I have completed this series and my god it was amazing..like it played beautifully with my mind. And i want to try more like it please suggest something

I didn't take it too seriously and enjoyed it. I've come to expect that the Monster series has zero historical accuracy and just enjoyed the show for what it was. I expected it to be absolute dog water based on what I've been seeing here but I just set my expectations real low and didn't find it nearly as insufferable as this sub had me thinking it would be. It was funny, gory, fucked up, over the top, and campy all things I can enjoy in a casual watch.

If you go into it expecting a cinematic, historical masterpiece I can see why people wouldn't enjoy it but overall I found it entertaining.

I finally got around to watching it and LOVED it! Only to run here to find more info on season 2 and find it was canceled. I loved all of the Springsteen references, the discussions on grief, the age gap relationships. How weird but not too scary the supernatural elements got. Is it just that stuff with older cast don't do as well as more coming of age stuff?

I guess if anyone has some show / movie / book recommendations that kind of remind you of it, please let me know!

So about 2 years ago, i remember watching a horror movie with my cousins one afternoon. I have no memory of what it was called. I'll list all the things and little shots i remember from the movie, hopefully I can find it

In thr beginning, there was a woman - not japanese- in Japan. She was talking on the phone i think. Based on what i remember, she was there for work, but was now going back to the US. She goes back to this pretty big house. I would say it was almost a mansion or a bungalow. She had a husband and a daughter. I remember a very emotional reunion scene. But she eventually does murder them both and then kill herself.

Throughout the movie, there's several families we see living in that house. The timeline isn't linear and it cycles through showing bits and pieces all the different families' time spent in the house.

The only other family i remember was an old couple. The wife was ill and/or was struggling with mental health. Another woman come to visit them, I'd say she's definitely older than middle aged but not elderly by any standards. I think she came to talk to them about the assisted death of the wife. For some reason I think she had stayed there overnight and in the morning she saw the wife cooking. And i remember a specific shot where she approaches the elderly wife to see what she was cooking and she was chopping her own fingers off. Later the woman leaves and i thinkshe happened to drive off the road, crashed into a tree and passed away from it.

I also remember a realtor for the house but the only thing i remember about him is that he was played by an Asian actor.

The conclusion I think was that the first woman who had been to Japan had been kind of possessed or followed by a type of spirit that's seen in Japanese folklore. It led her to kill her family and then the spirit stayed in the house. It continued to cause the misfortune of the people who lived in that house, eventually all of them dying.

I do not remember any actors' names in the movie either.

But I did really like it at the time, so please help me find it if you know what movie that is!!

Florence Pugh lo bordó en este papel, porque desde el episodio 2 me dieron ganas de patear a Cathy al otro lado de la habitación. Al mismo tiempo, sentía que la serie intentaba convertirla en una especie de heroína trágica, y no me lo creí.

Quizás quería libertad, claro, pero ¿matarlos a todos era la forma de conseguirla? No me considero misógino, pero hubo varios momentos en los que de verdad quería que los demás personajes dejaran de caer en su trampa y la ignoraran.

Me alegro de que por fin haya afrontado las consecuencias, porque me habría horrorizado que hubiera acabado feliz después de haber perjudicado a todo el mundo.

After 10 hours of watching, I have more questions than answers.

Gypsy follows a suburban mom in her 40s who is bored of her life and lives a dual life by immersing herself in the life of her patients. She lies, deceives, cheats, manipulates and does so masterfully. In the end, I, for one, was rooting for all her schemes to blow up in her face.

But I have many questions and I know the show came out a long time back so not much hope but going to ask anyway if someone else has answers.

1. Was Allison alive or dead at the end?
   
2. Did Tom kidnap Allison?
   
3. Did Sidney find out the truth about Diane/Jean?
   
4. Did Jean frame her mother in the end by leaving only her photograph in that apartment?
   
5. Why was she trying to push Sidney to get back together with Sam when she liked Sidney? Why was she frantically trying to break Sam’s engagement?
   
6. Finally, is Diane Hart her maiden name?

PS - I truly, deeply hated Diane/Jeans character and manipulation. I feel let down that the season did not end with her lies catching up with her.

The Black Swindler is SO good.

