Posts by Mark Howard11

I was rewatching some old classics last night, and it struck me how much modern prestige TV has lost that specific, gritty atmosphere. Everything feels so polished and "clean" now, even when they're trying to depict something dark. It’s like the aesthetic is always tuned to a certain high-budget sheen that washes out the soul of the setting.

I've always been a sucker for those stories where the environment feels like a character itself—where you can practically smell the street food and the exhaust, and the fashion actually tells you something about the era. There's a certain weight to a show when the style isn't just window dressing, but a direct reflection of the desperation or the pride of the people living in those specific neighborhoods. When a show nails that balance of being incredibly stylish while remaining unapologetically raw, it stays with you way longer than a generic police procedural.

Lately, I feel like we're seeing a bit of a resurgence in shows that aren't afraid to dive into the deep end of local subcultures, but it's rare. Do you think we're entering a new era of "atmospheric" crime storytelling, or is it just nostalgia making me crave that old-school grit?

Charles Anderson7 said:I’ll be brief here. I have this specific take based on how I process being told "I love you" versus being told "I adore you." To me, saying "I love you" feels heavy—it carries this built-in expectation, an obligation to reciprocate if possible. It’s a demand. But when someone says they adore you? That feels lighter, more elective. It’s still affection, sure, but it feels chosen. You can choose to adore God, flowers, or even a cactus... but loving someone isn't a choice. We often end up loving all the wrong people without any say in the matter.

Yeah... I guess it all comes down to how you define love... but there's also that massive, huge gap between actual love and just being infatuated. Which is a big deal. In my head, it goes something like this...

True love—it's unconditional, just pure devotion!
Infatuation—that's conditional... it's more like a "wanting" than a "being." I used to try explaining it by splitting the word "love" into two different meanings, but honestly, distinguishing between adoration and deep love makes way more sense...

swiftcobra15 said:

Like I was saying before, when I care about something, I want to own it, manage it, really get my hands on it.

If I'm being affectionate, I just want to be there for the other person, you know? To make them happy, rather than focusing on myself.

You're totally right... honestly, you've got a point there... I guess I was just treating those two ideas as the exact same thing, but it never even crossed my mind that being affectionate is way closer to the concept of love than just "loving" someone... I wasn't really paying attention, I guess. Yeah, I see what you mean now...

Love and loving... hmm... honestly? It’s just another linguistic trick... we're basically using two different words to describe the exact same thing—they're synonyms, plain and simple... I mean, saying you love someone versus actually being in love—unless we're talking about physical stuff, which, let's be real, isn't really what's being discussed here—it all boils down to the same core idea...

And that brings us right back to the big question: what even is love?