Finished 1923 and am sitting here wondering how a show can be written so badly and acting could be so terrible. Every scene was so predictable. Am I wrong or did Taylor Sheridan have a stroke before he wrote and directed this garbage of a show. At least 1883 was good….
1923 was fine, but would've been a lot better if they had stuck to one season instead of Paramount not liking that 1883 did so well but was only one season and made them do 2 for this. There's not 2 seasons worth of story, most of it was just ways to delay Spencer and Alex to draw it out, then the big war they talked about was barely an episode. I'd rewatch 1883 but the things they did for 1923 made me never want or need rewatch it.
10
SurfNTurf19831 day ago
+8
I like it and 1883. Tusla king to me has gotten worse every season and Marshals was absolute garbage. I've found his stuff has predominantly gotten worse with every new show that's come out.
8
johnmd201 day ago
+4
Marshals isn't garbage? It's a fun bang em up show. And it's not a Sheridan show anyway.
Tulsa King is always insanely entertaining. It's ridiculous but funny.
I like both. The 2nd season of 1923 however was excrement.
4
DogMamaLA1 day ago
+1
fully agree.
1
Wazula231 day ago
+46
Taylor Sheridan is the Tyler Perry for white people and the Ryan Murphy for straight people.
46
Columbus432191 day ago
-3
This needs to become a bumper sticker or something.
-3
-ButterMyBiscuit-1 day ago
+6
I thought the first season was pretty dang good. And then it fell off a cliff the second season
6
ViskerRatio1 day ago
+4
I thought it got increasingly ludicrous as it went on. Two otherwise competent adults shouldn't have anywhere near those kinds of problems simply crossing the continent in 1923 America. It's funny when Harold & Kumar struggle to purchase a franchise burger. It's preposterous when you put it in what is supposed to be a grounded drama.
The ending also felt more like they got tired of writing than they had an actual story to tell. One guy shows up and they're like "oh? We can shoot the bad guy? Why didn't we think of that..."
4
stringfellow-hawke1 day ago
+5
1883 was a pretty good to great western. It also is one of the better examples of a prequel substantially adding to the original.
1923 felt like a single season limited series stretched out to two season with all build up and a weak pay off. Other than pacing and writing itself into a corner that it couldn't deliver, I thought it was fine.
But identity politics have rotted people's brains so that it's impossible to have a normal discussion about Sheridan. As if Sicario, Hell or High Water, and Wind River never happened.
5
DogMamaLA1 day ago
+3
1883 was a lot better. I didn't really like 1923 at all.
3
optimis3441 day ago
+4
It was exactly on par with everything he's done.
Guy had his script rewritten on the fly one time, it made it much much better, and he's been making white conservative p*** ever since.
4
RusevReigns1 day ago
+5
While it's not my favorite Sheridan show, I'd argue 1923 is actually left wing coded (capitalist villain, native american school abuse/revenge storyline)
5
drybeans80001 day ago
+3
It still follows his classic pattern of urban=bad and rural=good.
The whole Dutton storyline is based on people wanting to turn Montana into NYC. Ignoring the fact that they’re literally right next to a national Park, which was super progressive for the time.
3
Fit_Philosopher_56911 day ago
+4
Politics aside I enjoyed 1883…maga has nothing to do with it
4
SassyPotato221 day ago
+5
The first couple seasons of Yellowstone, the first season of lioness, and mayor of Kingstown are all fine too, at least in my opinion. Rest of his stuff ranges from mediocre to trash unfortunately.
5
Disastrous_Wing70841 day ago
+5
>did Taylor Sheridan have a stroke before he wrote and directed this garbage of a show
Not unless he also had a stroke before every show he's ever written
5
ericjgriffin1 day ago
+2
I watched 1883 and noped out about half way through because it was trash. Watched the first 2 seasons of Yellowstone and noped out because it became so f****** ridiculous. Won't waste my time with 1923. Taylor Sheridan is turning into a hack. I say turning into, because the quality of Sicario, Hell or High Water, and Wind River are so dang high. All 3 of those movies are fantastic.
