Problems with Love/Hate.

Mardy Bum wrote: »

Well, Dano beats his wife. Dano's mother couldn't wait to be rid of Gits belongings. Now if you are able to do the math you may see a pattern. Inferences once backed up are valid. The writers do not go into a character's childhood. It is all inferred. Good writers can do this and you can see the clear parallels between Git and Dano.

Did I imagine Dano telling his worried mother that they would first do everything to find Git and then that they would find his body for her? I really think you are reading stuff that just wasn't there. Plus you are asking me to believe that a character who only has one emotion-rage, loved the man who beat him and possibly his mother?
Dano and Git (even his name was picked carefully) where lazy stereotypes who cheapened the story.

They had a mother who most probably neglected them for large parts. They were not nice in a general sense but did show some compassion for Lizzies supposed boyfriend. I identified the mother as a possible reason for their involvement in the RIRA. Neither were the brightest crayons in the box and so it was probably their only outlet.

So being neglected by your mum is motivation for all 3 family members to join a paramilitary organisation. Interesting.

You want Git and Dano to be nice fellas, I get that. They were not. Build a bridge and get over it. Dano cared deeply for his father if you want to look at that as a positive element to his personality.

Again your running away with yourself here, I never said that I wanted them to be 'nice' fellas. I think you may be confused as to what a 'nice' person is though.

LionelNashe wrote: »

Only problem I had with the series (apart from Aidan Gillen's accent) was that I thought that Darryn changed too much with very little explanation between season 2 & 3. In season 2, when he shot Stumpy, (who had beaten Rosie until she lost her kid and then shot Darren), he felt so bad that he visited Stumpy's mother and tried to give her cash. When he shot John-Boy, he was distracted and incoherent when he got back to his apartment, even though he had every reason to shoot John-Boy as well. Then in season 3 he shoots Elmo's cousin and girlfriend with no hesitation and no sign of remorse. It was a bit of a leap.

I agree with you here, they seemed to have their biggest problems in characterisation with Darren and I believe it has it's roots in the initial dishonesty of wanting a sexy and attractive lead. Style won out out content. It was evident that they wanted us to 'like' this character but because he wasn't a true portrayal of somebody in that situation they had problems all the way through the 3 series making his actions and reactions credible. Create a truthful character and you can do almost anything with them.

Good idea to start a seperate thread to discuss any problems you might have with this show rather than in the main thread.

My main problem with Love/Hate is that the seasons were too short. 4-6 episodes compared to an average of 12 for US shows causes serious limitations including the fact that some charecters can't be fully developed. Danno, the RA brothers, Lizzie and Debbie were all sketched a bit thin, but it's hard to see how much more could have been done with them in the alloted time frame.

Absolutely agree and it is something the commissioners should have known and done something about. Definately needed more time to develope the characters and storyline. They bit off more than they could possibly chew. Debbie and even Tommy could have been cut from series 3 completely and the series wouldn't have suffered one bit imo.

I think there was some poor casting, especially Aiden Gillen (way too suave for me) Debbie and Tommy weren't great either, in fairness Robert Sheehan grew into his role. In the previous thread I put this down to RTE wanting/needing big names and pretty faces to pull in viewers.

No argument from me on that either.

There were some continuity errors, but these happen in most productions.

I thought the shoot out with AK47's in the last episode was over the top (That said I heartily enjoyed it). The 'RA would never risk using or losing weapons like that in Dublin. It is possible that the producers included them to emphasis the difference in fire power between the two sides, many viewers under 30 would have only a vague knowledge of militant republicanism. However, this is a minor quibble.

Well as I have said before the whole RA elememt was designed and written to pander to middle class pre-conceptions and bias. The whole trip to Dundalk was laughable considering what Tony and Dano were prepared to talk to Nidge about in a packed Dublin pub earlier in the series. For instance Nidge was questioned and beaten in the front of a pub being watched by special branch earlier in the series, no need for secret blindfolded trips or overalls. Wasteful use of resources in a series that had tight budgets.

