|
|
Post by CosmicCavalcade on Jan 7, 2015 15:52:03 GMT
Not sure if this has been posted about before, so sorry if this is a repeat. So some of us were wondering when Mitchell took over as show runner. It was beginning of S5. He's the one who created the Emily character because apparently that's his trademark to bring a new spin to shows. He doesn't think the show should be centered around the characters (and hates doing fan service bits) but does think there should be some development of their individual arcs over a season. The example he gave in the interview was Julia being liberated from corsets.  Like half the writing team were his students at the writing college that he brought over. Every one of them has different ideas of what the characters/show are about. That explains some of the discordant nature from time to time and why there isn't always a perfect balance of elements. And he also doesn't want every episode to be exactly the same formula as the previous one. Though they do try to make sure that Murdoch invents something every three episodes.He also mentioned that a lot of his inspiration comes from noir type novels and that whole genre...so I guess that's maybe being played up now more this season. He also said 'you know' about 578 times. |
|
|
|
Post by Fallenbelle on Jan 7, 2015 16:02:59 GMT
Not sure if this has been posted about before, so sorry if this is a repeat. So some of us were wondering when Mitchell took over as show runner. It was beginning of S5. He's the one who created the Emily character because apparently that's his trademark to bring a new spin to shows. He doesn't think the show should be centered around the characters (and hates doing fan service bits) but does think there should be some development of their individual arcs over a season. The example he gave in the interview was Julia being liberated from corsets. Like half the writing team were his students at the writing college that he brought over. Every one of them has different ideas of what the characters/show are about. That explains some of the discordant nature from time to time and why there isn't always a perfect balance of elements. And he also doesn't want every episode to be exactly the same formula as the previous one. Though they do try to make sure that Murdoch invents something every three episodes.He also mentioned that a lot of his inspiration comes from noir type novels and that whole genre...so I guess that's maybe being played up now more this season. He also said 'you know' about 578 times.I've mentioned various bits in various comments, but nothing specific. I thought it was quite enlightening, and answered a few questions! I also caught the bit about "she stops wearing corsets this season" and while Julia's name isn't mentioned, who else could it be?  He also mentioned that he deliberately brought a new character in to make his mark (Emily), but it still strikes me as interesting that he brings her on, and doesn't define her character-thus leaving her wildly open to interpretation by various writers. If you haven't listened to it yet, I recommend it. |
|
|
|
Post by CosmicCavalcade on Jan 7, 2015 16:10:39 GMT
Not sure if this has been posted about before, so sorry if this is a repeat. So some of us were wondering when Mitchell took over as show runner. It was beginning of S5. He's the one who created the Emily character because apparently that's his trademark to bring a new spin to shows. He doesn't think the show should be centered around the characters (and hates doing fan service bits) but does think there should be some development of their individual arcs over a season. The example he gave in the interview was Julia being liberated from corsets. Like half the writing team were his students at the writing college that he brought over. Every one of them has different ideas of what the characters/show are about. That explains some of the discordant nature from time to time and why there isn't always a perfect balance of elements. And he also doesn't want every episode to be exactly the same formula as the previous one. Though they do try to make sure that Murdoch invents something every three episodes.He also mentioned that a lot of his inspiration comes from noir type novels and that whole genre...so I guess that's maybe being played up now more this season. He also said 'you know' about 578 times.I've mentioned various bits in various comments, but nothing specific. I thought it was quite enlightening, and answered a few questions! I also caught the bit about "she stops wearing corsets this season" and while Julia's name isn't mentioned, who else could it be? He also mentioned that he deliberately brought a new character in to make his mark (Emily), but it still strikes me as interesting that he brings her on, and doesn't define her character-thus leaving her wildly open to interpretation by various writers. If you haven't listened to it yet, I recommend it. Yes I thought the first half was pretty interesting/enlightening as well. Kind of tuned out for the second half. He doesn't actually say Julia? I thought he did? It's like he couldn't help bringing her on because of habit, but then because it was simply out of habit he just forgot she was there once he really took over his showrunning duties? Umm... |
