Halt and Catch Fire: TV’s best drama you’ve probably never heard of (2021)
sceneandheardnu.com
sceneandheardnu.com
edit - a great example and one of my favorite scenes from the show: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOR8mk0tLpc
also something about him with a good engineer
reminds me of me and my boss, i hope lol
He's also fantastic in Apple TV's Foundation and it's been really impressive seeing his range put on display there.
But yes, him and Jared Harris are pretty much the primary reasons to watch. And given the limited Harris screentime, definitely Pace carries it.
I love Lee Pace but there really hasn't been a blockbuster where he's front and center.
This! It's not a bad show but people calling it the Best Drama are wildly overselling it.
Pace really nails the intense Jobs vibe, but having seen his other work, it seems like it might not be 100% acting. There's consistency to the off feeling he gives across roles.
Gordon's role was probably the most setting accurate, but I do feel the story would have suffered if the entire cast was realistic to 80s standards rather than translated into late-2010s sensibilities.
It seems fewer than 1 in 20 actors act, the rest are cast.
You really feel it. Even when we know he's a manipulative sonuvabitch. It's mesmerizing. You have to admire his ability to spin shit into gold. The man has vision.
There's a sequence around S01E07 that I'm looking forward to reaching again, in which Joe is out on the front lawn with Donna's daughters during a hurricane and it's FEELS like magic. His performance feels earnest, and hypnotizing, and genuinely magical as he puts on a show for these young girls in the rain.
There's something intangible and hard to describe about the series. The writers have a way of making it transcend it's core drama and feel very different from just about any other show I can recall. Somehow it feels like pure creative expression that manages to defy outside expectations and tell a story that feels true to life and convey the ambitions of creative people who are fighting to make something beautiful.
It's shocking how few people have seen this show, let along watched it. Part of that probably has to do with how inaccessible it is on streaming. It's only readily available on AMC+. And no one has AMC+.
This is one of those shows that would likely shoot to the top if Netflix got the rights to it and even did a mild push. It's genuinely peak prestige TV.
When you purchase access to this item, you can permanently download it to your iPhone, iPad, Mac, or PC. Once downloaded, you can access this without an internet connection, and Apple can't remove it from your device.The term "album" by itself did originally refer to something physical -- a collection of photos bound into a book by a glue made from egg whites ("albumen") -- but the semantic shift to "album" meaning any kind of collection offered as a single unit happened well before "record albums" were a thing.
But the term "box set" has not experienced a comparable semantic shift, and still implies the presence of an actual box.
Huh?
Plus all the Prestige Y2K Television - Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Walking Dead.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halt_and_Catch_Fire_(TV_series...
[actors gathered] at Pace's house on weekends to prepare dinner, drink wine, and discuss the scripts and their characters.. "it was really nice, because you got to hear other people's point of views about your character." For the third season, Pace, Davis, and McNairy lived together in a rented house in Atlanta, with Toby Huss joining them for the fourth season..
Rogers called Lisco the duo's mentor, saying: "He.. showed us the ropes.. it was a master class in how to run a room, both in terms of getting a great story out of people, and.. being a really good and decent and fair person in what can sometimes be a brutal industry.." Between the second and third seasons, all of the series's writers departed to work on their own projects, requiring Cantwell and Rogers to build a new writing staff.An absolute legendary performance.
The thing is, Joe is supposed to actually have substance and vision. He's not faking it. The difference is that all those sales guys are pretending to be someone like Joe.
There's a line in the first season that runs as an undercurrent through the whole show ("Computers aren't the thing. They're the thing that gets you to the thing"). Joe originally says this to make the viewer think about technology, evoking the dawn of the personal computer and subsequently the internet. But later on, you're invited to re-interpret that statement as being about people: computers and technology were the thing that got the main characters to work together. It's the -people- that are the thing.
