Three episodes in and I think it's too early to call. I say let Mike White cook. I notice that it's less-verbose that previous seasons and allows more pauses and reactions. Rewatching Steve Zahn and Plop in S1 is a little painful, they have too many lines.
Also it's worth noting that the degree of difficulty in keeping five storylines (Carolingians, Cougars, Goggins, Belinda, Thais) going is higher, and will naturally lead to less character development on a per-case basis.
I'm also not in full-apologist mode either, just wanting to suspend judgement until the end.
I'm loving it so far, seven in and one more to go. Does everyone end up becoming themselves, or can they choose to be someone else? And the photography is so delightfully rich.
couldn’t agree more— the characters are such let downs this season, making it a total snoozefest. after watching the first episode, i asked my husband if it was just super boring or if i missed the point and should watch again. result: did not watch again. the next episode did nothing to help. love your point about it basically just being too on the nose right to be interesting.
hard AGREE on the yawning through the armed robbery - I was waiting for that to really land and it never did...? All it set up was Chelsea to say she nearly died several times which as of rn I can't quite place why we needed that to know about her character which is already obvious?
Interesting. This season has held my attention so much more than the previous two. The slow burn is almost complacent and for whatever reason that feels right. Slightly indulgent in its laconic-ness.
it feels like the way the bear fell off after receiving critical acclaim. full of only jumpscares like the robbery and spider bite without any interesting character development :/ zero likeable characters and no chemistry/tension
Very well said. S3 lacks the magic so far, eps 2-3 felt like they dragged. I'm still holding out hope there will be payoff, though. I think the 3 white women friends are the most interesting of the guests so far, their dynamic is one that hasn't been explored on the show yet. The security guard has potential on the staff side (asking your boss for a promotion right after you screw up big time? Delulu!) plus the return of Belinda as part-staff part-guest is intriguing. But I am so painfully bored with Walton Goggins' character. We get it! You do crime and you're sad/mad! Let's actually do something other than skulking around being pissy!
Great article but don’t think Parasite is in the same vein. The movie was very harsh on the parasitic underclass and far from an indictment of the wealthy.
I think Parasite was more nuanced than that. The film definitely shows the impoverished conditions that push the family to become parasitic towards the wealthy family they’re working for. Likewise, the wealthy family has their more sympathetic and more disturbing moments. There are more shades of grey, as opposed to black and white.
Both families are parasitic towards each other. The main difference is that the rich family is carelessly so, and when they remember attempt to apply noblisse oblige (except the real transactional nature of the relationship is always lurking under the surface). The poor family is knowingly and manipulatively parasitic, and it’s shown multiple times that they are the authors of their own misfortune because despite having the skills to make opportunities for themselves, they squander them out of greed and moral inadequacy. It’s hinted this cycle of finding and opportunity and losing it has happened with the father more than once.
It’s a very nuanced film. I’ve surprised at how readily it gets boiled down to “eat the rich.”
I just wrote a piece about this too more generally on how tv shows really underestimate our intelligence so i completely agree with you! Season 3 is not the same
As someone who has spent most of his déclassé professional life in hospitality – from the low end to the most high end – I was never a fan of the White Lotus and thought a lot of its praise was projection, finding a deeper significance in meaning in it than was actually present in the material. Whereas the HBO adaptation of Elena Ferrante’s Neapolitan Quartet into My Brilliant Friend has been the uncelebrated and much more insightful (and accurate) examination of the complicated nature of social hierarchies. What the White Lotus made clear to me is that “writing” and “reporting” are two fundamentally different skills. Much of the “socially conscious” art since 2016 had a lot of the former and none of the latter. That is, little of this art had a real comprehension of our contemporary spaces and how social classes interact in it. Thus, what you end up with are caricatures of caricatures of the rich and the poor. The comedy and rich visuals hide this shallowness. Saltburn is a good example of this. It might have to do with the increasing social isolation of college education and white collar professionals that instills a great sophistication of thought and technical skills but little in ability to go into the world and acquire information as raw material for art. I don’t think one is superior to the other but they are different. One of my favorite curios of the past few months was a short piece in the tabloid the Daily Telegraph where the reporter had the brilliant idea to interview a high-end escort (ppl who I’m not unfamiliar with bc of my jobs) to learn what the super rich actually think about climate change – we’re fucked and they know we’re fucked and that it’s too late. I thought, a NY Times reporter would NEVER think to do that. Instead he/she would first interview an “expert” – someone of their same social class and are more comfortable with. No one is surprised by the parochialism born from being poor and being excluded from resources. But there’s a strange elite parochialism amongst the educated and affluent classes I’ve noticed.
