Hello dear community! Hope you had a great weekend and are ready for anothe edition of your favorite Round Table. This week I'm(MK) joined by Milo (MI), Jaz (JZ), Laura (LS), Jennise (JH) and Lisa (LM). So as always sit back, enjoy your read and join the discussion.
1. As you all know the Emmy nods were announced this past Thursday. What do you think will the divide between actors and actresses ever be crossed and should they be merged into one category?
MI: That's an interesting question, and I can see it happening, but there would probably have to be some serious adjustments to the format because that would make the voting categories impossibly hard - there are so many brilliant actors and actresses out there. The way things are at the moment may not be perfect but it does allow more actors and actresses to get recognised, and unless they keep the same number of slots when they combine the two that isn't going to happen.
JH: I used to wonder about combining actresses and actors into a single category, but then i decided that from a practical/organizational standpoint it makes sense to continue the split.
LM: I don't see them ever merging the male/female actor categories - there aren't enough awards to go around now! In fact, I suspect that they'll start to splinter them more the way the Golden Globes do - and so they should. Premium shows, cable shows, and network shows shouldn't be forced to compete with each other.
MK: I was a bit confused when I first read the news but now I'm so into it. The Ouat writers know they they didn't do justice to some of their charavters and this re-do can maybe give them the opportunity to do it right. I just hope they don't try to hard the fall down can be quite brutal.
MI: I don't watch OAUT so I'm not going to comment on that, but it looks like Doctor Who is going down a similiar route in the Christmas Special by having David Bradley play the first Doctor, a role already played by William Hartnell back in the 1960s. Normally I'd be against this but the casting of Bradley has already seen him play the first Doctor before in the Adventures of Space and Time Anniversary, and I'm really looking forward to see how they handle him in a proper modern drama episode and how faithful they keep his character to the original. Early impressions are good, so if OAUT can handle its own problems like that as well as it can as Doctor Who is doing, then there shouldn't be a problem. And this is of course, different again from the case of the upcoming regeneration of the 12th Doctor to the 13th Doctor, where the prospect of finally having a female Doctor feels like a really exciting one!
JH: Aside from thinking the explanation was not stated very clearly, I think it’s a good idea that the show is trying to refresh itself.
As for the idea of season six focus on a *different* book of fairytales is something I think could work. There have long been different versions of these classic fairytales in both literature and film. I recall animated versions of one or two set in ancient Africa. I suspect the biggest problem is going to be with long term fans of the show who are not happy with change.
JZ: I don’t mind it. It’s an alternate world with another Cinderella. I don’t think they’re necessarily stepping on the previous Cinderella although as the stories of this new world get told, I’d like to see some old faces. Maybe as doppelgangers? I watch too many shows with alternative worlds so I can just roll with it. But I get the resistance on the part of some people, this is a family show about fairy tales, I don’t think it needs to be this complicated. But a Cinderella who is a WOC is AWESOME!
3. TVline announced a new Blind item for the upcoming season and it is a new death of a beloed character. The show's whole first half will revolve around the murder. Shock value deaths are another trend in the peak TV era but is it a good trend or are the writers already abusing it?
MI: One of of the biggest problems that comes with deaths to increase hype is that they just seem to be done for shock value, which is something that The Walking Dead seems so fond of. It feels cheap, unnecessary, and there's only so many times you can do it before it loses impact completely. I wasn't a fan of how Arrow handled the whole "Who's in the Grave" debacle back in Season 4 with the writers not knowing who was going to be in the grave until they killed off Laurel in a really cheap and pathetic way when it would have had much more of an impact if they had killed off Felicity earlier on, but if you're going to kill off a major character it needs to be planned. There's a good reason why the death of Moria in Season 2 worked so well in Arrow and Laurel's didn't, because clear consequences and planning had been considered in advance and it played out as part of the storyline rather than tacked off as an afterthought. So if you are going to kill off characters, don't do it for shock value, do it for storyline purposes and if you can generate shock because of that then all the better.
