>Good show that devolves into pretentious wank half way through

>>82008493
It wasn't good to start with.

Everyone overacts and the writing is abominably ridiculous.

>>82008493
>I want to see him return the papacy to its glory days by ruling with an iron fist.
There's no way the pope could reassert political control over Italy without the show being completely fantasy.

>>82008624
But everyone says its the best show in at least a decade, only plebs don't think its good

>>82008493
>pretentious

There's that word again!

>>82008493
>glory days by ruling with an iron fist

the holy see hasn't had any real power for over 200 years.

>>82008493

You must be especially retarded.

Everything he did ended up strengthening the position of the church perfectly according to keikaku, he completed the necessary steps towards being beatified (i.e. 3 witnessed miracles followed by his death), thus living out the Christ-allegory character arc, and he completed his growth as a man, learning to appreciate the importance of living according to the oft-overlooked 7 heavenly virtues.

I'm not sure you were paying attention during the first episode if you thought it was promising anything different.

>>82008493
That's retarded my dude.

>>82008624
name one TV show with better writing

>>82008493
it would have worked better as an anime

>>82008493
The whole point is that he realizes that ruling with an iron fist doesn't mean being a doucebag to the plebs. Look at the scene in Africa, he gives a loving speech immediately before poisoning the evil Nun running the school

>>82009644
>>Everything he did ended up strengthening the position of the church perfectly according to keikaku, he completed the necessary steps towards being beatified (i.e. 3 witnessed miracles followed by his death), thus living out the Christ-allegory character arc, and he completed his growth as a man, learning to appreciate the importance of living according to the oft-overlooked 7 heavenly virtues.
Not op but I watch shit like this all day and most characters aims/wants/symbolic actions fly past me I only ever see whats happening on the surface
I'm scared I won't get full enjoyment of tos, tng and ds9 because it is a thinking mans show

How do I remedy this? How do I fully appreciate shows by fully understanding on the first watch the reasoning and the significance of what the writers want to happen to develop the characters?

>>82010052
anon, TOS, TNG and DS9 are pretty much on the nose about their stuff so you are not going to miss anything they aren't subtle at all

>>82008493
>return the papacy to its glory days by ruling with an iron fist
That's what he's been doing since day 1 you stupid fuck.

>>82010109
In tng and ds9 I won't pick up on any of the political or economic systems in place nor will I understand the reasoning behind what any of the characters are for in relation to the bigger picture I won't understand the significance of their interactions, actions, progressions
I'll just consume it all at surface level, its supposed to be a thinking mans show

>>82010052

>How do I remedy this?

I mean if you're looking for advice about how to better understand any given character's meanings and motivations, that's a toughie because it depends. In this particular case, several characters made reference to him being a saint and having worked miracles in the past, and he did a big monologue pretty much every episode, so with even just the most rudimentary knowledge of Catholic theology his narrative trajectory was pretty obvious.

For stuff like Star Trek I would imagine it's quite a bit harder, since all the characters belong to weird sci-fi races and factions whose motivations might not be immediately clear to anyone who isn't already familiar with them. I guess learning more about the show's universe and rules would give you a better set of tools to work with in that particular case.

It's a lot easier to understand and predict characters in real-world settings because they tend to behave like real-world people if the writing's any good, so then it usually comes down to life experience. Basically getting to know real-world people's motivations in their natural habitat to better inform your enjoyment of them in fiction.

File: 1478372501108.png (386KB, 715x401px) Image search: [Google]

386KB, 715x401px

>>82008624

>>82010052

I should add to this >>82010433 to say that there's a few core stories that show up in fiction constantly under different guises, so it can pay to be aware of them.

For western stuff, Christ is definitely the big one, along with the Homeric myths (Odyssey and Iliad), a lot of the other Greek stuff (Hercules, Theseus, Perseus, Jason, Oedipus etc.), essentially everything by Shakespeare and, finally, Jane Austen - most romcoms are 1:1 carbon copies of some Austen book or other.

Essentially, the more you read of the literature that's considered to be really significant in the western canon, the more likely you are to recognise when writers in /tv/ have blatantly ripped off characters from earlier works, which is something they do a hell of a lot.

>>82008493
There was a massive influx of christcucks a few years ago and they ruined every board they infested. They're the reason why this show gets so much praise on this board and they're the reason why /lit/ is a 24/7 Dostoevsky and "christian philosophy" circle jerk.

Altough it's a decent show. Just way overhyped imo.