Why not though, when you bring up a somewhat misplaced critique of an episode so well controlled and clear of purpose?
Because I was never maligning the show in such a broad sense (some of the responses suggested I was attacking its visual and narrative strengths in toto). I was talking about the representation of a city in a post where I also dutifully praised the show (lest I be tar and feathered for dissent). My claims were very tentative. I was wondering about my admittedly vague memories of Scott's film and that got me thinking about Fuller et al's engagement with Florence and I was basically inviting people to discuss the differences and offer their own insights, maybe point me toward something interesting about the episode's mobilization of the city that I might have missed? This is what I expected, at least, although maybe I could have been clearer. It wasn't meant as harsh or definitive criticism. I was just trying to broach the topic and, really, one of my main points there was, "is Scott's film as nice, in this respect, as I recall?" It just came to mind and I decided to share my thoughts, but perhaps too hastily (quick, someone else redundantly remind me that I ought to have waited for a few more episodes before bringing this up, despite the fact that this point has been made already and I've admitted as much).
This isn't the show for pornographic establishing shots of exotic locales.
Yes. All the more reason for this show's engagement with the city to prove interesting and characteristically expressionistic. This is why it isn't "silly" to imagine that
Hannibal would distinctly inflect its representation of Florence (given the unique arrows in its formal quiver) and supersede Scott's take.
Hannibal could definitely leverage the location shooting so as to yield something like sui generis aesthetic/narrative rewards (i.e., exploit the space to intimate intense psychic drama). This is also why my post was not a thinly veiled attempt to shame a beloved show for its budgetary limitations, even though that erroneous charge seems to have been put against me. That's never been my point.
Also, it's so weird how your statement suggests two methods: the purposively stylized, oneiric
Hannibal route or meaningless "pornographic" (ugh) depictions of urban spaces (do you really think the latter is what I was asking for? Why? Because I used the word "splendour"?). Such a reductive binary. FYI: cities can be visually presented in varied ways that go beyond
Hannibal's particular aesthetic proclivities and whatever pretty postcard or void of utter meaninglessness you thought I had in mind (this mischaracterization of my perspective is insulting nonsense, by the way). Man, this point is obnoxious. Yeah, you totally won the fictitious argument you just invented in your head wherein you cast me as a person who is arguing for "purposeless" urban representation. Also: establishing a credible or attractive sense of place isn't purposeless, or thoughtless, or inherently worthy of stigma.
That said, maybe at least wait a few more episodes before comparing the show unfavorably to a larger budget production with different aims?
Maybe don't ignorantly suggest that I'm arguing for a strict equivalence between Scott's approach and Fuller's take (because, yeah, something derivative would be
so cool -- that's
totally my point) as some weak way of buttressing your condescending bull****? Let's be clear. I'm specifically talking about
distinction, which is something this show has previously achieved despite its budgetary limitations (and that is impressive and worthy of ample praise).
It was an extemporaneous, thinking aloud kind of post. Sorry to take up a few moments of your life with it. I don't have an agenda here, though. I
like this show. The tone of your post is really obnoxious and unduly condescending, by the way, and this has clearly informed the tone of my own reply. Out of curiosity, were you chomping at the bit to do something like this since I replied to TOWK's post wherein he defended Fuller's spoiler-heavy interview responses? Just curious. Your post smacks of extant message board contempt. If you were desperate to talk down to me, then I hope you got it out of your system.
