Spoilers Altered Carbon Season 1

[Christopher]

Sorry, it just seemed to me like you're getting worked up.

I wasn't before. I'm starting to get annoyed now, though.

And once again, I agree with you in general on the diversity issue, but that is not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about adaptations changing, or not changing things. Two totally different issues.

Again, that's what we already covered just five days ago -- that the adaptation changed things in the wrong direction by neglecting to address the racial questions that the novel did explore. I really have no idea why you've suddenly stirred up an issue I thought we'd already settled.

 

[JD]

Sorry, in mind it was two different issues. One was white washing, and one was adaptations changing or not changing things.

 

[eschaton]

I'll be there for Season 2.. Netflix is really becoming my go to media outlet. I can't remember when i turned on my TV last and then it was to watch Netflix on it

I agree after finishing the series. The only thing I really didn't like about the series was some of the expository monologue - particularly Quellcrist Falconer's. What she said was supposed to be profound in some manner, but it generally was not.

Just as an FYI, if it follows the books, the second season will take place decades later, on another planet, with no characters carrying over but Kovacs, who will have a different sleeve. It's also not really going to be noir, more military sci-fi. So other than the character continuity of Kovacs, it will essentially be like a whole new series.

 

[FPAlpha]

I agree after finishing the series. The only thing I really didn't like about the series was some of the expository monologue - particularly Quellcrist Falconer's. What she said was supposed to be profound in some manner, but it generally was not.

Just as an FYI, if it follows the books, the second season will take place decades later, on another planet, with no characters carrying over but Kovacs, who will have a different sleeve. It's also not really going to be noir, more military sci-fi. So other than the character continuity of Kovacs, it will essentially be like a whole new series.

Part of the appeal was how people accepted the stack/sleeve thing.. it was part of their life to realize that the body is only the hull and given sufficient levels of technology is easily replaced. That was a concept i had a little trouble adjusting to but then really liked it.

It would only fit with the theme of the show if they made a jump.. given stack technology you are basically immortal as long as your stack is intact (or are rich enough to get regular backups) so characters can be present over decades and centuries. The show made me care about the characters with only 10 episodes so i don't see why they couldn't repeat that if they find interesting ones (Poe's fate hit especially hard).

 

[eschaton]

It would only fit with the theme of the show if they made a jump.. given stack technology you are basically immortal as long as your stack is intact (or are rich enough to get regular backups) so characters can be present over decades and centuries. The show made me care about the characters with only 10 episodes so i don't see why they couldn't repeat that if they find interesting ones (Poe's fate hit especially hard).

One of the aspects of the show I didn't really understand well involved Lizzie Elliott. Her disembodied stack could be hooked up into a computer, where she could live in a virtual representation of the real world. Essentially, she was an "upload." Given this exists, I don't understand why more people don't choose this as an option (rather than either being re-embodied or having their stack sit idle waiting for re-activation).

 

[Q2UnME]

^ IIRC, if someone is ‘spun up’ in VR for too long, the person will go insane.

 

[FPAlpha]

Lizzy, a prostitute that Laurens Bancroft visited and got pregnant, was killed by his wife in a fit of rage which resulted in a damage to her stack that left her mental state also damaged. Poe helped her with psychosurgery in a VR environment that was successful and gave her the possiblity to heal.

I guess it sounds awesome to live in a VR world that is apparently well advanced enough to simulate real environments but i guess it's not desirable as a long term solution because i don't believe it is 100% perfect and psychologically you'd always know it's not real which is why people accept the fact of re-sleeving even if they lose out and get the body of a 55 year old drug user who has treated his body like crap.

 

[JD]

Watched episode 4 this morning, and the Kovacs story was just unpleasant, although it was interesting to see more flashbacks to his time with Falconer and the other Envoys. I'm glad we had the stuff with Ortega and her grandmother to lighten things up a tiny bit.

 

[Christopher]

I really do wish TV writers would get out of the habit of thinking that torture scenes are entertaining. These days some of them are trying to have it both ways, e.g. in The Punisher, where the characters acknowledge that torture doesn't actually work but offer some excuse for using it anyway. It actually had a sort of logic to it in The Punisher (Castle's plan was to let his victim get the drop on him and boast of his plan once he thought he had the advantage), but in other cases it's just hypocritical (e.g. "I acknowledge that torture doesn't usually work, but my way works!"). But Altered Carbon felt like it was still stuck in a past decade and hadn't yet gotten the memo that torture doesn't work, which is problematical in something set in the far future.

 

[JD]

Well, it does come from the book, although from what I read it was actually a lot worse in the book. It does strike me as the kind of thing that could have easily been worked around though, they already changed it, so you'd think at that point they could have found a way to work around it without losing the plot developments.

 

[Christopher]

Oh, yeah. I keep forgetting the show is based on a book from the early 2000s, which is why some of its ideas seem kind of quaint to me -- not just the torture porn, but some of the cyberpunk/futurism elements.

 

[JD]

The early 2000s did seem to be the big heyday for torture in the media.

