This show has some interesting similarities to the new animated show "Alan Gregory" - both are about members of the super-rich class  whose feelings of entitlement are threatened by the declining fortunes of their families.

I wrote a long post about it above.

Thanks!

Of course I wasn't serious, that post was just one big prank, yo!

Well when Todd says near the end of his review "The biggest question the show fails to answer is “Why?” Why is any of this happening?" and you say "…it's just that all of these things are presented without much explanation, or, to put it more bluntly, reason to care" - I interpret that as confusion on both your parts…

I've seen plenty of anime. Many have beautiful backgrounds but the character animation sucks.  The Grave of Fireflies is an especially egregious example of blowing most of the budge on backgrounds and skimping on the animation.

I think you're cheating by adding shows like Alfred HItchcock, Twin Peaks and Breaking Bad

It only has a 'point' if the humor is on context of something, in Marlowe's play is just seems stuck in there to keep the audience awake.

Can't say that I think its funny but all the stress on referring to the kid by his whole name is kind of an interesting 'shorthand' to indicate how superior these characters think they are to others.

All you have to do is look at "South Park" or "Rocky and Bullwinkle" to see that  cheap limited animation can work if the writing is great and there is a certain degree of 'wit' to the character designs.

Rowan and Todd, you are right that this show sucks, but for all Todd's 'analysis', you are basically clueless about what this thing is (or what it is presenting itself as in this episode).

Have not seen the film (and don't intend to) but presume this relates to the probability that Marlowe lived as an openly gay man, and if memory serves, Emmerich is a big homophobe - so just put two and two together….

Other writers of that era were experimenting with the third wall, this is not unique to Shakespeare.

There is a crack by one of Shakespeare's contemporaries that he was very weak in Latin (the common language of all highly educated  Europeans) and Greek.

When I took an art history class in college, the main thrust was to become familiar with various artists, then to look at an artwork we'd never seen before and know who did it.

There is no doubt in my mind that whoever wrote the works of Shakespeare (who I presume to be Shakespeare) had an absolutely phenomenal memory for words and images.

Most playwrights of that era WERE from working class families of tradesmen. Many DID get more formal education than Shakespeare did though - I THINK Marlowe went to University on Scholarship.

@avclub-173af0430bc192b8a027af7cdba82cd7:disqus

English nobility at that time DID perform in private theatricals called "Masqes" - they probably COULD have written these without any social stigma if they had had the talent to do so.

Sine Euripides, Sophocles nor Aeschylus went to Oxford or Cambridge, DeVere must be the real author of their plays.