|
|
|
Post by Fallenbelle on Jan 7, 2015 16:58:08 GMT
I've mentioned various bits in various comments, but nothing specific. I thought it was quite enlightening, and answered a few questions! I also caught the bit about "she stops wearing corsets this season" and while Julia's name isn't mentioned, who else could it be? He also mentioned that he deliberately brought a new character in to make his mark (Emily), but it still strikes me as interesting that he brings her on, and doesn't define her character-thus leaving her wildly open to interpretation by various writers. If you haven't listened to it yet, I recommend it. Yes I thought the first half was pretty interesting/enlightening as well. Kind of tuned out for the second half. He doesn't actually say Julia? I thought he did? It's like he couldn't help bringing her on because of habit, but then because it was simply out of habit he just forgot she was there once he really took over his showrunning duties? Umm... Yeah, the middle part goes off topic for a few minutes, and ends up on Murdoch again by the end. But the first half was the most enlightening for sure... |
|
|
|
Post by Hodge on Jan 7, 2015 18:03:18 GMT
Not sure if this has been posted about before, so sorry if this is a repeat. So some of us were wondering when Mitchell took over as show runner. It was beginning of S5. He's the one who created the Emily character because apparently that's his trademark to bring a new spin to shows. He doesn't think the show should be centered around the characters (and hates doing fan service bits) but does think there should be some development of their individual arcs over a season. The example he gave in the interview was Julia being liberated from corsets. Like half the writing team were his students at the writing college that he brought over. Every one of them has different ideas of what the characters/show are about. That explains some of the discordant nature from time to time and why there isn't always a perfect balance of elements. And he also doesn't want every episode to be exactly the same formula as the previous one. Though they do try to make sure that Murdoch invents something every three episodes.He also mentioned that a lot of his inspiration comes from noir type novels and that whole genre...so I guess that's maybe being played up now more this season. He also said 'you know' about 578 times.PM is a brilliant man but I find him very difficult, albeit interesting, to listen to. The show has changed since he's been the show runner and to be honest not always for the better, I really liked the earlier episodes. Not that I don't enjoy the newer ones, I did get hooked on the show during S7. Funny that he doesn't think the show should be centred around the characters as there's been more eps devoted to them since he took over. Also if you don't centre the eps around the characters you've just got another boring proceedural and who needs another one of those. The strength of MM is the characters and the stories surrounding them. |
|
|
|
Post by CosmicCavalcade on Jan 7, 2015 18:56:28 GMT
Not sure if this has been posted about before, so sorry if this is a repeat. So some of us were wondering when Mitchell took over as show runner. It was beginning of S5. He's the one who created the Emily character because apparently that's his trademark to bring a new spin to shows. He doesn't think the show should be centered around the characters (and hates doing fan service bits) but does think there should be some development of their individual arcs over a season. The example he gave in the interview was Julia being liberated from corsets. Like half the writing team were his students at the writing college that he brought over. Every one of them has different ideas of what the characters/show are about. That explains some of the discordant nature from time to time and why there isn't always a perfect balance of elements. And he also doesn't want every episode to be exactly the same formula as the previous one. Though they do try to make sure that Murdoch invents something every three episodes.He also mentioned that a lot of his inspiration comes from noir type novels and that whole genre...so I guess that's maybe being played up now more this season. He also said 'you know' about 578 times.PM is a brilliant man but I find him very difficult, albeit interesting, to listen to. The show has changed since he's been the show runner and to be honest not always for the better, I really liked the earlier episodes. Not that I don't enjoy the newer ones, I did get hooked on the show during S7. Funny that he doesn't think the show should be centred around the characters as there's