u/Less_Leader7990

I've never had a comfort show. I generally just love ensemble casts with very different people who have learn to like each other. I have really random tastes, but at the moment I'm not looking for a superhero show just something more real life like (preferably targeting that 20s-30s age range as I'm 22) but with a consistent plot.

Shows I enjoyed and why in no particular order:

• Young Justice - as a kid I used to love this and it really shaped the type of books/movies/shows I like. It is also quite well rounded in the sense that it has so much more to offer despite being a superhero show.
• The Boys - Good show. Loved the political messaging and a different take on superheroes.
• Money Heist - Good show. I didn't find it to be great, but it's definitely one that has that ensemble thing I mentioned.
• Friends - I like how close-knit everyone is and how messy their lives are shown as. I didn't like how there isn't a very consistent story at times.
• Invincible - Similar thoughts as with The Boys.
• Dear White People - There were parts which felt forced and I stopped watching at season 2, but I think there was merit to the idea and characters. I also really crave casual shows with slight political messaging which this show definitely fulfilled.
• The Good Place - I enjoyed the thought experiment, but it stretched on too long for me.
• Limitless - A show I really enjoyed when I was younger, but I can see myself liking a similar theme if it's done in a more polished way.
• How to get away with murder - Again, a show I really liked when I was younger. I feel some of the plot would fall flat for me now but I still appreciate the characters and how different they are despite working towards a common interest.
• Rick and Morty - Something I enjoyed when I was young. If something similar that is more nuanced and real releases I think I'd like it more.
• Ted Lasso - I feel the cast was a bit too widespread for me to care about everyone, but I did enjoy the show as a whole. Wish it was a bit more weird though idk how else to explain it.
• Psych - Funny and a great amount of "weird" humor without overdoing it.
• Arrested Development - Really funny. I wish there was a more consistent plot, but I understand why that wouldn't work the same.
• Community - Honestly I don't remember much from the show, but I remember it being funny.
• Moon Knight - Good.
• Supacell - Good.
• Not Suitable For Work - enjoyed this outside of >!the boss sleeping with one of the main characters subplot.!<
• The Society - I actually really enjoyed this. It was a bit more dramatic than I wished but I, again, like the casual thought experiment vibe.
• The Queen's Gambit - I enjoyed it as someone who plays chess.
• Midnight Mass - Good.
• Recalé - Good show.
• Loudermilk - great main character.
• New Girl - I really liked Nick's character and specifically the rough and sad side of him. I do also love how weird and unique all the characters are. You really grow to like them.
• Honorable Mention - I Love LA - I watched it with a friend and it was really a guilty watch for me because it's so far from what I like. However, I really enjoyed the sort of in your face satire it has.

Shows I did not like:

• You - Idk I found the whole concept too creepy.
• Pluribis - Stopped watching within minutes.
• Normal People - Felt very dramatic.
• The Office - Tried to like it but hated every part of the first episode. Sorry.
• Summer I Turned Pretty - friend turned it on and I just think I'm too old for that type of thing.
• Big Bang Theory - The odd episode is fine, but I don't have any desire to watch the whole thing and follow along the lives of those characters. I'm in STEM so maybe it's just that I'm not really impressed by it all idk.

Shows I'm not willing to give a chance with no explanation:

• Breaking Bad
• Game of Thrones
• Any medical show ever
• Severance
• Bojack Horseman
• Almost anything animated
• Most british shows released before the extraordinary/sex education/supacell era
• Tv shows with a considerable fanbase of guys who enjoyed the wolf of wall street
• Tv shows with a considerable fanbase of women who read colleen hoover

Edit: I also really like when a show hits the ground running and is engaging from the start!

For context, I'm an international student who was used to a lot more of a holistic education than what is provided in the UK. I've always been extremely good at math and english and in my time at Warwick Comp Sci I've felt that I really missed on the humanities side of education. I do enjoy my degree, but I really want to learn law formally and a conversion program seems like a good idea for my personal growth. I don't really care about the financial side of it as that is not an issue. However, I was wondering if anyone could advise if this is a good idea? I mostly want an idea of what benefits to expect:

• Do you think these courses satisfy this academic hole I am seeking?
• If I do well do you think it adds anything when applying to grad schemes or masters? (I performed poorly in 2nd year and got a 2:2 then got a 1st in final year so I averaged out at a 2:1 so I am worried about how my academic transcript looks as well)
• Overall, what do you think is there to gain from these programs if I just do the course and never do anything related to it in my career (likely what will happen)

Also, what is the general consensus between the university programs and the one's from UofLaw and BPP?

I remember there was this website I used months ago where you could analyze your chess games, and it would show the evaluations of moving a piece to each possible square on the chessboard at any given move. The evaluations would show up on the corresponding squares of the board. So, for example, if I clicked on a rook on a8 where there were no other pieces on the a-file or the 8th rank (so all rook moves were legal), it would show the evaluation of each possible rook move (x8 or ay, where x is any letter from a-h and y is any number from 1-8).

I want to start by acknowledging that I am coming at this from a perspective as someone who doesn't know the answer to this question. I am looking for an established framework of assessment because I commonly struggle with acknowledging whether these critiques are fair.

I am someone who just loves reading and so it is quite common for movies to come out where I am already a huge fan of the book (just this year alone, wuthering heights, project hail mary, and the odyssey were all books I had read multiple times in the past 10 years that came out as movies.) Almost each time this happens, I go into the movie expecting the themes and ideas in the book to feeling like I'm watching a completely different story. I obviously understand that it is hard to make a movie as complex as a book, but I am asking at what point is it fair to criticize a movie for this?

I found myself really struggling with the odyssey especially because I feel so much of the characters, story, etc. have changed, but at the same time I really enjoyed the movie on its own.

Overall I'm wondering if someone knowledgeable can provide insight on what they believe the sort of formal framework for assessing an adaptation should be. How do scholars or critics distinguish between changes that are necessary because of the medium and changes that fundamentally alter the identity of the original work? At what point does a work diverge enough that calling it an adaptation becomes questionable?

title

Almost every sub I want to be in won't let me post until I reach their minimum upvote requirement. However, they never state what it is. How many upvotes do I need to get to be able to post?