![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Oh dear...
We've only managed to watch the first episode so far, and that was so disappointing as to put us off the rest. I think this must have been the worst written story so far. The plot was unimpressive (I guess the writers must be missing Mickey too) and the flashback was pointless, because it didn't make us reassess what we'd seen, it just showed us how they did more or less what we thought they must have done. The flashbacks work when there's been a mislead; the audience thinks X has happened and the flashbacks show that it was really Y. But in the absence of a mislead, there's no reason not to keep the narrative linear. I felt as if I was being made an offer by a very poor conman. "Look! here's a plot twist, shown in flashback!" "But it's not a plot twist." "Yes, it is! Look, you can see it's a twist because it's shown in flashback!" "But it's not twisty. How can it be a plot twist if it's not twisty?" "But, it's in flashback!" "Yes, but it's still not a twist! You're a rubbish story. I'm not giving you my belief!"
So plot, null points. And story arc, null points as well. Although I'm always happy for an opportunity to watch Marc Warren cry - the only thing that makes Danny's increasingly brash exterior bearable is those rare moments of vulnerability which reveal his underlying insecurity - but yuck, yuck, yuck, I hated they way they used it just to get Stacie to turn all supportive, and tell him how much everyone admired him, and how of course he would find a solution. Stacie is canonically the brainiest after Mickey - it would have made so much more sense if she'd suggested a way out of the mess; or, better yet, if all had them had pitched in and they'd found a solution together. That would have set a pattern where Danny has the initial creative idea, and the others make up for Mickey's absence by working out the details between them. But no, there has to be a Leader (rules of the con), and apparently the rules of the con demand that that Leader has to be a man. Because really, logic and characterisation dictate that it should be Stacie, but clearly that's too daring for the 21st century.
Hustle has never been big on characterisation; it's always focused on shiny clever plot at the expense of developing any interaction between the characters. So when the plot doesn't come up to snuff, it turns out there's not much left to enjoy.
Worse still, I hear S5 won't have Stacie and Danny in it. At this rate, I'm not sure I shall bother to watch it.
We've only managed to watch the first episode so far, and that was so disappointing as to put us off the rest. I think this must have been the worst written story so far. The plot was unimpressive (I guess the writers must be missing Mickey too) and the flashback was pointless, because it didn't make us reassess what we'd seen, it just showed us how they did more or less what we thought they must have done. The flashbacks work when there's been a mislead; the audience thinks X has happened and the flashbacks show that it was really Y. But in the absence of a mislead, there's no reason not to keep the narrative linear. I felt as if I was being made an offer by a very poor conman. "Look! here's a plot twist, shown in flashback!" "But it's not a plot twist." "Yes, it is! Look, you can see it's a twist because it's shown in flashback!" "But it's not twisty. How can it be a plot twist if it's not twisty?" "But, it's in flashback!" "Yes, but it's still not a twist! You're a rubbish story. I'm not giving you my belief!"
So plot, null points. And story arc, null points as well. Although I'm always happy for an opportunity to watch Marc Warren cry - the only thing that makes Danny's increasingly brash exterior bearable is those rare moments of vulnerability which reveal his underlying insecurity - but yuck, yuck, yuck, I hated they way they used it just to get Stacie to turn all supportive, and tell him how much everyone admired him, and how of course he would find a solution. Stacie is canonically the brainiest after Mickey - it would have made so much more sense if she'd suggested a way out of the mess; or, better yet, if all had them had pitched in and they'd found a solution together. That would have set a pattern where Danny has the initial creative idea, and the others make up for Mickey's absence by working out the details between them. But no, there has to be a Leader (rules of the con), and apparently the rules of the con demand that that Leader has to be a man. Because really, logic and characterisation dictate that it should be Stacie, but clearly that's too daring for the 21st century.
Hustle has never been big on characterisation; it's always focused on shiny clever plot at the expense of developing any interaction between the characters. So when the plot doesn't come up to snuff, it turns out there's not much left to enjoy.
Worse still, I hear S5 won't have Stacie and Danny in it. At this rate, I'm not sure I shall bother to watch it.