Taken Down [RTE]

FrancieBrady

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I saw that extreme leftie politician @paschald on Twitter praising his former Oireachtas colleague on her achievement in writing the drama too - must all be part of the leftie propaganda movement.

Fecking Shinners are in de telly now! :rolleyes:

liogairmhordain

Deleted User wrote: »

Compare for example to a very gritty drama that aired last Sunday 'Doing Money' its a poor affair.

"Doing Money" being shown on BBC2 tonight, 9 pm

yosser hughes

TheBlock wrote: »

I do.

Good for you. What is it?

lookr

pixelburp wrote: »

I haven't seen the show (yet, not sure it's my cup of tea), but I welcome any initiative that tries to tell different sorts of stories, from original or a different range of perspectives of modern Ireland. The lives of immigrants, legal or otherwise, are a fact and reality in modern Ireland; there's more value in trying to humanise and tell their sides of this nation's shared narrative than keeping them as news items.

And co-opting American hyperbolic pejoratives, or screaming propaganda is a disingenuous, bad-faith engagement to take. That goes double if one hasn't actually watched the show either (including myself, so trying not to over-egg the point). All drama, be it TV, film, novel or comicbook, is told with either an existing bias from the author, or a preferred subjective point of view - that's literally the starting point of most fictitious accounts of the human experience. Picking and choosing ones outrage only betrays the larger bias in the consumer TBH.

Unless the aim is to demonise or scaremonger - which, you know, would be propaganda - then the end result is always going to be a positive reflection on a maligned corner of society. In fact it's no uncommon for those humanising portrayals in drama to have more demonstrable legal or societal effect than a dozen news items.

Thanks for this, very well said.

I'm a bit startled by the siege mentality on this thread. I don't believe the show went out of its way to depict refugees as saints, or "white men" as bad. Nor did it come across as some sort of feminist propaganda (unless having a female lead makes it so).

It appears that some people are mistaking representation and basic empathy for provocation.

One could argue that the real propagandists are the people on this thread cynically projecting their fears onto a TV show.

Redneck Culchie

lookr wrote: »

Thanks for this, very well said.

I'm a bit startled by the siege mentality on this thread. I don't believe the show went out of its way to depict refugees as saints, or "white men" as bad. Nor did it come across as some sort of feminist propaganda (unless having a female lead makes it so).

It appears that some people are mistaking representation and basic empathy for provocation.

One could argue that the real propagandists are the people on this thread cynically projecting their fears onto a TV show.

Direct provision is about Asylum Seekers many of whom are fraudulent, turned down repeatedly exhaust the appeal process and awaiting deportation. Do you work for the show?

lookr

Redneck Culchie wrote: »

Direct provision is about Asylum Seekers many of whom are fraudulent, turned down repeatedly exhaust the appeal process and awaiting deportation. Do you work for the show?

No, but thanks for proving my point.

yosser hughes

lookr wrote: »

No, but thanks for proving my point.

what's your point?

There is an agenda to get the government to disband the direct provision centres. Most commentary fails to ever mention that the reason most people are there for so long is because they have been turned down repeatedly as they are demed bogus and they continue with vexatious appeals assisted by the Immigrant Council.
This program is most definitely part of an agenda. It's written by a young,active Sinn Fein member whose world view, along with Sinn Feín's is open borders. SF reckon most of these economic migrants would vote for them as do most leftist parties.

pixelburp

Mod: OK, enough. This is a thread about a new TV drama, not the Politics forum or After Hours; if you want to sound off over conspiracies or agendas, take it to either of those places - otherwise leave the thread to discussions on the show - for those actually watching it. It's not a huge ask.

Spon Farmer

Spon Farmer wrote: »

I didn't say nothing happened in the opening scenes of Love/Hate - I said the opening scenes of Love/Hate was very poor. Plenty happened in this first episode and the opening scenes alone here had much more going than the opening scenes of Love/Hate, so your statement doesn't really make sense.