Part of what makes the show so good is that it's one of the few renditions in TV / movies of the joy of engineering something, and the constant tension that comes from working with great people. Great people inspire you, but they also challenge you. The show does a great job of portraying realistic conflicts that arise between different personality types and roles, as well as cleverly exposing the limitations of those personalities. With just Gordon, you'll get a stable and well engineered product but it won't be revolutionary. Joe has the vision but he can't actually _do_ the substantive part. Cameron has great substance and technical ability, but she's impractical and inflexible. Donna is responsible, effective, and clear-eyed - but unchecked, purely rational decisions erode the soul of a company into nothing. These differences frustrate our characters, and yet there can be no success without them.
I think many of us spend our whole careers chasing those rare moments where the right people are in the room solving problems, butting heads, but ultimately doing things they could never do all by themselves.
You really have to believe in yourself and your plan, and have a real plan even if its in flux, to communicate like that and carry it off. But when audacity is backed up by substance, it really gets people's attention.
I haven't yet seen season 3 and beyond, but it's clear the OP blogger agrees:
> The best thing the show’s writers ever did was realize that Joe wasn’t the most interesting character.
Like, Lee is a good actor for sure, he was just given a poorly story crafted role.
I remember seeing this discussed around the show The Marvelous Mrs Maisel, which is about a midcentury NYC divorcee getting into the world of stand up comedy. Overall it works and is a funny and enjoyable show, but there's definitely some of the standup routines depicted on-screen that are not actually as funny as the baked-in audience laughs might indicate. Because yeah... you can't really fake delivering good standup, even with a whole writer's room preparing the jokes and all the editing magic in the world, you still have to actually stand there and tell them in a funny way. That part can't be faked.
I sure do miss 'Mrs. Maisel'. What a stellar series.
I'll also second your comment about the kid, which is one of the best child performances I've seen.
Your assessment of movie magic is only partially correct. Obviously, a character has to be convincing by himself but the heavy lifting of the illusion is done by the peer characters acting as if they believe the role he plays.
"The king is always played by the others"
Not sure who is to credit for this quote but in my opinion it is one of the most important insights to understand how movies work and also why movie characters are never relevant role models.
Now, I've realized, in real life they wouldn't have let them finish their first sentence.
I was only aware of The Fall for its brilliant photography.
Naturally, although it was the same battle, they'll have seen different things up close, and have different views on the battle overall.
Having said that...
It's like someone wrote the Foundation movie three generations after the book was written, turned into a play, and then told over the campfire for decades.
It literally has no more connection with Asimov's works, than Star Wars is like Star Trek. All of the technology is different, the size of the Empire is wildly different, literally almost nothing maps.
Is it good? Yes, sorta. But it's not Foundation, by any stretch. It's not even remotely in the same "world".
For compelling TV you need recurring characters for the audience to become invested in. But the whole point of Foundation was that the individuals don't matter (mostly).
The show had to jump through all these hoops to keep the same actors around and make them heroes. And it expanded/emphasized the metaphysical element in a way that undermined the psychohistory. And IMO makes/will make (honestly don't know where they're at now) the series ending reveal far less interesting and thought provoking.
He has range!
Scoot McNary is good in lots of things-- Monsters is a favorite. Mackenzie Davis in Station 11!
Viewers may have missed the show but casting agents didn't.
He's also really great in the show Foundation, with a pretty different role. I watched Foundation much more recently and it took me a while to realize it was the same actor from Halt.
The show is not at all that if you stick with it for even a short while.
This is from the pilot and I watched it based on high recommendations, and I couldn't keep going because the character you're describing as so convincing and charismatic is so dramatically unlikeable!?
In this scene, he is:
* disrespectful and entitled with a coworker
* privileged and self-important about his background with a client
* then makes an admittedly pretty rousing speech, but TBH the show doesn't really trust us to understand that "this is meant to be inspirational" because it keeps cutting to the other character reacting "inspired", which is significant because
* he doesn't make the sale
* then proceeds to verbally scream abuse at the other character.
and then i'm supposed to be excited about watching the two of these start a computer company together? ..........why?
