Yeah. I feel like this last episode really tested me in terms of, "Are you SURE you're on board with exposition and instant professions of love?"
But I looked into my heart and saw it was trash, so I'm still here.
I hope that as the show progresses they rely less on the heavvvyyyy exposition to catch non-readers up with the story. But at the same time, I live for the dumb/campy lines because Goode still delivers them like poetry and sometimes I just want some good cheese.
I think at this point this show is either your personal brand of trash, or it's not.
Adding: It's better than Twilight in the sense that I feel like I'm not meant to be taking it too seriously. I think Twilight collapsed under the weight of its own self-seriousness, whereas there are enough winks in this to tell me that they know it's campy.
Yes and no. As I said above, it's trashy, so it's just a question of whether this is your kind of fun-trash.
I'm enjoying it, and I hated Twilight. There is a plot here beyond the romance, which helps. But frankly after years of dreary "elite TV" I'm kind of relishing in something that feels a little more late 90s/early 00s in its cheesiness.
If the premise sounds fun/dumb to you, you'll probably like it.
I feel like you and I tend to have similar taste, and I was hooked after the first 2. The pilot is pretty rocky, but the second episode ramps up a bit.
The show's at its best when it's just Matthew Goode rambling off nonsense in a deep, sexy voice while wearing tweed and downing vast quantities of red wine. The romance bit was a lot of the fourth episode and I didn't love it, but I'm sticking with it and hoping it irons out its wrinklier bits.
I've only seen the first two episodes and they are TRASH but I loved them and it made me re-read the book. I read it (skimming a lot) in 2 days and I'm moving onto the second book since I never did finish and read the third. I remember the second being a SLOG. It'll be interesting to see as they progress how they have to change from the book because NO WAY are they doing all of the shit she writes about and all of the boring back and forths that happen.
It's funny, but having just finished the books I feel like they're all slogs but the second is probably the most interesting? Even if it is kind of an Outlander ripoff.
The main thing I trust so far with the adaptation is that they've cut so much of the book's terrible filler and then gone back in and provided context and extra scenes/story for all of the side stuff that happens behind the scenes in the book itself.
It's still 100% trash, but it's well structured trash. I just want them to write better dialog.
Good to know!!! I really had a rough time with the second just because I'm not very familiar with a lot of the historical figures she was writing about (I'm not a huge Shakespearean/Elizabethan lover) so it will be interesting to me to re-read/skim it. I'm wanting to finish the third though, I never even started it. Hopefully there is some good resolution with the characters. I agree with what you said below though about the author--I noticed some of the things she wrote about over and over again and how annoying it was. How many times is Diana going to freaking faint or have her knees go to jelly? I mean come on now.
It's definitely an area of history I know pretty well, but I found most of the shout-outs kind of cringey. I'm not a huge fan of, "Oh just me and my old pal Shakespeare!!!"
I also hope that the show kind of lets Diana develop her own powers. But either way, the show's done a good job of carving a plot out of the novel's meanderings, so I hope/assume it'll continue to do the same.
Yes! I just re-read it and if you like cheesey romance and don't read it in one chunk it's great. Reading it all so close together (I just re-read it) I noticed the author does a LOT of repetitive stuff that annoyed me but I don't remember being annoyed my first time around. It's a good thought out story.
They're... rough. You can tell it's the author's first crack at writing a novel. The general concept is good, the characters are okay, but the execution is all over the fucking place.
Anything I liked about the book has been improved by the show. Anything I didn't, so far the show has wisely removed.
I can't help but think this is another example of a UK show that fumbled its distribution but as long as it does okay enough to get another season I'm cool with it.
Sky (or the production company) pissed me off with the way they handled the US distribution of Hooten & the Lady. They dumped it on the CW in July, so of course, no one watched it.
It filmed on location, though, so I'm sure it was pretty expensive. It just reminded me of Relic Hunter, so I wanted it to be renewed.
At least A Discovery of Witches is going to be shown in a lot of other countries. There are plenty of UK shows that don't make it that far. That makes me feel better about the, um, methods I use to watch UK shows. XD
It's fascinating watching these major companies just throw money away. At least with this it seems like they know it works best as something you can binge/stream.
Comments 94
seriously sometimes i'm like "even twilight wasn't this cringeworthy...right??" and then i doubt my sanity
Reply
But I looked into my heart and saw it was trash, so I'm still here.
I hope that as the show progresses they rely less on the heavvvyyyy exposition to catch non-readers up with the story. But at the same time, I live for the dumb/campy lines because Goode still delivers them like poetry and sometimes I just want some good cheese.
I think at this point this show is either your personal brand of trash, or it's not.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
I'm enjoying it, and I hated Twilight. There is a plot here beyond the romance, which helps. But frankly after years of dreary "elite TV" I'm kind of relishing in something that feels a little more late 90s/early 00s in its cheesiness.
If the premise sounds fun/dumb to you, you'll probably like it.
Reply
Reply
The show's at its best when it's just Matthew Goode rambling off nonsense in a deep, sexy voice while wearing tweed and downing vast quantities of red wine. The romance bit was a lot of the fourth episode and I didn't love it, but I'm sticking with it and hoping it irons out its wrinklier bits.
Reply
Reply
The main thing I trust so far with the adaptation is that they've cut so much of the book's terrible filler and then gone back in and provided context and extra scenes/story for all of the side stuff that happens behind the scenes in the book itself.
It's still 100% trash, but it's well structured trash. I just want them to write better dialog.
Reply
Reply
I also hope that the show kind of lets Diana develop her own powers. But either way, the show's done a good job of carving a plot out of the novel's meanderings, so I hope/assume it'll continue to do the same.
Reply
Reply
Reply
They're... rough. You can tell it's the author's first crack at writing a novel. The general concept is good, the characters are okay, but the execution is all over the fucking place.
Anything I liked about the book has been improved by the show. Anything I didn't, so far the show has wisely removed.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
It filmed on location, though, so I'm sure it was pretty expensive. It just reminded me of Relic Hunter, so I wanted it to be renewed.
At least A Discovery of Witches is going to be shown in a lot of other countries. There are plenty of UK shows that don't make it that far. That makes me feel better about the, um, methods I use to watch UK shows. XD
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment