I've been reading your posts on this, and I've decided not to watch Ashes so as to keep the good feelings LoM left me with.
I understand; that's why I almost didn't watch Ashes to Ashes at all. But they're such different animals that it turned out there was no risk; Ashes to Ashes is like a bad parody of Life on Mars rather than a sequel. (Erm, not that I'm suggesting that you should waste your time watching it. Just that Life on Mars is completely beyond it.)
That's so sad about how you were socialized. I can definitely see that in Annie. Thank you for sharing your insight about that era.
Another way to look at Sam's decision is that he realized he could accomplish more in 1973 because of his knowledge and ability to see the period in perspective. Just working to reform Gene might accomplish more than he ever would in those present-era meetings. *always likes to think nice things of characters she likes*
LOL, well, I like to think nice things about Sam, but I think that at that point he (and the audience) knew that the 1973 he was returning to wasn't the real world. So... I can't see there being much value in him working for social change in his, uh, imagination.
I do think a large part of why he returned was that he enjoyed sparring with Gene, but I have mixed feelings about that. It's hard to separate how much is genuine moral conviction versus how much is Sam sort of reveling in a narcissistic belief in his own cultural superiority. (Um, I do love Sam, really. He could've so easily turned into a preachy goody-goody, so I'm glad they made him flawed and three-dimensional.)
Homophobia and sexism were so prevalent then, I'm not sure I could have suspended belief if they'd played either down.
Oh, I'm really glad that they tried to portray that time period honestly. The reason politicians get away with that "everything was so much better in the past" nonsense is that people forget, and only see the past through idealized fairy tales. It's important to be reminded of how flawed the past was, and how the social changes we've made since then were for a good reason. (Which is why it boggles my mind how people come away from Life on Mars going "Wow, life was so much better in 1973, when men could be men!")
The only time I ever liked Martha in Doctor Who was in the "Human Nature"/"Family of Blood" episodes, because I think the writer did a great job portraying the racism of the time, and showing how difficult it would be for Martha to deal with (and how strong she was for doing so). And the fan reaction to that boggles my mind, too, because people complain that it proves the show is racist. No, it proves that the writer understands racism and that it would be cheap whitewashing of the past to pretend it didn't exist. Much better to show how awful it is and how strong the character is for dealing with it with dignity.
no subject
I understand; that's why I almost didn't watch Ashes to Ashes at all. But they're such different animals that it turned out there was no risk; Ashes to Ashes is like a bad parody of Life on Mars rather than a sequel. (Erm, not that I'm suggesting that you should waste your time watching it. Just that Life on Mars is completely beyond it.)
That's so sad about how you were socialized. I can definitely see that in Annie. Thank you for sharing your insight about that era.
Another way to look at Sam's decision is that he realized he could accomplish more in 1973 because of his knowledge and ability to see the period in perspective. Just working to reform Gene might accomplish more than he ever would in those present-era meetings. *always likes to think nice things of characters she likes*
LOL, well, I like to think nice things about Sam, but I think that at that point he (and the audience) knew that the 1973 he was returning to wasn't the real world. So... I can't see there being much value in him working for social change in his, uh, imagination.
I do think a large part of why he returned was that he enjoyed sparring with Gene, but I have mixed feelings about that. It's hard to separate how much is genuine moral conviction versus how much is Sam sort of reveling in a narcissistic belief in his own cultural superiority. (Um, I do love Sam, really. He could've so easily turned into a preachy goody-goody, so I'm glad they made him flawed and three-dimensional.)
Homophobia and sexism were so prevalent then, I'm not sure I could have suspended belief if they'd played either down.
Oh, I'm really glad that they tried to portray that time period honestly. The reason politicians get away with that "everything was so much better in the past" nonsense is that people forget, and only see the past through idealized fairy tales. It's important to be reminded of how flawed the past was, and how the social changes we've made since then were for a good reason. (Which is why it boggles my mind how people come away from Life on Mars going "Wow, life was so much better in 1973, when men could be men!")
The only time I ever liked Martha in Doctor Who was in the "Human Nature"/"Family of Blood" episodes, because I think the writer did a great job portraying the racism of the time, and showing how difficult it would be for Martha to deal with (and how strong she was for doing so). And the fan reaction to that boggles my mind, too, because people complain that it proves the show is racist. No, it proves that the writer understands racism and that it would be cheap whitewashing of the past to pretend it didn't exist. Much better to show how awful it is and how strong the character is for dealing with it with dignity.