been more eps devoted to them since he took over. Also if you don't centre the eps around the characters you've just got another boring proceedural and who needs another one of those. The strength of MM is the characters and the stories surrounding them. Difficult because of all the 'you knows'? I was starting to get rather irritated towards the half way point. Yeah it does seem to be more character central doesn't it? He did say that the stories are what bring people in but the characters are what keep them there, yet he makes sure not to give them more than 25% of any episode as the focus should be on the mystery. I would agree with this completely if the mysteries were consistently good or even decent...he's definitely right about it being difficult to write a mystery that people don't figure out in the first two minutes...it might help if they don't introduce the killer first thing every time. I feel like he's broken his cardinal rule and allowed more character heavy eps at the expense of mystery plot development because as he said himself, it's way easier to write character drama. He also admitted that they are having an increasingly difficult time coming up with original storylines and not just tweaking things they've already done. I guess those 10+ stories at the end of every season that they don't end up using are the ones that are too similar to past stories/aren't as good. If those are the reject ones I shudder to think of how bad they truly were considering the ones we do get aren't always stellar. All that said, I've found this season to have a few good mysteries in it, so I won't write them off yet as being completely out of ideas. And I'm looking forward to the corset one...but not for the mystery aspect of it. |
|
|
|
Post by Hodge on Jan 7, 2015 19:29:02 GMT
PM is a brilliant man but I find him very difficult, albeit interesting, to listen to. The show has changed since he's been the show runner and to be honest not always for the better, I really liked the earlier episodes. Not that I don't enjoy the newer ones, I did get hooked on the show during S7. Funny that he doesn't think the show should be centred around the characters as there's been more eps devoted to them since he took over. Also if you don't centre the eps around the characters you've just got another boring proceedural and who needs another one of those. The strength of MM is the characters and the stories surrounding them. Difficult because of all the 'you knows'? I was starting to get rather irritated towards the half way point. Yeah it does seem to be more character central doesn't it? He did say that the stories are what bring people in but the characters are what keep them there, yet he makes sure not to give them more than 25% of any episode as the focus should be on the mystery. I would agree with this completely if the mysteries were consistently good or even decent...he's definitely right about it being difficult to write a mystery that people don't figure out in the first two minutes...it might help if they don't introduce the killer first thing every time. I feel like he's broken his cardinal rule and allowed more character heavy eps at the expense of mystery plot development because as he said himself, it's way easier to write character drama. He also admitted that they are having an increasingly difficult time coming up with original storylines and not just tweaking things they've already done. I guess those 10+ stories at the end of every season that they don't end up using are the ones that are too similar to past stories/aren't as good. If those are the reject ones I shudder to think of how bad they truly were considering the ones we do get aren't always stellar. All that said, I've found this season to have a few good mysteries in it, so I won't write them off yet as being completely out of ideas. And I'm looking forward to the corset one...but not for the mystery aspect of it. Yep, all the "you know's"! I've only been watching MM since Dec 2013 so even though I've seen every ep multiple times I can't say I'm getting tired of it yet. I think that happens over time rather than over the number of eps you see. I'm still enthralled at the whole experience of each new ep even if it isn't the most stellar of storylines. In fact some of them improve with watching, Keystone Constables was one of these. I don't care for Vaudeville and it detracted from the ep the first time around however after watching it several times I now don't mind it as I see so much more than the Vaudeville acts. I don't try and solve the mystery, I just go with the flow although sometimes I do say so and so did it but I don't usually bother. |
|
|
|
Post by CosmicCavalcade on Jan 7, 2015 21:14:18 GMT