That doesn't answer my question about Brian Gleeson at all. You mentioned "Hughie typecasting" and I asked typecasting had been happening to him.

To be honest I found the whole thing like watching paint dry and that's my genuine opinion.

Love/Hate had an actual shooting in the first five minutes and the rest of the episode showed the devastation in the aftermath.

On the typecasting, I felt Brian Gleeson was so good in that role as Hughie that its hard to envisage him in a more serious role again that is just me expressing my genuine opinion.

liogairmhordain

liogairmhordain wrote: »

"Doing Money" being shown on BBC2 tonight, 9 pm

Fantastic drama. Absolutely brilliant writing and acting. A series would have been a huge success.

Birneybau

Redneck Culchie wrote: »

Deleted User wrote: »

Amy Huberman has been on 3 or 4 shows this year alone....She is fúckin brutal and as for that ''comedy'' that was aired recently... its about as funny as aids.

Of course some of her friends are brought along on the gravy train too like 'Backing Bwaaaaaave' woman who voiced the AIB ad a while back

RTE is like the dole for the upper classes. A safety net, where some stay there for life. Also paid for by the taxpayer.

Brilliant

Seth Brundle

[Deleted User] wrote: »

To be honest I found the whole thing like watching paint dry and that's my genuine opinion.

I watched the first half last night and finished it tonight.
I'm enjoying it and looking forwards to episode 2.
I'm curious to know what comes out about Samir, where it will go for the family, what other cock ups Wayne is in charge of and what he does with the video footage.

I'm also curious to see if anything happens in the real world in terms of the disgrace that is direct provision. Hopefully this drama has a secondary effect of bringing it into the public consciousness once and for all.

Birneybau

I'm going to say that Samir was merely gay. And I don't know if I'll tune in again, fairly weak, as usual

Seth Brundle

Birneybau wrote: »

I'm going to say that Samir was merely gay. And I don't know if I'll tune in again, fairly weak, as usual

As usual?

Spon Farmer

Deleted User wrote: »

To be honest I found the whole thing like watching paint dry and that's my genuine opinion.

Love/Hate had an actual shooting in the first five minutes and the rest of the episode showed the devastation in the aftermath.

I'm not really sure what you are getting at with "actual shooting" - you seem to be arguing that just because there was a gun shot it made it good. It doesn't. It was wasn't very well done at all - the music is woeful, Sheehan's character struts through Dublin airport looking like a complete dipstick and he isn't like that five minutes later, the brother can't act at all, the shooting has absolutely no drama because you see it coming a mile away and there is no "devastation" in either the rest of the episode or the series - Ruth Bradley gets a bit upset but the murder has very little bearing o the rest of the season.

In short, the opening scene of Love/Hate does not accurately reflect the quality of the rest of the show.

In Taken Down, quiet a bit happens in the opening scenes and the murder does actually have consequences for all the characters. [/QUOTE]

Deleted User wrote: »

On the typecasting, I felt Brian Gleeson was so good in that role as Hughie that its hard to envisage him in a more serious role again that is just me expressing my genuine opinion.

This is you not being able to see Gleeson is different type of role. That is not typecasting.

EDIT: Also you don't have to keep saying a comment is your "genuine opinion". Of course it is your opinion and why would it not be "genuine" ? The only time you have to specify whose opinion it is is if you talking about what other people's opinions.

Birneybau

Seth Brundle wrote: »

Birneybau wrote: »

I'm going to say that Samir was merely gay. And I don't know if I'll tune in again, fairly weak, as usual

As usual?

For RTE

Graniteville

Just been told by a colleague that knows someone who has seen more episodes (TV critic) that it is advisable not to have a recently eaten anything when watching episode 3.

Spon Farmer

Graniteville wrote: »

Just been told by a colleague that knows someone who has seen more episodes (TV critic) that it is advisable not to have a recently eaten anything when watching episode 3.

That is interesting.

