the two extremes were just culled from earlier posts, made into an arbitrary gamut. my hang ups are with the superficial elements because i really do think that's all there is to the show. it doesn't go much deeper than that when i watch it. that's my experience with it.
calling the sheriff saul was facetious, and yes, entirely because it's bob odenkirk. and yes bringing up homeland was to suggest that her being a female law enforcement agent who feels there's a different story than the one everyone else is buying is like carrie, again a reductive, jokey parallel meant to illustrate how derivative the show is. and yes, i understand that a lot of these archetypes exist outside out these shows, i just found it convenient that they all exist in the most popular shows at present. it all just looks like lazy patchwork to me. there's nothing to be helped.
and obviously the fact that coen references are in it aren't the issue, it's how they're employed. the playful nods in the form of "easter eggs" is what i guess the kids call em these days, fine, whatever. harmless. plagiarizing full bits, recontextualizing them in a way that, for me, has no meaning... just rub me the wrong way, i don't know.
so malvo is anton with a better grasp of the english language and a sense of humor.
i intended my opinion to be stated in a dismissive manner because that's basically how i regard the show. there's nothing wrong with a great story told well. fargo doesn't have that going for it for me, precisely because all i can think about is how much like everything else it is, and how it doesn't engage me to consider it as anything more than a mixtape of what works in tv of late. i'm glad that isn't the case for everyone.