Overall Love/Hate is by far the best series that RTE have ever made, very well filmed and scripted. Given the publicity and high viewer figures hopefully they will be willing to risk funding more adventurous shows in future rather than woeful shyte like the Clinic.

Again, no argument here. But the Clinic was designed to appeal to a certain demographic too, I just hope that RTE as the commissioners see what worked here and what failed.

By the by, in the locked thread I asked you to name a few TV shows you do like, I think this would be a handy point of reference

Again I resist The thread will just turn into Happyman against everybody else as a mod so helpfully put it in the last thread. And that wasn't why I set this one up. I am more interested in others opinions tbh. As they say, you can learn more from imperfection than you do from perfection.

kippy wrote: »

I am misunderstanding your concept of it. For clarity, can you explain what you mean by it in the context of this thread, for the benefit of everyone.

When you watch any created drama you enter a contract with it's creator, you leave your disbelief at the door and allow yourself to be affected by what they are making happen on stage or on the telly or on the radio. That doesn't mean that you leave your brain behind or that you don't interrogate the info you are being given. I don't believe for a second that any of this cast is actually in the situation they are in, but I am willing to and that is where I give the writer, actor and director the freedom to convince me.
Everybody suspends their disbelief when they watch a drama in one way or another.
In the context of this thread I am investigating where and why they failed to make that happen.

kippy wrote: »

For you and a small minority.........

Maybe so, but why is that such a problem for people? I don't get it, they are still accusing people of being traitors and anti-Irish begrudgers over on the other thread and chasing anyone who has a problem with the series. That defensiveness is very odd, it is like the behaviour of a cult following. I have given due praise to the series but I have some issues with it as do others, Why does it diminish others enjoyment of it, is it not a very insecure enjoyment when you attack those that undermine it?

A lot of your problems lie in the fact that you don't believe a sexy and good looking lad can be a hitman/scumbag........or that there may be a reason that the RA took him all the way to Dundalk this time compared to the times he was in contact with them in Dublin.
Essentially, you'd like a rolling commentary by the writer as to why he chose to do what he did?

Not what I said at all. I think you are just plucking out stuff from what I have said to suit your argument, which is essentially that I shouldn't be having this opinion at all.

AnonoBoy wrote: »

To be honest I just think you're not very good at analysing television.

It's like you've read half a book on interpretive theory and it's gone to your head.

Again the attack on me, if you think I am not that good then move on, this thread is not for you.
I just read back over yours and TippGunners little spat with Basil3 on the 'other' thread there. Somebody from outside Ireland had problems similar to the ones I had (the stereotyping, the pandering to prejidice etc) and he got rounded on, abused for mentioning The Wire and accused of being a foreigner attempting to 'burst our bubble'. It's not that 'my analysis' isn't very good, what you mean is: 'my analysis' isn't the same as yours!

kippy wrote: »

Your main issue with Darren was his looks, that is pretty obvious.

NO it isn't my main issue, my issue with Darren is the intent of the writers and the problems that created in the series. Problems that have been pointed out by a lot more than me. Part of that problem is the choice of the actor and how he looked....PART of it.

kippy wrote: »

From what I can tell, it's the major thrust of your issues with him. (from reading your comments on this thread alone)

Do you know gangland hit men personally?

What possible relevance has that question?

Dramatic characters are placed in unrealistic situations all the time, as long as they are 'true' portrayals we can suspend our disbelief and believe that that is how they would behave in that situation. Take The Road for example, we have no idea what a post apocalytic world would actually be like, but we believe in the character because the writer is being honest about him.
Can I assure you that Darren's looks are not the major thrust of my issues. I don't know how to help you with understanding that anymore. Realistic and truthful mean different things in drama.

kippy wrote: »

Sound out,
You're dead right, Love/Hate isn't that good at all.

Again, I never said it wasn't good, it is good but it is flawed as well.