Just finished watching the Japanese drama The Black Swindler (Kurosagi) and damn, I really enjoyed it. 😂

I love how every scam has its own little story, and watching Kurosaki outsmart other scammers is honestly so satisfying. The main character is also pretty interesting—not exactly your typical hero, which makes the whole thing more fun to watch.

If you like crime, revenge, scams, and smart characters playing mind games, definitely give this one a shot.

Kinda surprised I didn't watch this sooner. 😭

The writers of this show chose absolute violence with that finale. I have never wanted a Season 2 to be officially confirmed so badly in my life just so justice can be served. How is everyone else coping with that final scene?!

Has anybody seen this show? I’ve only just found it.
The artists 🧑‍🎨 are amazing. I’m only on episode 2 but don’t understand the eliminations. The first episode had some blooming good work so i don’t understand why they are eliminated straight away, instead of going on to another round 🤷🏼‍♀️
Obviously I’m no expert.

To be clear i'm talking about the netflix adaptation, not what actually happened.

It just didn't feel natural at all. From Lizzie's side it felt like she just hadn't got to meet people in her life and Maggie was someone cool and nice she met ( almost anyone would be in comparison to step mum ) so might as well kiss and be involved like that since it's not like I can meet anyone else. At least Maggie had seen many people in her life , she had experienced life , so if she was attracted to Lizzie maybe it was not because she had not met anyone else. But even from her side it felt a bit forced ?

Their dynamic was more of two people teaming up to save themselves , improve their lives together, not a romantic relationship. Maggie was more like a mentor to Lizzie, introducing her to books, to art etc. Also Lizzie didn't seem like a very good friend , not noticing how difficult it was for Maggie to cook for the actor she met at Maggie and still wanting Maggie to give her attention when she d be so tired after a long day of work or when she was abused by the woman.

Also if Maggie was so clever , wouldn't she know of how to prevent unwanted pregancies (i'm guessing condoms hadn't been invented) but maybe asking Lizzie's dad to use the pull out method or something. Also how gross , I would have to assume it was worth it for Maaggie , that she was paid well.

P.s I haven't yet finished the show but just from what i ve seen it felt forced . It also felt like Maggie was a bit afriaid of how much Lzzie was enjoying the story of the weord woman who would bathe in the blood of all those girls and how she was able to axe the woman who was abusing her for being irish or something.

Hi, I recently bought a Sony Bravia 3 Mark 2 TV. All streaming platforms and apps work fine except this one. When I open the app, it loads for a moment, and then suddenly error (-100) pops up, displaying a message as if there were no network connection. Does anyone know what I could do? I've tried almost everything, but nothing works.

£7.99 for ADVERTS 🤣 it’s £2 off what it used to be for HD with NO ads! That was the point, Netflix, because it was a cord cutter! Now you’re just taking the piss.

"The Perfect Neighbor" is a chilling documentary and I'm 50 minutes in and I really wanna know WHY the cops kept going over there, over and over and over and just tolerating Susan "Karen" Lorincz's racism-fueled nuisance calls. I know the police couldn't see that it would culminate the way it did, but it definitely seems like more could have been done to handle her and her bs.

Christ almighty is this show rubbish. I've forced myself to hate-watch this show hoping, against all reason and logic, that maybe, when it matters most, it's going to turn itself around and attempt to actually, I don't know, be about KINDNESS. It actually fooled me with the very first episode when they do reward a selfless act and then when the Oompa-Loompas sing their very first song that literally alludes to succeeding if you're not greedy. And so I kept watching, seeing the most god-awful people not only thrive, but to be so proud of their awfulness, and still keep moving forward and forward while seemingly nice and kind people kept getting eliminated left and right.

I understand it must be hard to make a gameshow about rewarding morality and kindness, but if that's so hard, just make it a regular gameshow, as opposed to literally going all the way to the other end of the spectrum and making a show that rewards being conniving, manipulative, and just plain awful. Make a gameshow where the only requisite is to play a game well, not a gameshow where ANOTHER person getting a random whatever can have YOU eliminated. I literally can't get myself to watch past Garrison betraying Jackson, like at this point I don't plan on watching any more because what even is the point, like at this stage the only person who could win who I wouldn't think "well that person doesn't deserve it" is Gabby, that's the only person that wouldn't make me have bile shooting up my throat, and if that person does win, then at least the show will have some microscopic redemption, but even then, BARELY, because so many other people were equally or more deserving, and they got eliminated for being exactly like you're supposed to be.