Difficult because of all the 'you knows'? I was starting to get rather irritated towards the half way point. Yeah it does seem to be more character central doesn't it? He did say that the stories are what bring people in but the characters are what keep them there, yet he makes sure not to give them more than 25% of any episode as the focus should be on the mystery. I would agree with this completely if the mysteries were consistently good or even decent...he's definitely right about it being difficult to write a mystery that people don't figure out in the first two minutes...it might help if they don't introduce the killer first thing every time. I feel like he's broken his cardinal rule and allowed more character heavy eps at the expense of mystery plot development because as he said himself, it's way easier to write character drama. He also admitted that they are having an increasingly difficult time coming up with original storylines and not just tweaking things they've already done. I guess those 10+ stories at the end of every season that they don't end up using are the ones that are too similar to past stories/aren't as good. If those are the reject ones I shudder to think of how bad they truly were considering the ones we do get aren't always stellar. All that said, I've found this season to have a few good mysteries in it, so I won't write them off yet as being completely out of ideas. And I'm looking forward to the corset one...but not for the mystery aspect of it. Yep, all the "you know's"! I've only been watching MM since Dec 2013 so even though I've seen every ep multiple times I can't say I'm getting tired of it yet. I think that happens over time rather than over the number of eps you see. I'm still enthralled at the whole experience of each new ep even if it isn't the most stellar of storylines. In fact some of them improve with watching, Keystone Constables was one of these. I don't care for Vaudeville and it detracted from the ep the first time around however after watching it several times I now don't mind it as I see so much more than the Vaudeville acts. I don't try and solve the mystery, I just go with the flow although sometimes I do say so and so did it but I don't usually bother. Yeah my opinion is sometimes flexible after the first viewing. For instance I hated Filmed Adventures the first time but didn't mind it so much the second time and even laughed a bit. I tend to be rather high strung for the live viewing which I'm sure makes me take it all too seriously when it isn't meant to be. Whenever I get around to seeing it a third time I might come to like it, though I doubt it will ever be a favourite of mine. I'll always hate the opera one so no point forcing myself to watch it anymore. I tend to rewatch the season after it's completely over so probably some other episodes will improve for me because I'll be less focused on trying to solve the mystery and more in tune to all of the other nuances. |
|
|
|
Post by snacky on Jan 7, 2015 22:31:28 GMT
I hatd podcasts, so I'm just going to comment on the comments. First I hate it when mystery writers claim they are running out of stories. YET new TV shows seem to hsppen every season! They often employ these writers who were "out of ideas". And for Peter Mitchell to say this when he has only worked for MM since season 4 or 5?  !!! Here's an idea - hire a new wrter/show runner who isn't out of ideas!!! Look at Law and Order or CSI - how ridiculous to be out of mysteries!!!! They need another historian on the team: someone who can bring the content. Just grr. |
|
|
|
Post by snacky on Jan 8, 2015 0:07:00 GMT
By the way you guys make it sound like PM thinks the whole character of Julia is fan service. >.>
If Emily was supposed to show off his forte as a show runner, I'd hate to see what he thinks his weak spots are. Emily is only coming into her own this season, after several discombobulating changes of direction.
Perhaps he made a mistake in hiring his proteges. Inbreeding stamps out creativity.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hodge on Jan 8, 2015 7:51:07 GMT
Yeah my opinion is sometimes flexible after the first viewing. For instance I hated Filmed Adventures the first time but didn't mind it so much the second time and even laughed a bit. I tend to be rather high strung for the live viewing which I'm sure makes me take it all too seriously when it isn't meant to be. Whenever I get around to seeing it a third time I might come to like it, though I doubt it will ever be a favourite of mine. I'll always hate the opera one so no point forcing myself to watch it anymore. I tend to rewatch the season after it's completely over so probably some other episodes will improve for me because I'll be less focused on trying to solve the mystery and more in tune to all of the other nuances. The first time I watch anything I just take it as it comes. I rarely try to figure out whodunit as it spoils it for me however sometimes it's obvious. Most shows I'll watch once and that's enough however MM works on so many levels you really can't take it all in the first time ... or second and sometimes third. Eps I wasn't fond of first time around usually grow on me as I watch multiple times and see all the nuances. That happened with the Vaudeville ep, the more I watch the more I like it. There are a couple of eps that will never grow on me, Murdoch at the Opera and Rich Boy, Poor Boy. Not sure what it is about RB,PB but it just does nothing for me and MatO is so over the top I can't stand it. Other eps I just can't get enough of. |