I had a great EM once who said I need to read it because nothing has changed in 40 years, and I keep a copy on my desk.
Touching as well, as it's on Joe MacMillan's desk in the final scene of third season.
What's so great about it is:
- mushroom theory of management works - trust new graduates and juniors to win by not understanding the possible - throw all the corporate bs away, just build - competing teams (skunk-works, vs roadmap team) works - real innovation is built by tinkerers, from the ground up, not top down
as a startup weirdo in the age of AI, who pines for the golden era (as they call it the golden prarie) i highly recommend this show!
I've only watched the first season and really don't see the link to Soul of a New Machine.
Season 2 is roughly about BBSs and Compuserve, and still in Texas.
Season 3 is about the early commercial Internet, same characters, SFBA.
Season 4 is about the Yahoo era of the Internet and about venture capital, also SFBA.
The first season is semi-accurate if you just replace Compaq with their company. But it quickly goes off the rails.
They still could have had Donna working at TI, which has a presence there.
Even billionaires like Zuck bite off more than they can chew and flail around.
For that matter, Jobs at NeXT succeeded in an unlikely way in the end. But for much of NeXT's existence it chronically couldn't get enough traction. They ended up droping the hardware. Then down purposed their OS into a developer platform to run on other OS's. So disappointing. But they did such good work, when Apple had a need, they were ready.
So yes, those C64s were running software 5-10 years ahead of their time because the writers felt like it and were able to get away with such.
Soul of a new machine is a fantastic book. About DG going up against DEC (Digital Equipment Corporation) and their Vax machines.
Also, I really liked DG/UX, for reasons I no longer recall.
Please do! Ephemera like that can tell more sides of the story that didn't make it into the book, for whatever reason.
I ended up working for the lead of the competing team within DG (whose product lost to the book’s protagonist) for many years right after college at a different company he founded. I suspect he has a slightly different perspective on the whole thing, but I never asked.
Sadly my father and many of his contemporaries are no longer with us. But I’m really happy that this book exists as a durable & accurate snapshot of the period. The computer history museum also has a wonderful collection of interviews worth checking out, which includes several of the staff from DG [1]
In an effort to sing the song of underappreciated works of greatness...
Patriot - a CIA hitman who writes folk songs about his exploits imdb.com/title/tt4687882/
Counterpart - not a multiverse, just a biverse imdb.com/title/tt4643084/
Scavengers Reign - Robinson Crusoe by way of a nature documentary of a very bizarre alien planet. imdb.com/title/tt21056886/
Common Side Effects - cops, robbers, magic mushrooms, corporate bad guys and the cure for everything. imdb.com/title/tt28093628
Evil - x-files meets Catholic mysticism. imdb.com/title/tt9055008/
The Heat Vision and Jack pilot episode - Jack Black, Owen Wilson and a script by Dan Harmon. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6lWgXDOAJ5s&pp=ygUUaGVhdCB2aXN...
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm4497617/?ref_=ext_shr
I will binge anything he makes with the double bullseye of these shows
In case it matters to someone, the order is reverse. As in, Scavengers Reign came before. Also, be aware it wasn’t renewed for a second season. But it absolutely deserved it, just not enough people knew about it.
Given the agreement in taste so far, here’s a couple to try if you haven’t:
- Sweet Vicious — marred by getting cancelled after one season, but a fun season anyway. College sexual assault survivor becomes an anti-rapist vigilante. It’s, uh… more light-hearted than the premise sounds?
- Review with Forrest MacNeil — A guy has a review show where he attempts to review… life. Takes viewer requests for what specifically to review in each episode. He takes his job very seriously. Avoid seeing episode counts if at all possible. Trust me on that part. Doesn’t ruin it if you do see them, but being blind to that does improve it.