EDIT: Holy Smokes. A use for a critic. :P

BoroMan32

Nothing great, but very few dramas grip you from the outset. Certainly enough interest to keep watching.

youre boring me now

I found my sympathy for the characters wane as it went on. Samir caught eyes with a guard several times (you can't say that's not suspicious!), refused to answer his questions, and then pushed him down steps. (That the guard was then shown to be a hateful loon doesn't exonerate Samir's actions.) The mother aggressively complained to the manager/owner about mould in her room in the immediate aftermath of the killing of one of the residents of the centre. And her son attacked the guard who was arresting Samir and aggressively faced up to the manager in the presence of guards. I'd have been happy for the son to have been caught smashing windows somewhere because he was bored, or for the mother to be caught stealing food because she'd missed the regimented dinner time, both of which can be explained by their circumstances. But what I listed is just bad behaviour! And I suspect the writers aren't quite aware of that, in the same way they seem not to realise how unprofessional it would be for a guard to publicly reprimand her colleague who had arrested someone on reasonable grounds.

I'll continue to watch, but I hope the criticism of DP centres becomes less heavy-handed and that the characters become more nuanced.

Spon Farmer

youre boring me now wrote: »

I found my sympathy for the characters wane as it went on. Samir caught eyes with a guard several times (you can't say that's not suspicious!), refused to answer his questions, and then pushed him down steps. (That the guard was then shown to be a hateful loon doesn't exonerate Samir's actions.) The mother aggressively complained to the manager/owner about mould in her room in the immediate aftermath of the killing of one of the residents of the centre. And her son attacked the guard who was arresting Samir and aggressively faced up to the manager in the presence of guards. I'd have been happy for the son to have been caught smashing windows somewhere because he was bored, or for the mother to be caught stealing food because she'd missed the regimented dinner time, both of which can be explained by their circumstances. But what I listed is just bad behaviour! And I suspect the writers aren't quite aware of that, in the same way they seem not to realise how unprofessional it would be for a guard to publicly reprimand her colleague who had arrested someone on reasonable grounds.

I'll continue to watch, but I hope the criticism of DP centres becomes less heavy-handed and that the characters become more nuanced.

I agree about Samir. He kept gawking and drawing attention to himself. I disagree that the young Garda acted out of hate. It was a combination of eagerness to succeed in the case and having his blood up by being assaulted. He went too far though and Rooney had little choice but to public chastise him. And the eldest son is a toe rag.

I do like the mother and the young son. She was justified in her complaint and while her timing was bad, her outburst was as a result of the murder of the girl who she clearly knew quite well.

youre boring me now

Spon Farmer wrote: »

I agree about Samir. He kept gawking and drawing attention to himself. I disagree that the young Garda acted out of hate. It was a combination of eagerness to succeed in the case and having his blood up by being assaulted. He went too far though and Rooney had little choice but to public chastise him. And the eldest son is a toe rag.

I do like the mother and the young son. She was justified in her complaint and while her timing was bad, her outburst was as a result of the murder of the girl who she clearly knew quite well.

The way he ransacked the room looking for something incriminating seems pretty hateful to me. (It should be said, also, that Samir's under no obligation to answer questions, afaik.) I disagree she had no choice but to publicly chastise him. I'm not a Garda, but I imagine a subordinate in that situation would be told to go outside while the superior dealt with the situation, to be rebuked later, if required.

I see your point about the mother, but I just wish it had been written in such a way that I could have felt more sympathy.

Spon Farmer

youre boring me now wrote: »

The way he ransacked the room looking for something incriminating seems pretty hateful to me. (It should be said, also, that Samir's under no obligation to answer questions, afaik.) I disagree she had no choice but to publicly chastise him. I'm not a Garda, but I imagine a subordinate in that situation would be told to go outside while the superior dealt with the situation, to be rebuked later, if required.

I see your point about the mother, but I just wish it had been written in such a way that I could have felt more sympathy.

