For one, I can't see Poe hurting a cat. He wrote stories to a wanting public about things like that, didn't do them in real life. And the bird as well, who crushes a bird with their hands? I know this is supposed to be a Masters of Horror episode, but still...I feel it is uninspired. I would have rather saw a show which adapted the real Black Cat story instead of this. It is what I thought I was going to watch. Not some blend of reality and fiction, which people love to do these days and it always is lost on me.
I thought the animal violence had no reason. And I felt Virginia's illness was just for gross out, when consumption wrecked the loves of Poe's life. I guess if it is a Poe story, I am OK with it but exploiting his life and persona for a gross out, makes me disrespect the director of this episode. And I don't mind gross out stuff, like the Right to Die episode, that made sense within the frame of the episode. I can't really get my head around what the writers and directors of this episode wanted to achieve. It's not really a bio, not really a story...just a mess of facts and Poe's fiction. It's badly done horror at best, hence the 3, which I give because I personally like the sepia tone look of it and the acting. I just didn't like the writing or concept of it. It seems like a mockery until the last few minutes, when you see Poe was dreaming and he is inspired to write the Black Cat because of his dreams, but it's a bit too little, too late. I will bump it up to a 4 because of the ending.
Maybe it's the idea that horror authors have to be crazy people...like Poe or Lovecraft have to be these out of control characters, when in real life, they were mostly low key. And like I say, making light of consumption is sort of rude. I mean, people don't write horror stories about the grossness of having cancer, except maybe for Saw and I think the cancer thing in that respect tries to make the villain more human.
If I see this episode being about the creative process, I could bump it up to 5. I like the concept of that...yet the rest of the weird mockery stuff bugs me.
I thought the animal violence had no reason. And I felt Virginia's illness was just for gross out, when consumption wrecked the loves of Poe's life. I guess if it is a Poe story, I am OK with it but exploiting his life and persona for a gross out, makes me disrespect the director of this episode. And I don't mind gross out stuff, like the Right to Die episode, that made sense within the frame of the episode. I can't really get my head around what the writers and directors of this episode wanted to achieve. It's not really a bio, not really a story...just a mess of facts and Poe's fiction. It's badly done horror at best, hence the 3, which I give because I personally like the sepia tone look of it and the acting. I just didn't like the writing or concept of it. It seems like a mockery until the last few minutes, when you see Poe was dreaming and he is inspired to write the Black Cat because of his dreams, but it's a bit too little, too late. I will bump it up to a 4 because of the ending.
Maybe it's the idea that horror authors have to be crazy people...like Poe or Lovecraft have to be these out of control characters, when in real life, they were mostly low key. And like I say, making light of consumption is sort of rude. I mean, people don't write horror stories about the grossness of having cancer, except maybe for Saw and I think the cancer thing in that respect tries to make the villain more human.
If I see this episode being about the creative process, I could bump it up to 5. I like the concept of that...yet the rest of the weird mockery stuff bugs me.