JH: I attended a lecture where a showrunner explained one of the painful realities of the business. What I didn’t realize at the time is that there is a lot more money in television then in features. That pressure makes it difficult to have room to take chances; to try something new. So you have executives asking the creative teams to stick to what they know has worked before.
It’s frequently annoying to viewers but can you imagine how frustrating it is to the creative teams?
That said, using the shocking death cliche to spur a season long arc story has potential. It’s more than just a gotcha moment for the end of the episode; it provides a lot of potential for great personal character stories throughout the season. Plus if the mystery is well handled (the daytime soaps I’ve watched do this seldom have a good solution to the mystery) it could lead to a very satisfying season overall.
JZ: This blind item sounds like an opening for HTGAWM! We’ve talked about shock value deaths in last week’s roundtable and I (optimistically) don’t think this will be one of them. If all the facts from this item are true, the writers already know who it is and I hope that they take the time to really finish off the character in a satisfying way. An arc like this allows them to do so.
That being said, it’s hard to tell if this is going to happen without knowing what the show is or who these writers are. I’ve only ever watched 2 shows (HTGAWM and Arrow) with this sort of premise and both times the audience’s reaction was less than favourable. Mainly because even the writers themselves didn’t know who was under the blanket or in the grave until the time came to put someone there.
If the writers know who it is, recognise they’re beloved, and do the storyline justice then I have no problem with it.
LS: As I commented on that post, I care much more about the blind item concerning the show that is considering making their lead male character gay. If they ever happen to see this post - PLEASE DO IT! Blind items are notoriously underwhelming so I really don’t care about this deathly one.
LM: Shock value deaths are definitely overdone. However, I do really like this premise. Kill the character and then spend the season solving the murder - or leading up to it... It's at least a little different than the usual storyline.
4. San Diego Comic Con is just around the corner. Which panel are you looking forward the most and what reveals are you expecting to happen.
MK: Ohh so many panels. But first and foremost The Originals and The100. Hoping for some good teasers, casting announcements and some kicka*s footage.
MI: So many panels I'm looking forward do. As a big DC fan I'm looking forward to all the CW-verse, Gotham and even the DCEU panels where I'm crossing my fingers that we get all the new trailers and possibly some confirmation on future DCEU movies. Trailers and news for The 100 would be welcomed as well. I'm also going to be keeping an eye out on the Westworld panel.
JH: I haven’t been to comic con in years. (It was too crowded for me, personally.) I love the fact that more and more of the professional recordings of the panels are being made available online.
I have stopped looking to it for scoops though. I like real spoilers more than teasers and the comic con panels (for completely understandable reasons) stick to teasers. I like the entertainment factor. Unfortunately, my current job has left be a little distanced from my tv viewing so I’m not looking for any particular panel
JZ: I love SDCC! I’m Australian so going is merely a bucket list plan, but I love sitting at home watching all the interviews and panels come in while I engage with fellow fans online. It gets me over that hiatus hump before Fall.
I'm looking forward to all the panels. Basically, any TV show I’m watching next season, I’m here for it!
While I love the panels, I do prefer the media interviews. Some journalists really put in the time to ask some thoughtful questions we won’t get from a standard panel. I salute their hard work.
LS: THE _Psych_ PANEL! Oh my god! Psych panels have always been amazing and this is gonna be a reunion of epic proportions! I hope there’s footage from the film and all the crazy hijinks that used to happen! I am also looking forward to the _Archer_ panel, since that cast doesn’t actually record together at all. The only times they ever actually see each other are at panels and interviews like these. They have great chemistry for actors who barely spend time in the same room. And lastly, I CANNOT wait for the _Rick and Morty_ panel. Last year they revealed a Pickle Rick clip to us, this year who knows what they will do, since Comic Con is only a few days until Season 3 is set to air. I just know it’ll be exciting.
Hope you enjoyed this editition of the Round Table and return next week for another edition. In the meantime stop by the comment section and share your opinions on this week's discussed topics.