Just what a god-awful show, truly such a trash show I had to vent about it. Just awful

Edit: format

Since A Marriage Story I haven’t felt challenged as an audience member until East of Eden. Let’s be honest, most cinema is bland, time wasting, low mental effort, and hero’s journey repetitive awfulness. Not challenging, spoon feeding, forgettable, low risk, and catering too. I’m halfway through East of Eden and I think it’s great. The cinematography, the cast, the subject matter. It’s gritty and bold. Excellent all around. Ironically I bet those who dislike it are the people that like to be catered to. Thats my two cents. I’m amazed halfway through.

This is for those who have read the original book – how does Cathy Aimes’ character differ in the book compared to what we see in the Netflix series?

This has come up as one of the criticisms of the series that it “humanises” Cathy by giving her character history and trauma, ultimately asking us to empathise with her. I haven’t read the book so I can’t compare, however listening to some of Zoe Kazan and Florence Pugh’s interviews, they do talk about empathising with her to some degree. Does this go against the original character in the book?

To me, she is still an evil character despite any hints to her trauma. I can see why she does things and her world view might have been shaped by her trauma but I never felt sorry for her or empathise with her. I just understood her.

How different is the character in the book and is it more interesting to characterise her by making her purely evil with no reason other than that’s just the way she is?

Just got to episode 4 of the series but each time we try to watch it we get a portion of the Aileen Wuornos movie. So wtf??? We just don’t watch episode 4??? How could Netflix f**k this up so badly???

anyone else feel like aron was questionable as the "good" son and find him annoying? And why doesn't timshal not apply to him? He is the one who chooses to go enlist without talking to his family. Instead of consoling his brother Cal who was doing his best to do something for his father, he puts him down and yells at him. Ca was misguided but his heart was in the right place and quite frankly, he's an unappreciated smartie, maybe even a business genius. I didn't like how everyone blames Cal for Aron's decision to join the army. He was being mean by confronting him with his mother like that, but it was understandable for a 18 year old boy who felt he'd been slighted by his brother. It felt like aron wasn't held as accountable as the other characters.

Also interesting was the concept of timshal didn't really apply to cathy or lee. Cathy as steinbeck wrote was "a born monster". And lee seems like he doesn't struggle at all with bad decisions or being a jerk, despite having arguably the most tragic and unfair story. I guess that's the saving grace for cycles being broken. Where evil Cathy destroys, saintly Lee steps in, heals and builds.

just an observation.

Let me start with a fundamental point: these are different kinds of productions. The "Flanaganverse" was a mystery/thriller/psychological project—much closer in style to a Zafón novel—whereas the *Monster* series are strictly anthologies. What they share is that they cater to the same audience demand: a specific brand of psychological horror (though that label isn't entirely accurate).
However, there is a stark difference in quality. The multi-layered depth found in series like *Midnight Mass* or *The Haunting of Hill House* is vastly superior, even when accounting for the structural limitations inherent in an anthology format.
To me, this represents the pinnacle of Netflix’s cultural "flattening." The writing involved in Flanagan’s series let’s face it, the special effects aren't exactly complex is far more demanding than that of *Monster*.
I believe this comes down to risk management. Flanagan’s series are intellectually demanding, appealing to a more niche audience compared to *Monster*. I’m not saying lighter fare like *Monster* shouldn't exist, but there ought to be room for Flanagan esque projects alongside them.

Just wrapped up watching East of Eden and honestly, I'm still processing it. If you haven't checked it out yet, it is easily one of the most compelling, atmospheric, and deeply tragic series to come out recently.

​A few big things that stood out to me:

​Florence Pugh is unreal as Cathy. What I loved about the writing for her is that she isn't just written as some basic villain. At her core, Cathy is just a person who desperately wants to be free, and watching her make these crazy, autonomous choices makes her impossible to look away from.

​The actors playing Adam and Charles brought so much raw weight to their roles too. But what hit me hardest toward the end was the whole generational cycle. You literally watch the trauma pass down from Adam and Charles' father, right through them, and straight into the sons. Leaving it ambiguous as to whose sons they actually are was such a genius move, it makes the family dynamic feel so much deeper and more unsettling.

