With so few, relatively, folks subscribing to Hulu, NYTIMES has given way too many words to this series
Well, Hulu does have over 12 million subscribers. So as NYC has less than that, the NYT could stop running any stories about local events that only affect 10 million people or less. Likewise those tornadoes near Dallas only killed about 5 people and didn't affect 10 million, there should have been no story about that either.
15
I signed up for Hulu just for "The Handmaid's Tale". Since then I've seen other interesting series (for example, 'Harlots').
5
I just signed up for Hulu and am loving Handmaids, which will remain on Hulu, just as this review remains on the NYT website.
1
Oh...one more thing. The Wife to whom the new baby is given sits on the birthing chair's upper seat so that the Handmaid may "bear upon my knees". Read the Jacob/Leah/Rachel story in Genesis. It's all there. Atwood did her homework.
11
You might want to read up on the Jacob/Rachel/Leah story. Anyways, that way of birthing, with a midwife, was the NORM in the Biblical era. The whole idea of giving birth on a hospital bed in a hospital, lying down (to convenience the DOCTOR) is very, very modern -- maybe 100 years old -- a nanosecond in human history.
1
Please do us a favor and address the narrator by her name in the series. Which is June. Call her June. Not Offred.
8
I disagree. In the book, "June" is almost never mentioned.
3
In the novel, the character's real name is never given. Some people think it was "June" but that is never directly stated. In the 1990 film, she is named "Kate".
2
"Given how important the caste system is in Gilead, I am curious about the racial dynamics for black handmaids. Are there black Commanders? Are black handmaids considered less desirable?"
It's a shame (and rather disconcerting) that Ms. Bastien is unfamiliar with Margaret Atwood's novel, where Gilead is (naturally and believably) an all-white society, minorities having been shipped off to the toxic colonies with other undesirables. By "integrating" Gilead the TV series weakens the social satire and, to my mind, compromises the story's power.
If I were a bit more cynical I'd say it's socially acceptable at present to name and shame America's patriarchal sexism but not its deep-seated racism.
It's a shame (and rather disconcerting) that Ms. Bastien is unfamiliar with Margaret Atwood's novel, where Gilead is (naturally and believably) an all-white society, minorities having been shipped off to the toxic colonies with other undesirables. By "integrating" Gilead the TV series weakens the social satire and, to my mind, compromises the story's power.
If I were a bit more cynical I'd say it's socially acceptable at present to name and shame America's patriarchal sexism but not its deep-seated racism.
13
The inclusion of black characters has nothing to do with the social acceptability of shaming America over its racism. It's an economic decision on the part of the show's producers. They are trying to appeal to the broadest audience possible, and they know that that audience is already limited by the nature of the show's politics.
1
"It's an economic decision on the part of the show's producers. They are trying to appeal to the broadest audience possible, and they know that that audience is already limited by the nature of the show's politics."
Exactly right; that's why they have eliminated racism from the story. Racists hate critical depictions of racism, so a commercial decision has been made to cater to their sensitivities; after all, we are currently living under the "be kind to racists" administration.
Exactly right; that's why they have eliminated racism from the story. Racists hate critical depictions of racism, so a commercial decision has been made to cater to their sensitivities; after all, we are currently living under the "be kind to racists" administration.
5
I think maybe they just haven't gotten to that yet.. the only non white people ive seen have been the handmaids.. it seems like the leaders and their wives are all white.. maybe this will come out in a later episode.. also side note the men hanging were gay, an abortion doc, and a priest, not a rabbi... Catholicism is no bueno in Gilead
2
Low-key, slow-paced, content-confused, pretend-outrageous storytelling. What do we have to look at here, save Serena Joy's striking good looks (and she's supposed to be the subtly evil character)?
Then, there's the crappy, poppy, crackly sound track, replete with incomprehensibly whispered dialogue/monologue. It matches the murky lighting and poor composition of the cinematography, perfectly. All the latest snores in TV hyper-production, complete with foul language and anachronisms out of our latest cop dramas.