I cannot see how it was hateful. He wasn't shown to have an issue with anyone else at the centre and his attention was only on Samir for all the gawking. Yes, Samir was under no obligation he was very hostile and soon to be quite hateful himself by his earlier comments to the eldest son about police - he clearly has suffered at the hands of authorities but to tar all police with the same brush is prejudice. The detective approached him in an eagerness to get something for the investigation and blood was boiling from the assault.

I was wrong to say Rooney chastised the young cop. All she actually did was tell him to stop, he disregarded a senior officer and it was then that she became more forceful. As you say he was ransacking the place and she could hardly let him carry on.

The mother and young son are the only residents of the centre of that I like for and they are the only ones actually upset by the murder in a way I do have sympathy for.

youre boring me now

Spon Farmer wrote: »

I cannot see how it was hateful. He wasn't shown to have an issue with anyone else at the centre and his attention was only on Samir for all the gawking. Yes, Samir was under no obligation he was very hostile and soon to be quite hateful himself by his earlier comments to the eldest son about police - he clearly has suffered at the hands of authorities but to tar all police with the same brush is prejudice. The detective approached him in an eagerness to get something for the investigation and blood was boiling from the assault.

I was wrong to say Rooney chastised the young cop. All she actually did was tell him to stop, he disregarded a senior officer and it was then that she became more forceful. As you say he was ransacking the place and she could hardly let him carry on.

The jump to suspicion and the disgust he has for Samir suggest hatred.

We'll have to disagree on the rightness of Rooney's reprimand.

hatrickpatrick

Spon Farmer wrote: »

I disagree that the young Garda acted out of hate. It was a combination of eagerness to succeed in the case and having his blood up by being assaulted.

You've got to be kidding me. He acted like a total scumbag. You can't be compelled to answer a Garda's questions in public or give an interview unless you're placed under arrest, and even then you still have a right to remain silent and say nothing at all. In my view, Samir pushing him down the stairs was a response to the direct provocation of being stalked and shouted at - if the Garda had wanted answers he wasn't getting, he should have arrested him.

I'd agree that Samir was acting suspiciously, but the Garda broke the rules - and the law - by escalating the way he did rather than doing his job, which would have been to arrest Samir as a person of interest, on account of his having acted suspiciously:

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/justice/arrests/questioning_and_surveillance.html

Where a Garda is investigating a criminal offence, the Garda is entitled to seek the co-operation of anyone by asking the person questions about what he/she saw or heard. However, while the Gardaí are entitled to question members of the public, there is no legal obligation to answer any such questions or to co-operate with the Gardaí.

An example of this would be where a Garda observes you acting suspiciously late at night, in an area where a lot of crimes are being committed. The Garda is entitled to stop you in order to detect and prevent crime. You are under no legal obligation to co-operate with the Garda and the Garda cannot use force to restrain your freedom under common law, short of arresting you.

However, if the Garda has reasonable grounds for suspecting that you committed an offence, the Garda can use a statutory power to demand your name and address. If you refuse to provide them, then the Garda can arrest you.

Spon Farmer

Spon Farmer wrote: »

I'm not really sure what you are getting at with "actual shooting" - you seem to be arguing that just because there was a gun shot it made it good. It doesn't. It was wasn't very well done at all - the music is woeful, Sheehan's character struts through Dublin airport looking like a complete dipstick and he isn't like that five minutes later, the brother can't act at all, the shooting has absolutely no drama because you see it coming a mile away and there is no "devastation" in either the rest of the episode or the series - Ruth Bradley gets a bit upset but the murder has very little bearing o the rest of the season.

In short, the opening scene of Love/Hate does not accurately reflect the quality of the rest of the show.

In Taken Down, quiet a bit happens in the opening scenes and the murder does actually have consequences for all the characters.



This is you not being able to see Gleeson is different type of role. That is not typecasting.
.

It was still better and more entertaining than Taken Down which was relatively a bore fest and one dimensional. I can see a huge drop off next episode if the storyline doesnt pick up. It needs a bit more edge to it.