2
Jreacher455-21 day ago
+1
You mean you weren’t cool with a former Navy Seal stopping by a blown up meth trailer and just straight up executing a dying man just because “I know how bad burns hurt.” Yeah, his movies were pretty damn good but those shows have all been straight up dogshit. I can’t believe anyone takes him seriously.
1
gofl-zimbard-371 day ago
+1
1923 would have to be a whole lot better to even qualify as worst.
1
tylerthe-theatre1 day ago
+1
I got into it a few weeks ago randomly and find it a bit odd, some stiff acting and bad CG. Then I went to 1883 to try and understand the story/world more and its easily 5x better lol
1
blindreefer1 day ago
+1
Idk I’m a sucker for any show brave enough to show a woman being lectured, tortured, and eventually killed by an uncaring world so they can have one token scene where the beefy lead actor has a reason to cry.
1
rhj20201 day ago
-2
It’s ok if it’s not your cup of tea, don’t watch. This show is and was incredibly popular. I personally liked it very much. I know within the first 15 minutes whether I will like a show or not. I just stop watching, I don’t continue to hate watch then make a post about not liking it.
-2
SasquatchInCrocs1 day ago
+2
It certainly does take a lot of dedication to keep that hate bottled in for 2 years while waiting for season 2 doesn't it?
2
Fit_Philosopher_56911 day ago
+1
Dedication I just finished the show…my gf wanted to finish it. It was bad very bad. Especially when comparing it to 1883
1
Abdul_Exhaust1 day ago
+1
Ooh, way to go calling out the 'hate watcher'
1
Fit_Philosopher_56911 day ago
-4
15 minutes huh? You aren’t very patient are you
-4
Disastrous_Wing70841 day ago
+2
There's such a thing as too much patience if you just watched 16 hours of a show that you think is "the worst" and "garbage of a show"
2
ComputerDecent4631 day ago
1923 is actually really good, albeit very slow at times.
This sub is just really weird when it comes to politics, despite the fact that Sheridan is not even right leaning.
Point out how unfunny Colbert or Oliver are and you’ll get a mathematically impossible amount of downvotes in five minutes.
0
blindreefer1 day ago
+1
>not even right leaning
Bro
1
ComputerDecent4631 day ago
Did you watch the Yellowstone finale?
Or do you think he is right leaning because he had the audacity to actually cast Sylvester Stallone in a show after his support for Trump? Grrrrr
0
blindreefer1 day ago
+2
I’ve actually watched quite a bit of his shows and movies. It’s not about a single thing but a consistent trend of cities/big government/libruls bad that gives the game away. Landman is probably the most egregious example of a mouthpiece for a political agenda.
What were you alluding to about the Yellowstone finale? I’ve seen it but it’s been a minute.
2
ComputerDecent4631 day ago
+1
Yellowstone ends with the family giving the land back to the native tribe. I can’t think of a bigger rejection of right wing thinking than that.
Regarding Landman, I think people are misinterpreting the point of the show. They are not saying whether or not big oil is good, they are presenting arguments from the point of view of the characters. Of course those characters would support oil and drilling.
It’s like The Bear and how they act like they’re superheroes and artists by putting 70 calories of food on a plate and charging $120 for it.
1
blindreefer1 day ago
+3
I’ll admit the inclusion of Native American storylines in his work is definitely more gray than the rest but it is just an outlier. It’s not really saying anything about the many other aspects of the show that do lean heavily to the right like John being a republican Governor who fires his entire staff on a whim or portraying Asian tourists as morons who would walk right up to a bear or jump off of a cliff, or how criminals are always drug addicts who should be killed on sight. Those are all conservative tropes that go back decades.
And I have no problem with a shows characters espousing a certain viewpoint that the writer doesn’t necessarily agree with. That’s actually the sign of a good writer. My problem is with those characters not having any characters that can effectively challenge or push back those viewpoints. Every time the protagonist goes on a rant about something they believe in, the other character always makes the weakest attempts at a counter argument and loses. They never ever have the last word and they’re always the one who looks dumbstruck at the end of the scene as Beth or John or Billy Bob walks off.
Also, just want to say I appreciate you being interested in talking about this like a human. I’m not trying to take away your show from you or make you feel bad for liking it. To each their own!
33 Comments