I thought the dialogue references to Trump, Christianity, Russian/Ukraine war ruined the viewing experience, and made it feel very cheap/cliche, almost like an SNL skit that’s a parody of the white lotus. Maybe they’re building up to something, I’ll give them some benefit of the doubt. But I’ve said to my friend, the first and second seasons flowed much more naturally, and had character dynamics that felt more real.
The family in S3 don’t have any on screen chemistry together and it feels very sterile/unsettling to watch as a result. Something’s a little off with all of the performances but I’ve felt most compelled by Walton Goggins scenes, especially in the last episode. He’s probably the only character I can resonate with.
Yes I couldn’t put my finger on it but there’s something off this season. It also feels like they forgot how to write tension and verbal conflict between characters and instead they’re relying on violence and being physically hurt.
That Daphne scene on the beach with Ethan in season two is the benchmark for dialogue. When she says, "I think you just … do … whatever you have to do to not feel like a victim … of a life." Realer than real. Delivered with resignation and a hint of defiance.
I dunno, I found Olivia's POV in S1 to be pretty on the nose in this regard 😆 I really like how S3 has been progressing, and how the setting has really informed the tone of each season. I don't think the theme this season is "eat the rich" and I don't think it was in S2 either. I think in Italy the theme was that being rich doesn't make you wise, and this time it's that even the rich can't escape from pain.
Three episodes in and I think it's too early to call. I say let Mike White cook. I notice that it's less-verbose that previous seasons and allows more pauses and reactions. Rewatching Steve Zahn and Plop in S1 is a little painful, they have too many lines.
Also it's worth noting that the degree of difficulty in keeping five storylines (Carolingians, Cougars, Goggins, Belinda, Thais) going is higher, and will naturally lead to less character development on a per-case basis.
I'm also not in full-apologist mode either, just wanting to suspend judgement until the end.
Has he finished cooking yet ?
I'm loving it so far, seven in and one more to go. Does everyone end up becoming themselves, or can they choose to be someone else? And the photography is so delightfully rich.
couldn’t agree more— the characters are such let downs this season, making it a total snoozefest. after watching the first episode, i asked my husband if it was just super boring or if i missed the point and should watch again. result: did not watch again. the next episode did nothing to help. love your point about it basically just being too on the nose right to be interesting.
hard AGREE on the yawning through the armed robbery - I was waiting for that to really land and it never did...? All it set up was Chelsea to say she nearly died several times which as of rn I can't quite place why we needed that to know about her character which is already obvious?
Interesting. This season has held my attention so much more than the previous two. The slow burn is almost complacent and for whatever reason that feels right. Slightly indulgent in its laconic-ness.
it feels like the way the bear fell off after receiving critical acclaim. full of only jumpscares like the robbery and spider bite without any interesting character development :/ zero likeable characters and no chemistry/tension
Very well said. S3 lacks the magic so far, eps 2-3 felt like they dragged. I'm still holding out hope there will be payoff, though. I think the 3 white women friends are the most interesting of the guests so far, their dynamic is one that hasn't been explored on the show yet. The security guard has potential on the staff side (asking your boss for a promotion right after you screw up big time? Delulu!) plus the return of Belinda as part-staff part-guest is intriguing. But I am so painfully bored with Walton Goggins' character. We get it! You do crime and you're sad/mad! Let's actually do something other than skulking around being pissy!
Great article but don’t think Parasite is in the same vein. The movie was very harsh on the parasitic underclass and far from an indictment of the wealthy.
