Jump to content
LCVG

Recommended Posts

Anyone else watch this show?  I'm 5 episodes into it and my wife decided she could wait on me to finish it so she finished it on her own.  It's a show about a blind girl who disappears and then returns years later but now she can see.  Saying anything else would ruin it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just so happened we were looking for something to watch last night when I read your post. We watched episode one and it's very intriguing, though I did get really sleepy so I'll have to watch it again.

 

Did they really roll "opening" credits 3/4 through the episode? Weird.

 

 

Carlos.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just finished and that has to be one of the most satisfying , yet WTF shows I have ever watched. Lol

That's high praise. Seriously.

 

Everything I've heard about this is positive but this week is too damn busy to sit & start watching. Damn holidays.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We ran through the season over the last couple of evenings. Good show! The material isn't necessarily my thing, drama, afterlife, angels, etc. But it's a well written and acted series, and I appreciate the mystery and unpredictability of the story.

 

This is the type of middle ground show that works for both my wife and me. She enjoys dramas, but I can only put up with them if they strive to be different, edgey, and with at least a bit of unpredictability thrown in.

 

I'd recommend OA, but that's with the understanding that some people will react with a, 'wtf am I watching?' Don't forget to bring your suspension of disbelief along for the ride, and you should be able enjoy this show.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I finished it a few night ago. I...yeah. Ok, then.

 

There's a lot to like but that finale was laughable trash. Well meaning trash with an eye towards being deep without any of the requisite writing to make it as such. Yes, in the end the show is about a group of lost souls who find the meaning they are looking for in life through Prairies' story/experience. In the end whether the story is

true or not isn't as important as whether the five find meaning in it and are at the right place at the right time, etc. When it's all said and done they are little more than a cult of people too "flexible" (read: gullible, it is afterall what Prairie was looking for) to find enlightenment for themselves so they happily buy into her tale of angels and movements. The interpretive dance stuff at the end came off amazingly silly for me, too. Maybe it was the intention to elicit comedy? I don't know but I almost wished the school shooter had just gunned them down for making asses of themselves instead of standing there thinking "da fuq?" long enough to be brought down.

 

 

To be frank, the middle parts of the season meander and bore at times. For such a short season, I found my attention drifting often but I found the performances strong enough to want to continue to completion.

Then episode 8 changed the name of the show to "The Red Herring" and into something M. Knight Shymalan would be proud of. I'm all for the unreliable narrator types of stories but there's far too much bait and switch going on here for my liking. Did she succeed with the five movements and tunnel her way to another dimension and that's what we watched? Is she simply crazy and her delusion stretches far enough into clairvoyance of the future as it has since her youth? Was it all true? I mean how did she get her sight back if not for heavenly intervention or was it just a strong enough blow to the head? Did she ever really lose her sight? Why was the therapist in her home that night? Did he plant the books? Did she die in the finale or was she simply locked up? (The whoosh sound would point towards option A or was that her moment of travel where she finally is off to be reunited with her love, hence the whisper of "Homer" at the end.) Homer was obviously real as we saw the YouTube video of his N.D.E, right?

All great questions this show has zero fucking idea how to answer. Oh but it wants to challenge YOU to answer them, Romier! Sure, but there's simply nothing to interpret here. Go down the paths of logical reasoning for each interpretation and it falls apart. It's masturbatory bullshit trying to claw at the meaning of belief/faith and the human condition. 2011's "The Sound of my Voice" did this story far better already.

 

Look, there's a fine line between a piece of art asking me to interpret its meaning and a piece of art throwing shit at a wall. Episode 8 felt like there was a lot more of the latter. No amount of beautiful cinematography, great performances (especially the little girl who played young Prairie!), and at times solid writing will prevent me from calling a spade a spade. In the case of "The OA" - it's an meandering and wholly unsatisfying art house vanity project that I have almost zero interest in revisiting. Fool me once....

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't argue Romier, there's a whole lot to rip in this show for a variety of reasons. Someone mentioned the OA and Cinema Sins. That would make for a fantastic episode. :)

 

I wouldn't ardently steer anyone toward or away from the show, to each his own, but it is certainly interesting to hear and read opinions of the show. For example, your vitriolic opinion and summary in that last post is far more interesting and thought provoking than any word any person has ever written about Parenthood.

 

(I had to ask my wife, once again, what the name of the 'arguing show' is. Parenthood, ain't no one begging for a Cinema Sins of that bore fest.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with most of what Romier says, and he states it better than I ever could.

 

My wife and I binge watched it over a few days based on the recommendation in this thread. We were fully engaged with it, right up until the end. I have no problems with a movie/show leaving some things vague, or unanswered, where I have to make up my own mind about something, but it has to be done in a way that still feels satisfying. This didn't do that.

 

The real issue is that I was so invested in the story she was telling. I wanted to know what happened to her. I wanted to know how she escaped. I wanted to find out what happened to the others. What was her ultimate plan or what did she think was going to happen? Why did they need 6, when in HAP's Lab they just had 5? I even wanted to learn more about HAP. I felt like the show was leading to much of this, and then did a hard left turn at the end and said "Nope. Won't tell you that. BTW, she might be making it up".

