Watched it when it came out and don't remember much about but I didn't really get a Breaking Bad vibe from it at all. Unless I'm forgetting something it seemed like he was really doing all of that to protect his son rather than for him (which is ultimately the point of Breaking Bad, it was for him the entire time)

no.

S6 has more redeeming qualities than you might expect going in. The first arc with Jack chasing the bombs across LA after literally just getting out of a Chinese prison camp might be the most exciting the show's ever been. But then it comes to an almost complete stop and it get sooo slooow and boring and that's what makes it the worst season IMO.

I get not liking the seasons after but they're at least more fun to watch. Tony coming back, Jack going on a rampage in S8.

What about Live Another Day though??? I haven't rewatched it but I remember loving it when it was on.

I'm not sure if you thought you were watching the show within the show but I got the exact opposite experience from you. The cast is great. Who doesn't like Judy Grier? Key? Johnny Knoxville? Paul Reiser??? Like maybe Rachel Bloom isn't your jam but the others are all known for being really funny and likeable. And I'm not sure what you think they don't "follow through" on, the point is that the network meddles with the premise to reboot it and just makes the same thing over again.

The headline doesn't spoil anything? You hate people talking about a show outside of your personal timeline?

Happy holidays!

So you're just not going to address anything I said and throw out ad hominems claiming that I can't have an opinion about Friends because you perceive that I'm either too young or too old to remember the nuanced history around the show? Wtf are you even talking about lmao

I do like how I'm apparently not worth your time to actually address what I said but worth enough of it for you to try and insult me. I'm sorry I don't like your favourite show as much you, I guess?

Unfortunately the truth is more complicated than most people's individual feels and it's tough for a lowest-common denominator network procedural to realistically deal with that. I agree that SVU has been doing a decent job of it since 2020. All three L&Os are more nuanced than you would think. But they're also never going to fully lean into an ACAB stance because they're trying to appeal to the largest group of people possible. And that includes not only people who are pro-cop but also people who aren't but still want comfort food TV. And a lot of the time it feels like the stories where the cops are the "bad guys" in the episodes aren't exactly going full on in the other direction. And ultimately they are portraying "good cops."

I heard that if Dick Wolf doesn't get at least one new show greenlit every network TV season, a portal to hell opens up over Los Angeles.

> Your entire comment was tearing down Friends, so you were using derivative as a pejorative, and there was nothing negative about its use of a similar concept.

I said a bunch of things about Friends but you decided to fixate on that one word because it's seemingly the only thing you can refute.

> On its own being derivative isn't necessarily bad, of course art is iterative and there are tons of shows that are great are also derivative

This was literally the thing I said right after that part of my comment so, yeah.

What's annoying is that a big part of it is messaging and the hesitance if not straight up refusal on the part of legacy media companies to adapt. Access to broadcast TV could be simple, free and widespread with minimal effort. Already they make digital antennae you stick to a window that give you access to most broadcast networks in your area. But people just don't know about that, and many don't even know the distinction between broadcast and cable. But why not take it a step further and just make all broadcast TV free and easily accessible, officially, on the internet?

I'm guessing the answer is carriage fees from cable companies but eventually the math on that is going to change as people continue cutting the cord and then these networks are going to lament the missed opportunity for transferring that audience to digital platforms. We should have been able to watch all these channels for free years ago, I think a lot of people would have even gotten used to commercials (Netflix IMO is about to prove that), but people already don't care enough.

I think you missed the point I was making. More popular shows targeting similar audiences overshadowed better, arguably more niche shows.

You're drastically downplaying the similarities to Living Single, but even if it was just the basic concept, that still makes it derivative, by definition. On its own being derivative isn't necessarily bad, of course art is iterative and there are tons of shows that are great are also derivative, I just don't think the quality of Friends makes up for that. But I already admitted that this is my subjective view.

Whether or not it was a cultural phenomenon is not up for debate and I never suggested it was, but, again I don't know how that proves anything about its quality. A ton of people liking a mediocre thing doesn't make it retroactively better. Of course it was more popular than The Big Bang Theory but, again, as I pointed out, that could be at least in part attributed to its timing. Friends was perfectly timed culturally with the popularity of appointment viewing. It's pre-DVR, largely pre-internet, and at the apex of NBC's Must See TV. People watched Friends Thursday nights because that's just what you did on Thursday nights. When TBBT, Modern Family etc came on it wasn't like that anymore. We'll never know if they would have been as popular if they all came on at the same time but the culture around TV was already different.