|
|
|
Post by Hodge on Jan 8, 2015 7:59:14 GMT
By the way you guys make it sound like PM thinks the whole character of Julia is fan service. >.> If Emily was supposed to show off his forte as a show runner, I'd hate to see what he thinks his weak spots are. Emily is only coming into her own this season, after several discombobulating changes of direction. Perhaps he made a mistake in hiring his proteges. Inbreeding stamps out creativity. Perhaps he does! I agree with you on Emily. Introducing a new character just because it's 'your thing' doesn't always work out, I think Emily was a mistake despite the fact that I don't mind her. I'll agree with this take and also your idea of another history oriented writer. |
|
|
|
Post by Fallenbelle on Jan 8, 2015 19:08:31 GMT
By the way you guys make it sound like PM thinks the whole character of Julia is fan service. >.> If Emily was supposed to show off his forte as a show runner, I'd hate to see what he thinks his weak spots are. Emily is only coming into her own this season, after several discombobulating changes of direction. Perhaps he made a mistake in hiring his proteges. Inbreeding stamps out creativity. Perhaps he does! I agree with you on Emily. Introducing a new character just because it's 'your thing' doesn't always work out, I think Emily was a mistake despite the fact that I don't mind her. I'll agree with this take and also your idea of another history oriented writer. I'm going to disagree with you guys about PM thinking Julia is merely fan service because that's too depressing of a thought. Did he not ever get that she was supposed to represent the new woman for the new century, and William's equal? I miss BAMF Julia, and if you guys are right, we'll never see her again.  I still find it intriguing that he brings on Emily, and doesn't seem to have much concern for her character development in that he lets her go without clear definition for the writers, who proceed to interpret her in a myriad of ways. Intriguing indeed.  I would love to see more history brought into the show, but I do understand that you don't want it to be strictly following the events of 1902. You do want to have the ability to have some flexibility and play around a little. |
|
|
|
Post by snacky on Jan 8, 2015 21:39:42 GMT
I want to watch Keystone Konstables again, but I feel so bad for George freezing on stage I just can't bear to watch.T_T
I'm trying to get up the courage to do it, though. I want to take another look at William's envy and laughter. It's a key feature of his character that he never got "morgue humor". I like the idea he has more freedom to express emotions in the domestic sphere, but did that just break an innate character trait? Hmmm.
Also warming up to idea of shipping George. Annoyed by Edna calling him "George Crabtree", but can't see "George" either now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hodge on Jan 8, 2015 23:59:24 GMT
Perhaps he does! I agree with you on Emily. Introducing a new character just because it's 'your thing' doesn't always work out, I think Emily was a mistake despite the fact that I don't mind her. I'll agree with this take and also your idea of another history oriented writer. I'm going to disagree with you guys about PM thinking Julia is merely fan service because that's too depressing of a thought. Did he not ever get that she was supposed to represent the new woman for the new century, and William's equal? I miss BAMF Julia, and if you guys are right, we'll never see her again. I still find it intriguing that he brings on Emily, and doesn't seem to have much concern for her character development in that he lets her go without clear definition for the writers, who proceed to interpret her in a myriad of ways. Intriguing indeed. I would love to see more history brought into the show, but I do understand that you don't want it to be strictly following the events of 1902. You do want to have the ability to have some flexibility and play around a little. I don't necessarily think he does feel Julia's just fan service but she's certainly been treated that way recently. I loved the BAMFy Julia of the earlier seasons and yes I do think she represented the modern woman. Too bad they haven't carried that forward. They do play with history a little and I don't want it to be a history programme. As long as something happened around the year the season is set in it's fair game and I'm fine with that. |
|
!!! Here's an idea - hire a new wrter/show runner who isn't out of ideas!!! Look at Law and Order or CSI - how ridiculous to be out of mysteries!!!! They need another historian on the team: someone who can bring the content. 