 

[Christopher]

The early 2000s did seem to be the big heyday for torture in the media.

It's still pretty common today, unfortunately.

 

[JD]

Yeah, it amazes me how many shows still go for it after all of the real world discussions about how it doesn't work.

 

[Skipper]

I've just finished the season. It's interesting how the show depicts a world that is socially and technologically stagnant. Our protagonist wakes up after 250 years and the only thing that is new to him is the use of the term "Meth" to indicate very old people.

 

[Christopher]

I've just finished the season. It's interesting how the show depicts a world that is socially and technologically stagnant. Our protagonist wakes up after 250 years and the only thing that is new to him is the use of the term "Meth" to indicate very old people.

That's not so unrealistic, actually. We assume that rapid technological progress is normal, but that's just because we happen to live in an era where it's occurring. Historically, periods of rapid advancement are the exception rather than the rule. It's more common for societies to achieve a degree of technological and economic equilibrium and remain there for a long period of time, until economic, environmental, or social conditions change enough to require major innovation. Then innovation proceeds until the factors driving it subside, and things return to a steady state. It's not "stagnation," just stability. There is still growth and progress, just on an incremental scale rather than a constant state of technological revolution. It's basically like punctuated equilibrium in evolution -- rather than constantly changing, species remain in a steady state as long as they're in balance with their environment, and only evolve into new species when the environment changes enough to require it.

For instance, China had the knowledge and resources to achieve an industrial revolution 700 years before Europe did, but they didn't need one, because they were already prosperous and economically stable enough as they were. Any major disruptions in their way of life would've been counterproductive. But Europe 700 years later was resource-poor and being economically outcompeted by China and India, so they needed the Industrial Revolution to bring about change for the better. Sometimes change is necessary, sometimes stability is necessary.


On the other hand, it does make sense that the Altered Carbon society is one that wouldn't have much change or progress. All the powerful decision-makers are immortal, so they like to keep things the way they are, maintain the status quo that benefits them. And the portion of the population that wants and needs things to change is oppressed and devoid of the means to bring about change. I suppose that does represent a form of stagnation in that instance, if not necessarily in others.

 

[Skipper]

The show made me care about the characters with only 10 episodes

I remember the old times when a movie or less was enough to make you care about a character....

 

[FPAlpha]

I remember the old times when a movie or less was enough to make you care about a character....

And they still do when they're well written and acted but in the age of sequels, prequels, remakes and spin offs you can't rely on Hollywood to bring such movies with any consistency.

 

[Gryffindorian]

I just finished watching the series, and I enjoyed it immensely for the most part. I'm not familiar with Blade Runner, though I did see Ghost in the Shell last year starring Scarlett Johansson, so I can relate to the similarities in the premise.

The level of violence was extreme at times, especially when it depicted the murder of children (albeit offscreen). For a guy who has chronic anxiety, I was rather unfazed, probably because it was all fantasy violence. More importantly, the violence was a tool in storytelling - both human nature and Takeshi's nature; in other words, it wasn't violence for the sake of blood and gore violence we often see in horror and R- rated films. Let's not forget that Takeshi Kovacs was an antihero in this story, not unlike Deadpool, Punisher, etc.

I wouldn't object to the nudity in any case -- especially Martha Higareda's nudity, because she's spectacular -- but in this particular case, I think it actually works as part of the worldbuilding, and thus is not gratuitous. Although so far it does seem somewhat imbalanced in favor of the male gaze, with more full-frontal female nudity than male, and that's the one thing that feels gratuitous to me (my personal preferences aside).

That's an astute observation.

Personally, I enjoyed seeing every moment of Joel Kinnaman's shirtless, often naked physique. But what is so atrocious about the human penis that it cannot be displayed on screen??? There were glimpses of male frontal nudity here and there, but not as much as the full naked female form, which I also happen to appreciate in all its glory.

At the end, I was kind of hoping Ortega and Ryker/Takeshi would be reunited, but that doesn't seem to be the direction of the plot, as the Peasant Boy has to go looking for his beloved Princess .

 

[Christopher]

I just finished watching the series, and I enjoyed it immensely for the most part. I'm not familiar with Blade Runner, though I did see Ghost in the Shell last year starring Scarlett Johansson, so I can relate to the similarities in the premise.

From what I've heard about the live-action Ghost in the Shell movie, you'd be much better off seeing the original anime film or TV series.

Personally, I enjoyed seeing every moment of Joel Kinnaman's shirtless, often naked physique. But what is so atrocious about the human penis that it cannot be displayed on screen??? There were glimpses of male frontal nudity here and there, but not as much as the full naked female form, which I also happen to appreciate in all its glory.

Well, the case can be made that no female genitalia were actually seen, just pubic hair. So in that sense, the female nudity was less graphic overall. The anatomy is different enough that it's hard to be truly equal in how it's treated, I guess.

Still, my attitude toward nudity is that I prefer forthrightness to self-conscious contrivance. If you're gonna show almost everything, then go ahead and show the rest, rather than hiding things using forced camera angles or strategically placed obstacles or gendered double standards or other artificial conceits.