Another that I’m not sure counts as under-watched as it’s more recent, but I rarely see it discussed in the wild: Dickinson, a magical realism biographical show about the poet, that mixes in humor and some modern pop culture (think: A Knight’s Tale).
I don't understand. How would knowing how many episodes there are have an impact on the show? (And the number of episodes seems just... fine?)
I've not heard of the series so I can't comment on it specifically but that was my take on their warning.
Gur frevrf unf cbvagf vg zvtug raq, ohg qbrfa'g, naq gura qbrf noehcgyl raq abg irel sne vagb vgf ynfg frnfba. Gurer'f n yvggyr rkgen wbl gb or unq vs lbh qba'g xabj dhvgr jura vg jvyy or bire (frrvat gur rcvfbqr pbhag ba gung ynfg frnfba, va cnegvphyne, fcbvyf gung). Vg'f abg yvxr gung ehvaf gur fubj be nalguvat, ohg vg'f n yvggyr orggre vs lbh pna znantr gb erznva oyvaq gb vg.
Funny thing about watching Patriot for the first time: my sister in law showed up on it. We had no idea. Just all the sudden there she is on my TV. She's the mute cop, Sophie.
Counterpart was great but structure made it hard for to watch knowing it'd been cancelled.
Scavengers Reign was great; I couldn't get into Common Side Effects.
Evil is exactly the Catholic X-Files, which is an amazing concept, but by the end of the 2nd season it is all the way off the rails and hurtling into a canyon.
Given your list, you might dig Lodge 49, which is somewhere in the intersection of HACF, Evil, The Big Lebowski.
Also in the running for great title sequences as well
So many quotable moments. Vantasner Danger Meridian. Structural Dynamics of Flow. The attaché badge.
So many phenomenal scenes. I’m not surprised it didn’t get more traction with the general public but it was unafraid to take some serious and weird risks. But they pay off in spades for me!
I have a framed "Structural Dynamics of Flow" poster on my wall in my home office, visible on Teams calls. Only 1 person has ever recognized the reference.
If you want something more American, the show for you is Barry.
My friends and I have found that Patriot phrases make excellent team names in pub trivia, even if no other teams get the references. (Also "double great", "disgraced veterinarians", "pin-flam-fastened pan traps", more I'm forgetting... clearly I need to rewatch the show yet again!)
> I’m not surprised it didn’t get more traction with the general public
I suspect the show would have had a larger audience if it had a better title. That seems to be an instant negative whenever I try recommending it to someone. Hopefully Steven Conrad's new hbo show will raise his profile enough to let more people rediscover Patriot. It's an absolute gem.
- Black Earth Rising
- Pine Gap
None of that was my type of thing before, now it's all I want. I think the genre might be called absurdist fiction, but I'm not sure that covers the full vibe.
Dan Romer is an excellent composer too, I listen to his stuff a lot. I have the Station Eleven soundtrack in my car, now my kid randomly sings Wandering Under The Moon, and it's one of my favorite things in the world.
For those curious, start by watching the 8 minute short which originated it all. If it hooks you, you’ll love the show.
But be aware the show wasn’t renewed for a second season. Not enough people knew about it.
It was very intriguing and I started watching it on the same day. This would have really deserved a renewal for another season, but sadly it got cancelled.
Mind sharing a link? I found the podcast but not the episode.
I would suggest also Devs just for the visuals and Tales from the Loop for the most peaceful TV show I've ever seen
I'd also add the two other legs of the Lee Pace Great Television stool: Wonderfalls and Pushing Daisies.
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/new-techniques-in-mode...
(And he's also done two bands: The Jones Sisters and Hoist the King.)
I did rather enjoy the way that they captured the manic energy of the generation of dirtbag sales and marketing people that drove the PC industry in that era.
What it missed, I though, is that it failed to capture the breathless sense of wonder at finding yourself at the center of an event around which the entire universe was going to pivot -- something that was obviously going to change everything. That's what you lived if you worked on the technical side of the PC industry.