Surely Margaret Atwood's interesting little dystopian novella deserves better. These first two hour-long episodes, properly cut, could add up to a decent half-hour pilot. Then, Elizabeth Moss' talent might carry us through the rest of the story.
Best Regards,
JV
Then, there's the crappy, poppy, crackly sound track, replete with incomprehensibly whispered dialogue/monologue. It matches the murky lighting and poor composition of the cinematography, perfectly. All the latest snores in TV hyper-production, complete with foul language and anachronisms out of our latest cop dramas.
Surely Margaret Atwood's interesting little dystopian novella deserves better. These first two hour-long episodes, properly cut, could add up to a decent half-hour pilot. Then, Elizabeth Moss' talent might carry us through the rest of the story.
Best Regards,
JV
3
I think Atwood's work deserves more than to be referred to as a "little dystopian novella."
8
I find the series to be visually striking, mostly by way of costuming, but unsophisticated in terms of its insights, and the acting is hit or miss. The storyline is jumbled and the characters are muddy and underdeveloped. This is typical of many projects these days that produce inside jokes and marketing hooks instead of good art. The poor music choice mentioned in this summary is a particularly egregious example of my last point.
3
The problem is when fiction and good storytelling are overwhelmed by "political correctness" and the desire to impose their political views on everyone else via slanted or biased fiction. NO western society and no Christian faith has ever had beliefs let alone practices anything like that in Gilead -- blinding women for being smarty-alecky -- cutting off the hands of adulterous MEN -- polygamous sex between "threesomes" -- and murdering even the very women whose fertility their dying societies need so desperately. Even worse, Atwood wrote this in 1985 (to attack Reagan's America) with no knowledge of the reproductive technology available THEN -- 33 years ago. TODAY, in 2018, it is patently absurd. Technology has rendered the basic premise here obsolete.
1
When I was in Manhattan yesterday, on 17th near Broadway if I recall correctly, I saw a group of say two dozen young women marching down the street, quiet and all dressed exactly like the handmaids from this series. I must admit at first sight of the initial pair I was only looking at some practitioners of an orthodox faith! I smiled when I realized what I was seeing. But no reason really to smile, when I realize that at first I was only politely ignoring them, like anybody here in town might...
9
Can't find Hulu channel on tv.
You have to order it from Netflix by visiting Amazon.com.
6
Hulu is an app. You download it to your phone or tablet. If you have an Apple TV, Roku device, or gaming console (PS4, Xbox One), you can download it there. You won't find it among your cable listings. There is a separate subscription fee for Hulu.
3
In the novel, Margaret Atwood's Gilead is all white. As much as I am enjoying the series, to make the cast multiracial is to blunt some of the power of Atwood's original narrative, where racism, religious fascism and misogyny walk hand in hand in hand.
19
I agree. They like Mormons have a religious fantasy that automatically makes darker skinned people less. Also deciding to give her a name bothers me. In the book it's more powerful that we never learn her real name. Like the narrator of Rebecca by Daphne du Maurier. Their namelessness is very powerful.
11
Namelessness is powerful - it serves to make people seem invisible.
For example, in the Bible's story of Noah, Noah's wife and the four wives of his (named) sons are all nameless. They are simply overlooked and forgotten - yes, namelessness is a powerful tool of oppression.
For example, in the Bible's story of Noah, Noah's wife and the four wives of his (named) sons are all nameless. They are simply overlooked and forgotten - yes, namelessness is a powerful tool of oppression.
1
I agree. It's distracting and far-fetched to think that this misogynist, homophobic society would be post-racial.
2
"Fred Waterford is not raping Offred". What? When a woman's choice is to submit or be maimed or killed, consent can't be inferred. The Handmaids are slaves in a theocratic state, not "employees" performing an "ugly job".