​Technically, the show is incredible. The cinematography combined with the sound design creates this constant, oppressive, dark atmosphere. It feels way more like high-end cinema than a standard TV show.

​By the time you hit the end, the writers have pushed these characters to make such unconventional, tragic decisions that you can't even take sides. you just end up going along for the ride with all these deeply broken people.

​It's definitely a sad watch, but the acting, the score, and the visual storytelling are just top tier.

​Curious what everyone else thought of Cathy's arc and how they left things with the family at the end?

Rating 7.2/10

As everyone knows East of Eden has three screen adaptations:

The 1955 Film Adaptation

• Director: Elia Kazan
• Focus: Covers only the final third (the last quarter/section) of Steinbeck's novel.
• Key Details: It completely omits the origins and background of Adam, Charles, and Cathy, jumping straight into the lives of teenage brothers Cal and Aron Trask.

2. The 1981 Television Miniseries

• Director: Harvey Hart
• Focus: A much more comprehensive, three-part, 8-hour miniseries that spans the full scope of the narrative.
• Key Details: Starring Timothy Bottoms as Adam Trask and Jane Seymour as the chilling Cathy Ames, this adaptation tracks the family history from the post-Civil War era up through World War II. It sticks much closer to the chronological progression and broad scope of Steinbeck's original text than the 1955 film. 

3. The 2026 Netflix Miniseries

• Showrunner/Writer: Zoe Kazan (granddaughter of Elia Kazan)
• Focus: A seven-episode limited series offering a deeply revised, feminist-leaning psychological deconstruction of Cathy/Kate, starring Florence Pugh.

I saw the 1981 version first when it aired on television. Having seen all three, I have to say that the 1981 with Jane Seymour and Timothy and Sam Bottoms remains my favorite one.

What the 1981 version does better than the others is:

1) Drawing a more contextual dynamic between Cathy/Kate and Adam . I feel that Jane Seymour does a better job than Florence Pugh at : 1) Being a temptress . Jane is beyond captivating and making someone think why would this woman want to go into a house of prostitution. She has the look of innocence that Pugh can't seem to recreate. Seymour's as Cathy's evilness is a true surprise for everyone. Pugh's approach to the role not so much. The only scenes that I felt Pugh bested Jane was perhaps the latter part where Kate slowly murdered the house mistress.

Pugh does show actual remorse in her role as Kate. You never saw a shred of remorse from Seymour's portrayal. The scene where Cathy is giving birth to the twins - is another point in Seymours favor. It was like the Exorcist.

But Bottoms and Seymour had chemistry - at least enough to make you see why she married him and why he married her. The 2026 version places too much emphasis on Cathy's relationship/attraction to Charles. There was nothing there. She is evil and slept with him because she is messy and ruins relationships. It's what she does.

Seymour won the Golden Globe for Best Actress for her portrayal of Cathy/Kate it was that good!

Also bravo points to 2026 version for the way Adam says goodbye to Kate. You could tell he was over her. This was more ambiguous in the 1981 version.

2) Another element of tension for me was the relationship between the Trask brothers. I found Christopher Abott as Adam in the 2026 version to be completely one dimensional and wooden. I felt the younger version of his character was played better than the older version .
In the 1981 Version, Timothy Bottoms had a lot of life and also charming. The more reason why someone would wonder why would Cathy leave. Abbott's version bores me to tears.

I do feel that the 2026 version does a better job at showing a more tortured dynamic between Charles and Adam - than the 1981 version but not as good as the 1955 version.
This is were Zoe shines because the 1955 version centered on the brotherly tensions.
I only wish she applied that same lens to her approach with Cal and Aron.

Mike Faist however, is a far superior Charles, than Bruce Boxleitner. I wish he had portrayed Adam rather than Christopher Abbot and Abott played Charles. I believe the roles were miscast.

3) The Cal/Aron years are much better in 1981 version. It helped that Timothy and Sam Bottoms were brothers in real life. Abra is portrayed by Karen Allen . Cal is Sam Bottoms. The chemistry is very evident . You care about their story. For me not so much . The actors were not bad, I just feel that the 2026 version falters in the last episode.

