Apr. 3rd, 2011

Criminal Minds

spoilery for 6x19 )

Oct. 30th, 2010

quick CSI: NY comment

spoilers )

Apr. 22nd, 2010

quick comment on Murdoch Mysteries 3x10

spoilers for Murdoch Mysteries 3x10 )

Dec. 10th, 2009

a brief rant

Sort of a minor Criminal Minds spoiler, but not really about the plot )

Oct. 7th, 2009

a brief rant

The aim to make your tv series appear "dark" or "edgy" or "gritty" or whatever does not mean that the screen has to be literally too dark to make out anything. I get that there are mood lighting choices, and atmosphere through colors and so on, but it completely defeats any kind of purpose if your viewer can't see or follow what's going on. It is not all that sinister if you have to squint and guess what is happening. Seriously, things can be dark and edgy even if there is a lightsource somewhere! (This was brought on by me trying to watch SGU, but really it applies to a lot of series.)

Jan. 22nd, 2009

this week's Criminal Minds

no squee about CM 4x13 here )

Nov. 12th, 2008

this week's House

spoilers for House 5x07 )

Nov. 7th, 2008

quick episode reactions to CSI and Supernatural

spoilers for CSI 9x05 )

spoilers for SPN 4x08 )

May. 2nd, 2008

tv pet peeve #5697...

The latest incident of this I've noticed was in this week's CSI: New York, but it's not really specific to that ep, so I don't think it needs a spoiler cut. So once again they examine photos taken by bystanders on their cell phones for evidence, and this is related to that weird "endless zoom and image enhancement" phenomenon in procedurals (and wow, do I wish photos and video really worked like that, that you somehow could extract all potential information rather than all actual information recorded, because then if you had a reference picture of an object and needed to see the detail of some part of the mechanism rather than the whole thing you could just zoom instead of cursing about how few easy to find photos there are just showing a small part of a thing in great detail), but I don't mean that exactly, though it is also a pet peeve of mine. It's that on top of the endless detail it never seems to happen that a significant portion of their relevant photos just suck too much, like maybe blurry because the person wobbled too much, completely over or under exposed, etc. This somehow annoys me because random tv people are apparently much better at taking snapshots than actual people, even if they are just using cell phones, are in a crowd, and not all sober.

Also, and this is a bit more specific so I cut, )

Nov. 16th, 2007

this week's CSI

spoilers for CSI 8x07 )

Nov. 9th, 2007

this week's Supernatural

spoilers for SPN 3x06 )

December 2016




RSS Atom
Powered by InsaneJournal