I think Parasite was more nuanced than that. The film definitely shows the impoverished conditions that push the family to become parasitic towards the wealthy family they’re working for. Likewise, the wealthy family has their more sympathetic and more disturbing moments. There are more shades of grey, as opposed to black and white.
Yes. That’s what makes it so good. At least I enjoyed it. Far better than this season of White Lotus (so far).
Both families are parasitic towards each other. The main difference is that the rich family is carelessly so, and when they remember attempt to apply noblisse oblige (except the real transactional nature of the relationship is always lurking under the surface). The poor family is knowingly and manipulatively parasitic, and it’s shown multiple times that they are the authors of their own misfortune because despite having the skills to make opportunities for themselves, they squander them out of greed and moral inadequacy. It’s hinted this cycle of finding and opportunity and losing it has happened with the father more than once.
It’s a very nuanced film. I’ve surprised at how readily it gets boiled down to “eat the rich.”
I just wrote a piece about this too more generally on how tv shows really underestimate our intelligence so i completely agree with you! Season 3 is not the same
As someone who has spent most of his déclassé professional life in hospitality – from the low end to the most high end – I was never a fan of the White Lotus and thought a lot of its praise was projection, finding a deeper significance in meaning in it than was actually present in the material. Whereas the HBO adaptation of Elena Ferrante’s Neapolitan Quartet into My Brilliant Friend has been the uncelebrated and much more insightful (and accurate) examination of the complicated nature of social hierarchies. What the White Lotus made clear to me is that “writing” and “reporting” are two fundamentally different skills. Much of the “socially conscious” art since 2016 had a lot of the former and none of the latter. That is, little of this art had a real comprehension of our contemporary spaces and how social classes interact in it. Thus, what you end up with are caricatures of caricatures of the rich and the poor. The comedy and rich visuals hide this shallowness. Saltburn is a good example of this. It might have to do with the increasing social isolation of college education and white collar professionals that instills a great sophistication of thought and technical skills but little in ability to go into the world and acquire information as raw material for art. I don’t think one is superior to the other but they are different. One of my favorite curios of the past few months was a short piece in the tabloid the Daily Telegraph where the reporter had the brilliant idea to interview a high-end escort (ppl who I’m not unfamiliar with bc of my jobs) to learn what the super rich actually think about climate change – we’re fucked and they know we’re fucked and that it’s too late. I thought, a NY Times reporter would NEVER think to do that. Instead he/she would first interview an “expert” – someone of their same social class and are more comfortable with. No one is surprised by the parochialism born from being poor and being excluded from resources. But there’s a strange elite parochialism amongst the educated and affluent classes I’ve noticed.
I struggle to finish an episode without falling asleep. It’s very dull. Lacklustre.
I thought the dialogue references to Trump, Christianity, Russian/Ukraine war ruined the viewing experience, and made it feel very cheap/cliche, almost like an SNL skit that’s a parody of the white lotus. Maybe they’re building up to something, I’ll give them some benefit of the doubt. But I’ve said to my friend, the first and second seasons flowed much more naturally, and had character dynamics that felt more real.
The family in S3 don’t have any on screen chemistry together and it feels very sterile/unsettling to watch as a result. Something’s a little off with all of the performances but I’ve felt most compelled by Walton Goggins scenes, especially in the last episode. He’s probably the only character I can resonate with.
Yes I couldn’t put my finger on it but there’s something off this season. It also feels like they forgot how to write tension and verbal conflict between characters and instead they’re relying on violence and being physically hurt.
SO GOOD oh my god
So far, I’m loving this season more than the first two, so let’s wait to see what happens before jumping on the “it’s not as good” bandwagon.
That Daphne scene on the beach with Ethan in season two is the benchmark for dialogue. When she says, "I think you just … do … whatever you have to do to not feel like a victim … of a life." Realer than real. Delivered with resignation and a hint of defiance.
I dunno, I found Olivia's POV in S1 to be pretty on the nose in this regard 😆 I really like how S3 has been progressing, and how the setting has really informed the tone of each season. I don't think the theme this season is "eat the rich" and I don't think it was in S2 either. I think in Italy the theme was that being rich doesn't make you wise, and this time it's that even the rich can't escape from pain.