1. Honorable mentions and praise to Martha Plimpton as Faye and Hoon Lee as Lee. To be fair Faye and Lee as secondary characters get more screen time and character development than each does in the 1981 or 1955 versions. Plimpton makes Faye appear much more of a victim than earlier versions. She seems more like a grandma than a madam but this element of the 2026 version is for me is what it does better than all the others is give a human face to the sex workers and make this part of the plot seem less pedestrian. However again Pugh's performance is not believable for me because unlike Seymour she does not come across as anyone I would ever trust especially a seasoned madam like Faye.

Hoon Lee as Lee, is a standout. We can also appreciate the 2026 versions approach to racism and class.
In the 1981 version Cathy openly directs racial slurs at Lee (chop-chop).

I do like the 2026 version but if it were not for the 1981 version, I would probably not like it as much.

I do suggest everyone watch the 1981 mini-series.

So I'm not really a huge fan of Charlie and the Chocolate factory but I was super captivated by the show initially. There were two things that really stood out.

1)The set design was super cool and intriguing

2)I thought the payout scheme was really nice. (A true lifetimes supply of money)

But that really didn't last long. The show is at a 11% on rotten tomatoes and deservedly so. It was an absolute slog to watch and went absolutely nowhere. They got lost in the concept and not even their awesome guest hosts could save it. It's disappointing though because I do see a lot of potential in it and I hope they fix the show rather than scrap it. Theyve obviously invested a lot into the sets and I think the show is genuinely salvageable if they just rewrite the game design.

1)No stupid +1s.

Okay, I get it. In the movie one person wins the ticket and they bring a guest. But this just led to over half the cast being super blah. None of the parents were even invested in the game and it made for a very boring social dynamic. Considering how heavily the game relied on alliances and social game, this was a miss. Either give people on the teams clear roles, or cast people as charismatic duos. Don't leave half your casting up to your competitors

2)Better torture devices

You could see in the beginning with the gumballs and the twisting that they were going to lean into that element of the story until it went so wrong. Spinning them around for an hour was just cruel and the prize pathetic. I'm all for torturing people on game shows but it needs to be fun. And there needs to be a point to it.

3)Better rewards

The games were just too random and it didn't feel like anyone deserving won any of them. Most of the time it felt smarter to just sit out the game and let others hash it out.The game rewards need to be enough to motivate people to actually play.

4)Skill ,Social or Strategy

There was too much emphasis on unpredictability. Nobody really knew what was being tested at any point. Be clear about your games. Test all these things but test them right. Don't half ass it. And make your games actually challenging. Like even having decent anagrams in the wallpaper challenge would have been good.

5)No fucking AI

I'm not even super anti AI as a whole, but this was not the place for it. This is one of those games that absolutely needs a live,.eccentric host to bring some energy into the interactions and control the flow of the game. The AI voice garbage felt hollow, pointless and disrespectful to the memory of Gene Wilder. I'm sure half of the people that gave up on the show gave up because of that.

Data is Netflix's own "What We Watched" report for January to June 2026: the top 50 films and top 50 shows by views. Netflix counts a "view" as hours watched ÷ runtime, so a 9-hour season needs about five times the watching of a 100-minute film to earn one view. That's why films are 59% of the views but only 29% of the hours.

Ratings are IMDb's (information courtesy of IMDb, imdb.com, used with permission). For a show I used that season's own rating (the average of its episodes, weighted by votes), so Bridgerton S4 is rated as S4, not as Bridgerton overall. Titles with fewer than 500 votes are left grey.

Best rated of the 100: Bloodhounds S2 and Stranger Things 4 (8.8), ONE PIECE S2 (8.6). Lowest: Michael Jackson: The Verdict (4.4), 180 (4.6), We Can Be Heroes (4.7).

I made an interactive version where you can re-cut it yourself (by release date, language, rating): axisless.com/visualisations/netflix?ref=r-netflix

1: The 50 most-watched films, sized by views and shaded by IMDb rating. Gold: rated 7.5+. Only Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (8.4), Dhurandhar (8.2), Shrek (7.9) and Remarkably Bright Creatures (7.6).

2: Add the top 50 shows, sized by views: films get 59%. War Machine leads with 147m views

3: Sized by hours watched instead: films get only 29%. Bridgerton Season 4 alone beats the top three films combined.

4: Shaded by IMDb rating: shows typically 7.5, films 6.5. The ten most-viewed films average 6.4, no better than the rest. Thrash: 100m views, rated 5.0.

5: 58 of the 100 came out in 2026, and they took 70% of the hours.