And I would love to know what you think was groundbreaking about the show. I don't think Friends did anything that Living Single, Seinfeld or other similar shows hadn't already done. The biggest difference I can think of is how Jerry and co never dated people of colour whereas Ross did. But as the Living Single debate has long proven I don't think that undoes the quote-unquote "problems" with Friends and race. If Friends is "groundbreaking" for being sex-positive etc in the mainstream then so is TBBT for what it was doing for nerd culture, or Modern Family for gay couples on TV.

There is a narrative that the show was a ripoff of Living Single, which was basically the same premise but with an all-black cast that came out a year earlier. Friends wound up overshadowing its legacy. Whether or not it was representative of the reality of living in the 90s in New York is of course debatable, as is whether or not that actually matters since it's a sitcom. But I get it's important for people to look at the history and get the full context of something so culturally pervasive. Like Friends is the show from that era that people remember even though it's arguably not very good and derivative. It's lowest-common denominator and every era has a show like that that sticks when, if given the proper attention, other, better, more representative and/or inclusive shows could do the same. Friends has Living Single. The Big Bang Theory has Community. Modern Family has Parks or Veep. Friends' impact on similar shows is probably more destructive since it was at the acme of appointment/watercooler viewing whereas those more recent shows eventually all live more comfortably in streaming.

Like, ultimately it's just a middling sitcom with a much bigger following than it probably deserves, but I don't know how much that really matters. It's not like it's copaganda, it's just white people hanging out mostly with other white people, who cares.

It's so weird, it's like the people who were running the network in the late 00s/early 10s have come back to tank the streaming service. Like I know they're hemorrhaging money but how do they expect to add subscribers if they can't guarantee any show will survive, no matter how good it is?

It's especially frustrating because of how good they clearly are at developing really funny sitcoms, something that's really been lacking in hollywood the last few years. So many half hour shows are leaning towards the darker side like Barry, Atlanta, even Ted Lasso and few outlets are making actual sitcoms with really funny people. So you have all this talent gobbled up by Peacock only to be squandered. I guess Netflix has a good relationship with Tina Fey so it worked out for this but Saved by the Bell, AP Bio, those shows are never coming back.

Netflix has Big Pussy Energy confirmed

I too thought they meant literally dark lol. Started watching the first ep with my parents and they didn't want to continue because they couldn't see anything.

In general I think this happens because a lot of shows/movies shoot in the day and put a filter over it to simulate night time. I guess it's cheaper to film that way (don't have to pay people over time, use a bunch of lights, etc). I remember reading about it after Nope came out, which apparently was revolutionary because the cinematographer came up with a new method to film during the day and make the scenes pop a lot more.

I actually really like a lot of S1, they seemed to be going for something really interesting with good social commentary, but it fell apart I guess when they changed showrunners and I agree the end is pretty dumb.

S2 is good if you don't think about the logic of what they're doing too much, or ignore how it's completely devoid of any point.

S3 is good but again with a stupid ending.

S4 has a couple of decent episodes and I actually think they nailed the ending for the most part, I like how it's basically Star Trek: Arrival. But it's also maybe the most boring season of the show so far.

I like most new Trek and think SNW deserved this award, but The Orville, especially this past season, is really, really good as well. New Trek is trying different things (for better or sometimes worse), even when they're rehashing things. The Orville starts as Star Trek Classic, landing on that line between homage and parody, but by S3 it's fully its own thing with the spirit of TNG era trek. Some of the episodes they did in S3 are among the best sci fi I've ever seen.

A lot of the criticisms people had with FAM this season were fair but I still really like it and it was among the shows I was most excited for every week when it aired. The Orville was really good too this season. And I'm surprised Severance wasn't nominated, I guess they don't consider it sci-fi enough.

That being said I would have voted for SNW as well, the finale especially is probably the best episode of Star Trek I've seen since the Voyager days.

You know it's cool if something just isn't for you, right?

You're right I think Beats is pretty much their only 10+ digit buy. They generally make really smart acquisitions so I think it's more a matter of waiting for the right company to buy rather than not wanting to spend the money. I could totally see why they wouldn't be interested in a legacy company like Comcast or Warner that comes with more problems than it's probably worth.

Honestly I'm thinking more Netflix. They've very highly valued now but if the price is right that feels like it could fit.

Yup same here. I use Apple Music and needed the iCloud space so it's simpler to just get that family plan and have Arcade/TV in perpetuity.

I think they'll inevitably swallow up one of their competitors and merge platforms. They literally have the largest corporate cash stockpile in the world and outside of Amazon they probably wouldn't have much trouble merging with or outright buying any of their competitors, outside of antitrust issues (which, let's be honest, is barely a hurdle anymore in the US).