizarre weirdness that happened at the end of BSG.

[iris lily]

I'll have to go back and watch then, I quit watching it a number of years ago.

I quit watching The Americans at some point too (I think Season 2 or 3). The marriage stuff just got too intense for me, but eventually I went back to it and really glad I did. As I mentioned it ended up becoming an all-time fave.

I abandoned it somewhere in season two or three as well, and then later came back to carefully watch the entire thing. It was all  the wigs and costume changes that I thought so hokey that did it for me. I didn’t mind the marriage stuff because  I like family dramas and that’s essentially what The Americans was – a family drama within a setting of intrigue and danger.

[uniwelder]

Here are two political shows that have gotten our attention recently, though they're pretty old, from 2015 and 2010 or so.

Servant of the People on Netflix.  This is a comedy about a high school history teacher that's fed up with government corruption and his students push him to run for presidency.  He wins in a surprising victory and the rest of the show is the struggle to reform.  In real life, the main actor of this show, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, ran for president of Ukraine with a push from the team of this show, and won in a surprising victory.  Its amazing to watch him as an actor in his time before the current war his country faces.

Borgen on Netflix.  We've only watched the first episode, but it has very high ratings, and we plan to continue.  Its about the fictional first female prime minister of Denmark, who coincidentally gets elected to power one year prior to the actual first female prime minister of Denmark.

[mspym]

We watched all 8 episodes of the first season of The Lazarus Project on Saturday so if you want mysterious government agencies, time loops caused by extinction level events, and all the associated practical and ethical dilemmas that ensue this might be up your alley.