Brian Gleeson was actually decent in Rebellion but he needs a bit of edginess to his roles for me. He's a very ordinary actor otherwise. Im not sure why you keep challenging me on my personal opinion to be honest. Perhaps other people dont see him as being 'typecast' but he looks drastically out of place playing a seemingly inconspicuous ordinary man. Surely others see this too?

Im going to leave it at that because we are going around in circles at this stage and you are picking on what is relative semantics.

youre boring me now

youre boring me now wrote: »

The way he ransacked the room looking for something incriminating seems pretty hateful to me. (It should be said, also, that Samir's under no obligation to answer questions, afaik.) I disagree she had no choice but to publicly chastise him. I'm not a Garda, but I imagine a subordinate in that situation would be told to go outside while the superior dealt with the situation, to be rebuked later, if required.

I see your point about the mother, but I just wish it had been written in such a way that I could have felt more sympathy.

Samir drew obvious suspicion to himself and actually assaulted a Garda who merely wanted to ask him a few questions. He should have been arrested and charged for assaulting an officer but my guess is the detective inspector let it slide because she wanted to play the long game and gain the trust of both Samir and the Nigerian family

youre boring me now

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

You can't be compelled to answer a Garda's questions in public...

However, if the Garda has reasonable grounds for suspecting that you committed an offence...[/i]

There's your grey area! It's arguable that a refusal to give a name and address is sufficiently suspicious to justify invoking the provision that compels you to give your name and address.

youre boring me now

Deleted User wrote: »

Samir drew obvious suspicion to himself and actually assaulted a Garda who merely wanted to ask him a few questions. He should have been arrested and charged for assaulting an officer but my guess is the detective inspector let it slide because she wanted to play the long game and gain the trust of both Samir and the Nigerian family

I don't think the Garda's behaviour is so easily excusable. He forcefully pulls Samir by the arm twice before he is then pushed, doing so in what is Samir's home. And I think it's pretty clear that the detective's response is one of disgust. From the start, she is shown to dislike that guard.

youre boring me now

youre boring me now wrote: »

I don't think the Garda's behaviour is so easily excusable. He forcefully pulls Samir by the arm twice before he is then pushed, doing so in what is Samir's home. And I think it's pretty clear that the detective's response is one of disgust. From the start, she is shown to dislike that guard.

Why run away from a Garda if you have nothing to hide??? And nothing justifies pushing a cop. Surely the easiest thing would be to just deny everything instead of getting all defensive and running off?

youre boring me now

Deleted User wrote: »

Why run away from a Garda if you have nothing to hide??? And nothing justifies pushing a cop. Surely the easiest thing would be to just deny everything instead of getting all defensive and running off?

That's the mentality used to justify police infringement of civil liberties.

youre boring me now

youre boring me now wrote: »

That's the mentality used to justify police infringement of civil liberties.

Well back in the real world where we all have to live in we have to comply with laws. He acted suspiciously and the Garda had every right to question him.

AGS are an imperfect organisation but that doesnt mean that i can just drive on past a Garda checkpoint in ignorance with a few whiskeys inside me because i dont feel like talking to the Gardaí and that i believe its my civil right to ignore their questioning. That's not how the real world works.

youre boring me now

Deleted User wrote: »

Well back in the real world where we all have to live in we have to comply with laws. He acted suspiciously and the Garda had every right to question him.

AGS are an imperfect organisation but that doesnt mean that i can just drive on past a Garda checkpoint in ignorance with a few whiskeys inside me because i dont feel like talking to the Gardaí and that i believe its my civil right to ignore their questioning. That's not how the real world works.

You seem ignorant of the real-world laws of this country.

youre boring me now

youre boring me now wrote: »

You seem ignorant of the real-world laws of this country.

Oh im not woke enough am i?? Well deary me. :rolleyes:

I cant wait for your Marxist society to become a reality where we can push members of the Garda away if we dont feel like talking to them. Its going to be great fun Please explain to me where in law does it say we currently have the right to assault a member of the police force???