 

The whole part about "here are some books, so she's obviously making it up" just didn't sit right. Why, because she has these books, is she using them as reference for her made up story? If I thought I was an angel, I would probably do some research on it. If I thought I had an NDE, I would probably read a book about it. If I thought my dad was a part of the Russian Oligarchy, I might want some more information. Maybe the Iliad is a little weird, but it could have just as easily been a box set of Simpsons DVDs. And are you guys forgetting that she did disappear for 7 years, and has those scars on her back, and can see, and tried to throw herself off a bridge before she ever met you so that she might flatline (and made videos for Homer before she met you all, but you don't know that anyway)? Not to mention that you have confirmed parts of her story.

 

One of my favorite movies ever is 12 Monkeys. Part of the hook of that movie is Bruce Willis' character starting to believe that he is not actually a time traveler, but is crazy, just as the person who doubted him, believes that he is actually travelling through time. This show could have done something like that, where OA, starts to think she's crazy and what she believes is untrue, And at first they believe she's lying, but then uncover enough evidence that prove otherwise (at least to themselves) 

 

I also read a part of an interview with Batman, about how all the scenes of her capture are not flashbacks, but are how the kids (and Phyllis) are imagining it to be from her story, and that how we imagine a story being told, is different than how the storyteller sees it, or the next person. I personally hate this idea, or explanation, or whatever it is meant to be. It doesn't make any sense, especially since there are parts of the story that OA was not around for, and because all of the flashbacks are identical.

 

We might be negative about it, but I think that's because it was a show with very good form right up to face planting the landing, and it's hard to forget that. I thought the story of her capture was gripping, there was a good sense of emotion, and the cinematography and set design in HAP's lab was fantastic.

 

I must really applaud Netflix for the chances they are taking with the content they are producing. This is a risky show that breaks a lot of conventions, and could never have been done the way it is here on regular broadcast television. From the first episode acting as a introductory prologue with the credits 3/4 of the way through, no credits at the end of an episode (and very little of Netflix's UI popping up after an episode for fairly seamless transition), to the episodes having wildly varying lengths like the chapters of a book and it's subject matter. This show is not a show made for TV, not even HBO or AMC, and I for one am glad that Netflix will foster these kinds of projects.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a great addition to Romiers comments Graeme. The end of the season felt terrible out of place, and unnecessarily rushed, but it's irritating me now more. My original thoughts were that the ending's flaws were due to an eye on a second season, and although that may indeed be partially true or not, it's really not even a decent explanation or excuse for how it was handled. I could throw other shit on the wall, like time or money crunches/constraints, but nothing would really excuse the hard crash stop.

 

I'd be interested in seeing where a second season took things, but I also hate when series ideas get strung out. I'm feeling like there is strong case that this series could be a stringer. Like the creators never had a clear end vision when they began the project.

 

And to Romier's comments on the girl who played the young Russian. She was a highlight of the series. She was captivating in the role. Far more interesting than the older version of OA.

 

Still giving the show a nod for anyone interested, primarily for the water cooler talk it illicits.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I must really applaud Netflix for the chances they are taking with the content they are producing. This is a risky show that breaks a lot of conventions, and could never have been done the way it is here on regular broadcast television. From the first episode acting as a introductory prologue with the credits 3/4 of the way through, no credits at the end of an episode (and very little of Netflix's UI popping up after an episode for fairly seamless transition), to the episodes having wildly varying lengths like the chapters of a book and it's subject matter. This show is not a show made for TV, not even HBO or AMC, and I for one am glad that Netflix will foster these kinds of projects.

 

I agree completely. The fact that the show exists is amazing in and of itself. Even if I was left underwhelmed, I'm ecstatic that Netflix is willing to take chances on this type of project. I'll take swinging for the fences and missing than never swinging at all.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoyed it a lot and don't think the ending was a miss at all. I think we're meant to believe it was all true. She mentioned that if they were to succeed at traveling dimensions that they would forget (it's the reason they had to scar the moves into their bodies).

 

There are a couple of ever so subtle clues that I haven't quite fleshed out but have stuck with me.

 

1) what was the deal with the car parts strewn on the street amid two burning flares?

 

2.) Alfonso had a dad at the end? Seemed that a male told Prairie's dad that he said all there was to say, when previously they want out of their way to show Alfonso to be the bread winner of his family.

 

2.) Steve was not in military school. Sure the teacher bribed the crew to let him go, but don't you think they would have come to get him the next day? Or his dad would have just chosen another school?

 

I think OA did travel through dimensions and made changes to their timelines.

 

Anyway, I'm not ready to call Bullshit on that ending. I think there's something deeper here and I'm willing to invest some more brain cycles on analysis. Even if there isn't a concrete explanation, I think this will stand as another good pick-your-own interpretation show.

 

 

Carlos.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2.) Alfonso had a dad at the end? Seemed that a male told Prairie's dad that he said all there was to say, when previously they want out of their way to show Alfonso to be the bread winner of his family.

It's not clear but I'm pretty sure that was Steve's house and Steve's dad. We were watching it with the subtitles on and it says that line was from Mr Winchell. I was confused as to why Frenchie was coming out of the house when I watched it too. I assume he was there investigating her story with Steve.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...