Unfortunately, the dystopian future portrayed in this marvelous series is upon us: the Republican Party and The Robert's Court appear poised to divest women of the right to choose whether, and when, they should bear children. All of this in a society in which women are paid, on average, 30% of what men are paid for performing the same work...
Unfortunately, the dystopian future portrayed in this marvelous series is upon us: the Republican Party and The Robert's Court appear poised to divest women of the right to choose whether, and when, they should bear children. All of this in a society in which women are paid, on average, 30% of what men are paid for performing the same work...
13
Women are paid 70%, not 30% of what men are paid for the same work.
4
Sorry for the typo.
3
Fred Waterford is not raping Offred. I think you are taking that a bit far. Offred, a Handmaid, has a job and that's too "bare fruit" produce a child for the couple. She is not being forced, it's her job, as ugly as it is.
Don't throw the word rape around when it's not that.
Don't throw the word rape around when it's not that.
2
Offred and all other hand maids are the property of their respective commanders . Saying this is not rape is like saying female slaves in 18th and 19th century America were not raped by their owners and overseers. Slavery in any form is not a "job."
31
Rape implies lack of consent. Did Offred consent? Not really... she is attempting to do what is necessary to stay alive... not unlike the stories of many rape victims.
21
This use of "rape" bothered me too. Atwood is quite clear about this in the novel in the first mention of the ceremony. Offred ponders what to call what she and the commander are doing, and after discarding "making love" and "copulating" she thinks: "Nor does rape cover it: nothing is going on here that I haven't signed up for; There wasn't a lot of choice but there was some, and this is what I chose."
3
I was also very curious about why birthing techniques seemed to have reverted to the eighteenth century. Considering the importance of babies, one would assume that part of technology would have been kept even when others were rejected.
8
Everything is done as "Biblically" as possible, so no drugs for childbirth. Doctors are only called in as a last resort to save the baby's life.
Offred is not allowed coffee or any caffeinated beverages because they are not healthy for pregnant women. Smoking is out too.
The handmaids are fed, according to the book, "bland, but healthy" meals.
It is not rape. She had a "choice"...to be a handmaid or get sent to the Colonies to sweep up toxic waste. It is a job to her, like scrubbing toilets.
In the book, all people of color are designated "Children of Ham" and are resettled far away from Gilead, which is centered around Boston. In order to avoid this blatant racism the teleplay writers, with Atwood on board, changed it to what you see. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out.
The writers have youthened the Commander and his Wife. Both are elderly in the book. Rita, the cook, has also been made into a much younger woman.
Most of this information comes directly from the book, the rest from articles written about the series.
I suggest that people read the book. As usual, it's better.
Offred is not allowed coffee or any caffeinated beverages because they are not healthy for pregnant women. Smoking is out too.
The handmaids are fed, according to the book, "bland, but healthy" meals.
It is not rape. She had a "choice"...to be a handmaid or get sent to the Colonies to sweep up toxic waste. It is a job to her, like scrubbing toilets.
In the book, all people of color are designated "Children of Ham" and are resettled far away from Gilead, which is centered around Boston. In order to avoid this blatant racism the teleplay writers, with Atwood on board, changed it to what you see. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out.
The writers have youthened the Commander and his Wife. Both are elderly in the book. Rita, the cook, has also been made into a much younger woman.
Most of this information comes directly from the book, the rest from articles written about the series.
I suggest that people read the book. As usual, it's better.
3
Per the book, there were doctors waiting outside in a van 'just in case'.
6
Perhaps it's a reflection of the fact that the values of this society have reverted to the 18th century, in which theology trumped
(no pun intended) science, and women are property. The reason for the low fertility is not explained, and science and technology may have been scapegoated as the root cause of low birth rates...
(no pun intended) science, and women are property. The reason for the low fertility is not explained, and science and technology may have been scapegoated as the root cause of low birth rates...
5
http://www.vulture.com/2017/05/handmaids-tales-closing-songs.html