The Garda questioned Samir and persisted in asking him to help him with his enquiries. Given that Samir was hanging around the murder scene and acting extremely suspicious he had every right to do so. To further his level of suspicion, Samir resisted to cooperate in any way at all and acted extremely stand offiish and to cap it all of he assaulted the police officer because he didnt want to cooperate with a murder investigation where it was abundantly clear he had some interest in the matter given his insistence on hanging around the murder site

youre boring me now

Deleted User wrote: »

Oh im not woke enough am i?? Well deary me. :rolleyes:

I cant wait for your Marxist society to become a reality where we can push members of the Garda away if we dont feel like talking to them. Its going to be great fun Please explain to me where in law does it say we currently have the right to assault a member of the police force???

The Garda questioned Samir and persisted in asking him to help him with his enquiries. Given that Samir was hanging around the murder scene and acting extremely suspicious he had every right to do so. To further his level of suspicion, Samir resisted to cooperate in any way at all and acted extremely stand offiish and to cap it all of he assaulted the police officer because he didnt want to cooperate with a murder investigation where it was abundantly clear he had some interest in the matter given his insistence on hanging around the murder site

Wrap it up: we're done here.

youre boring me now

youre boring me now wrote: »

Wrap it up: we're done here.

No more arguments to make? thought not. Goodbye

Seth Brundle

Deleted User wrote: »

Well back in the real world where we all have to live in we have to comply with laws. He acted suspiciously and the Garda had every right to question him.

AGS are an imperfect organisation but that doesnt mean that i can just drive on past a Garda checkpoint in ignorance with a few whiskeys inside me because i dont feel like talking to the Gardaí and that i believe its my civil right to ignore their questioning. That's not how the real world works.

Samir did not object to being questioned but claimed that he would not be questioned by that particular garda given his accusatory glaring and behaviour.
I doubt a judge or anyone else would hold that against him tbh!

Niall_76

Where is the closest crossing between Nigeria and Ireland anyway? Did that raft get caught on a current heading to Dublin?

Was very very slow moving. 2nd episode had better be a big improvement to have people watch this apparently gruesome 3rd one.

I only watched Love/Hate after people had told me it was very good. Only memory I have from first episode was a lot of SIM card eating.

FrancieBrady

Niall_76 wrote: »

Where is the closest crossing between Nigeria and Ireland anyway? Did that raft get caught on a current heading to Dublin?

It was very clearly shown that they transitioned from their landing point in southern Europe to Ireland.

Niall_76

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It was very clearly shown that they transitioned from their landing point in southern Europe to Ireland.

Fair enough..must’ve switched off for a few seconds during that part. Body bag was the focus for me.

Strazdas

BoroMan32 wrote: »

Nothing great, but very few dramas grip you from the outset. Certainly enough interest to keep watching.

Watching the repeat on RTE1 and it's actually pretty stylish. I'm surprised to hear there was a bit of criticism from some quarters.....it's certainly interesting and different for an Irish TV drama.

donkeykong5

Sean fox who plays a garda is probably the best actor in the first episode.

Some nutritional information already provided in tonights episode :pac:

donkeykong5

Deleted User wrote: »

Some nutritional information already provided in tonights episode :pac:

Do they ever stop eating. ?

tylercheribini

Drooling fellas leering over a computer screen beside a female colleague."phwoar, wud ya look at dat", im like this in the office everyday.

tupenny

Lad from the Surf add back in the day?!

donkeykong5

That woman really thinks life owes her a living.

tupenny

tupenny wrote: »

Lad from the Surf add back in the day?!

Well spotted. Was racking my brains out trying to think where I remember him from. He's everywhere where there is laundry to be done. No wonder Biddy didnt spring out of nowhere plugging Surf

ANDREWMUFC

i fear all dee bad men

Good old Git Loughman