Tracy Kidder's book, The Soul of a New Machine, however....
First off, he wasn't working in the industry at the time the pilot episode takes place. He first got involved in the industry a couple of years later, working for Sun Microsystems. (So not quite the ideal candidate for a technical consultant). And second off, he came to the table after the pilot episode had been written, but before the first regular season script was written. There's only so much a technical consultant can do when he's presented with a script whose central plot point is "it's hard to reverse engineer IBM PCs". He does claim responsibility for the procedure they used to reverse engineer the BIOS, oddly. But I am inclined to be generous, and give him credit for providing the most absurdly difficult technically-plausible procedure for reverse-engineering the BIOS, and grant that the right thing to do (throw the entire script away and start again because it WASN'T difficult to reverse-engineer the BIOS) was not a pragmatic realistic recommendation for a rookie technical consultant to deliver.
To put things in perspective. There was no need to reverse engineer the BIOS at all, because the IBM Technical Manual provided exquisitely commented assembler source code for the BIOS (copyright protected), including API documentation (the essence of which is not copyright protected). And a complete set of schematics. And IBM was -- for complicated reasons -- actively encouraging third parties to build clones. So correcting the technical inaccuracies in a pilot script whose entire plot revolves around "how audaciously difficult it is to reverse an IBM PC" is a bit interesting.
Once corrected, the plot of the pilot episode would have revolved around clean-room procedures for translating API documentation into copyright-safe BIOSes. Probably not that interesting to the unwashed masses. And abstract speculation as to whether IBM would sue their pants off for IP violations, even though IBM was very publicly and loudly saying that they would not. And whether you could convince CFOs and investors that they could take IBM at their word.
The actual strategy IBM was using was pretty clever, and quite horrifyingly machiavellian (although fair and reasonable enough that nobody ever really complained about it). I'm not actually sure if I'm allowed to tell the story of what happened when IBM patent attorneys showed up at our door wanting to have a discussion about a 10" thick stack of patents. Suffice it to say that I think they were playing a long game.
After all, if we could rewind those years, all that chaos would have all happened very differently. We canonize our own particular history too easily. Manifest destiny is not a real thing.
I had the same feeling but the opposite outcome with Silicon Valley. Growing up in Palo Alto, it took me a while to figure out if I was enjoying this show because it was genuinely funny or if it was just because it hit the absurdity of the time and place so well.
>“His [Teller, working for Google] message was, ‘We don’t do stupid things here. We do things that actually are going to change the world, whether you choose to make fun of that or not.’
>Teller ended the meeting by standing up in a huff, but his attempt at a dramatic exit was marred by the fact that he was wearing Rollerblades. He wobbled to the door in silence. “Then there was this awkward moment of him fumbling with his I.D. badge, trying to get the door to open,” Kemper said. “It felt like it lasted an hour. We were all trying not to laugh. Even while it was happening, I knew we were all thinking the same thing: Can we use this?” In the end, the joke was deemed “too hacky to use on the show.”
[0] https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/how-silicon-v...
I guess that's to its credit: it nailed the culture.
Please tell us about it! I always thought it's more of a 50-50 (it's an American series anyway), but I was only a kid back then, so I would be very interested to hear your complaints!
So in the first episode, Gordon Clark, the HW guy (played by Scoot McNairy) had to dump the contents of the IBM PC BIOS from the ROM chip.
Gordon extracts the BIOS chip (an 8KB EPROM chip if you do a web search) and plugs it into a breadboard and proceeds to dump out each byte of the chip with Joe (Lee Pace) writing down the address and data at that particular address on a pad of paper.
After writing the address and address contents for the first time, Joe asks Gordon how many times they have to do this procedure. Gordon replies 65536, which would imply a 64KB ROM chip - but the web search said the IBM PC used an 8KB EPROM for the BIOS.
After more dreary, repetitive work, they accomplish the dumping and transcribing of the IBM PC BIOS in one weekend.
