It still cracks me up that, while what you say about the show's content is absolutely true, the credits sequence would lead one to believe that the show is a Sex and the City clone. I'm flabbergasted that a show created and run by a woman, with a mostly female writing bullpen, would choose to concentrate on visual images of primping when the show itself is about a terrifically capable and determined young surgeon who's struggling to be taken seriously on her own merits.
Willow ,'Potential'
The Minearverse 3: The Network Is a Harsh Mistress
[NAFDA] "There will be an occasional happy, so that it might be crushed under the boot of the writer." From Zorro to Angel (including Wonderfalls and The Inside), this is where Buffistas come to anoint themselves in the bloodbath.
I'm 50% through my second Global Freq (I thought about leaving that at GF, but let's not) attempt, using XBT client.
Matt -- the show is so not about medicine and she hasn't struggled with much other than her right to sleep with her boss in the last few eps. It's about the lives and loves of pretty people who seem to practice medicine (although highly implausible).
Ah, so lots less concentration on the actual work they're doing since the rape victim and tumor episodes? I'd thought Meredith's troubles with acclimating to the hospital and dealing with proxy issues from her mom's reputation were going to be major thrusts of the story arc along with her lovelife. But I've only seen snippets of recent shows .
I don't think the focus is as much on her as I was expecting -- now we're involved in everyone's quest for sex. Her mother comes up once an ep, if that often, and mostly as background for her relationship with her co-workers and boyfriend. The medical cases seem to be supporting the personal drama, more than anything else.
About the Skyman vs. Simon debate, the closed captioning said Skyman. I thought it was wrong at first, having noticed that his nametag read Simon. Perhaps it was a nickname he told the Panty Sniffer.
downloading GF now
Isn't it more than a little reckless to shoot a suspect without warning in front of surveillance cameras that you know damned well are there because you've used them to locate said suspect?
Isn't it more than a little reckless to shoot a suspect without warning in front of surveillance cameras that you know damned well are there because you've used them to locate said suspect?
Probably, but if they don't have audio, all the camera would reveal is that you shot someone holding a hostage.
Unless you can read lips.
It's possible to exploit misogyny and crimes against vaginas (cf SVU) without supporting them. I dislike it as a shorthand to ultimate horror.
ita, I'm confused, can you clarify?
Isn't it more than a little reckless to shoot a suspect without warning in front of surveillance cameras that you know damned well are there because you've used them to locate said suspect?
Future episodes spoiler: It was a little reckless, yes. And one of the arcs will deal with the consequences of that.
ita, I'm confused, can you clarify?
I'm not sure where I wasn't clear -- I was addressing the position that as long as you're not supporting the horror, it's okay. No, you can handle something badly without endorsing it. One of those ways is to use it as cheap shorthand.