War of the Acronyms
Feb. 15th, 2003 08:35 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
zebralittle52I find it interesting that Queer as Folk and Six Feet Under came out the same year, both on premium cable channels (which means I only get to see 'em a year or two later when they come out on disk), both have sex/nekkie people/homosexuality on screen... and are shot in such completely different ways.
Now, I'm not talking about director styles. Of course that'd be different, but where Showtime puts it all on the line, HBO still does the quick cut-aways, filming two guys kissing from behind one of their heads so we have to assume their lips are touching and, of course, the *cough* conveniently placed things in the foreground lest we see anything fun. (Showtime: Full frontals, tongues going into mouths, sticky bodily fluids being flung about the room. HBO: Lots of tits, a little ass, and so far only one guys dick but he was frumpy and doesn't count.)
(I should mention now that I've only seen the first 8 eps of SFU, and 19 of QaF. Things may change later on.)
What I'm wondering about is, how much of my impression of the show is influenced by how much (and how little) I get to see?
Where I find one endearing, the other is enthralling. The characters on Six Feet Under feel comfortable to me, out of a story I could walk away from but wouldn't because I care. Where as Queer as Folk is a double shot of espresso with a grande latte chaser, having gotten under my skin and I need to see the next bit NOW.
These are both soap operas in their own way, but are written from such different directions, with such uniquely different styles, that I'm almost compelled to compare them because of those differences.
But maybe that's just me... and I've more episodes to watch.
Now, I'm not talking about director styles. Of course that'd be different, but where Showtime puts it all on the line, HBO still does the quick cut-aways, filming two guys kissing from behind one of their heads so we have to assume their lips are touching and, of course, the *cough* conveniently placed things in the foreground lest we see anything fun. (Showtime: Full frontals, tongues going into mouths, sticky bodily fluids being flung about the room. HBO: Lots of tits, a little ass, and so far only one guys dick but he was frumpy and doesn't count.)
(I should mention now that I've only seen the first 8 eps of SFU, and 19 of QaF. Things may change later on.)
What I'm wondering about is, how much of my impression of the show is influenced by how much (and how little) I get to see?
Where I find one endearing, the other is enthralling. The characters on Six Feet Under feel comfortable to me, out of a story I could walk away from but wouldn't because I care. Where as Queer as Folk is a double shot of espresso with a grande latte chaser, having gotten under my skin and I need to see the next bit NOW.
These are both soap operas in their own way, but are written from such different directions, with such uniquely different styles, that I'm almost compelled to compare them because of those differences.
But maybe that's just me... and I've more episodes to watch.