But one could have used a short BASIC program to dump the IBM PC BIOS ROM - the IBM PC wasn't a locked down game console...
Maybe as a HW guy, writing a BASIC program to dump the BIOS would not come to mind.
For a legal clean-room implementation of the IBM PC BIOS, the actual contents of the IBM PC BIOS aren't needed.
You need the specs for each BIOS function (input/output parameters and description of what the BIOS function does).
The IBM PC Technical Reference Manual (which cost $99 back then) contains the BIOS assembly language listing.
One would need to type up the lines that list the input/output requirements for each BIOS function and their purpose and they'd be half-way to a clean-room PC BIOS.
But that'd be way less dramatic (and easier) than the way shown in the episode.
see https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/112846/halt-...
And, as an added bonus, as a hardware guy would know that you could read back the contents of an EPROM using the software that controls your EPROM burner (not an expensive piece of equipment). So that excuse doesn't fly either.
PS - Christopher Cantwell - one of the writers and showrunners - has written a library of wonderful comic books worth investigating
PPS - ATX TV did a 10 year anniversary interview with a handful of the cast and crew that's worth watching if you're a fan - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6L1suN-mGE
Especially when I start to spend too much time obsessing about storage optimization, or similar. To me, sometimes, the computer is the thing. But it's really helpful to take a step back and think about the big picture.
With apologies for going all old-guy, today it seems that whatever you do, you end up in some walled garden along a pre-programmed path. Can you write an independent iOS app without spending a lot of time screwing around with Apple? I don't know. It does not look like a worthwhile thing to spend my time on.
Everything you do today, it's like you automatically end up on some set of train tracks somebody else has made. Maybe they let your train run, maybe not. Maybe they like what you're doing and let your train run like the wind so that they can copy it all.
HCF reminded me that there was a time before all of this. Good memories.
Agentic coding may be an even bigger change, and it might kick off a new time like that. Too soon to tell. I sure hope so. I can't help but notice there are a lotta folks looking to get their hooks into the system.
Yes! I've spent much more time screwing around with linkers and search paths than I ever have App Store Connect. It's really not very difficult, it's always surprising to hear engineers expect it'd be something they'd sink time into.
Honestly, I think it's pretty remarkable you can distribute software to billions of devices with about as much clicking and form-filling as buying a plane ticket. Was there a time it was even easier?
It takes barely any time to manage the review process. I have had apps and updates rejected but it was easy enough to make some changes and re-submit.
Christopher Cantwell, the showrunner, is also doing the new series of The Terror (aka North Pole Bear Show) that's premiering this year.
Right down to obscure LucasArts first online game.
It tries to cram too many things into this one show. Like a medley of computing history.
And it's not like that kind of thing never happens, like look at General Magic and its through-lines through the tech industry up until 2015 or so, but it just happens too conveniently in the show. Particularly Bosworth's role seems far-fetched to me. He's already at the end of his career in season 1, and somehow he remains relevant through the internet age?
The "Phoenix" monologue in the last episode evokes nostalgia for everything Donna and Cameron have been through, but it also breaks suspension of disbelief by pointing out just how much of history these two people have been involved with firsthand.
Since they used the book's story already, they made a turn for the series to be an anthology of loosely thematically-similar stories (think American Horror Story). The basic setting of season 2 is Japanese internment during World War II in America, and it's from different writers than the first, and of course isn't adapting the novel anymore. It was much less popular both in terms of viewers and critics.
I'm a little surprised they think the brand still carries enough power to put another original story in there under its name for a season 3. It's also a bit of a double-edged sword: you do get name recognition and some built-in initial audience, but you're also taking on expectations and baggage from the original. This is a factor in season 2's tepid reception, and there have been other similar attempts to slide something unrelated in under an existing banner that backfired: True Detective Night Country comes to mind.
I was a child during the early parts of that era, and so for that part I got most from reading books and seeing the public announcements, but I started my first company during the era depicted towards the end - an ISP - and I feel they got that balance roughly right.
But, sure, there were annoying deviation that is obvious to those of us who know how things happened. I don't think that was avoidable.
I'm glad they put this at the top. I instantly closed the tab. On the off chance that the title is remotely true, I wouldn't want to have the show ruined for me before I even saw an episode.
For others who have never heard of this show, here's a little I picked up from carefully scanning over the wikipedia page:
It's a AMC period drama about the early days of PCs and the internet. It ran from June 1, 2014 – October 14, 2017, had four seasons, reviews are good (so it's not just this guy who liked it) and they got better as the show went on. Also "it was marketed as the first TV series to premiere on Tumblr and the first time AMC had partnered with a social media service to debut a new show." which is weird, but it does seem like it's worth checking out.
(I also haven't seen Silicon Valley which, as I understand it, is simultaneously required watching and required avoidance for HN people...)
If you're willing to consider some random username's opinion, I consider it to be possibly the best of all time TV drama, with the only alternative pick being The Wire.
I hope you enjoy it!
It looks like some of the key writers changed halfway. This likely contributed to the change in characters, feeling, and everything that made the first two seasons so good. Jamie Pachino the executive story editor, was only there for the start. Also writers Jason Cahill, Dahvi Waller, and Jonathan Lisco only contributed to the first two seasons.
I can only imagine how the last two seasons would have felt if more of the early writers were still involved.
Season 1 was absolutely killer. I like that they tried to capture different eras per season, but subsequent seasons got progressively weaker.
I still think Gordon's final scene is one of the best pieces of writing in TV drama history. Took my breath away the first time I saw it.
Carl was a Technical Consultant across all four seasons of Halt and Catch Fire, providing industry insight and script review. Hear what he had to say about his experience on the show, a breakdown of specific scenes, and some of his favorite memories.My only real critique is that it has the same problem as Mr. Robot. The writers and script are clearly very tech-literate, but the spoken lines are stilted and awkwardly delivered with odd intonation because the actors clearly have no understanding of what the words they're saying mean.
You need to do yourself a favor and drop whatever you think you know and re-binge.
Totally worth a watch.
https://gilpignol.substack.com/p/halt-and-catch-fire-the-tra...
> The masterpiece quality of Halt and Catch Fire lies in how precisely it shows the zero-sum reflex at work.
> Disagreement becomes disrespect.
> Respect becomes status.
> Status becomes survival.
> When Cameron’s game doesn’t align with business strategy, it isn’t a tactical debate; it’s an assault on her identity. When Joe pivots the company without consensus, he isn’t merely decisive; he is declaring sovereignty. When Donna asserts operational control, it reads as treason to those who conflate ownership with authorship.
The claim is simple: in creative orgs, disagreements often escalate into identity conflicts because people map ideas to self-worth. Halt and Catch Fire portrays that escalation pretty clearly.
If that doesn’t resonate, what has your experience looked like instead?
You can debate the argument: what’s embarrassing is feeling the need to announce to strangers that they’re wrong on the internet.
It matters.
> the hardest thing to scale is not software. It is trust.
For example: Is this your sincerely held belief, the conclusion of all of the preceding words, and the point you were trying to express?
Because it reads, superficially, like shallow self-help pablum.
If you want your readers to differentiate these words from those words, you at least owe them the assurance that you've thought this through, and are willing to defend this idea.
If this is your own idea, it might be worth some consideration beyond its superficial presentation. If this is the output of an LLM trained on shallow observations and presentation style, it is not worth consideration.
Why, and for whom, do you publish?
I like literally love it, not ironically, it makes it more like a stage play.
Feel like the flaws are what makes it special. I don't want Kubrick for a tv show about BBS'
- the archetype characters and their motivations to do what they do (100% valid today)
- struggles and exhilaration of startups
- as a pseudo-documentary of the early years of personal computing
Highly recommend it!
One thing I liked about HACF is despite using a decent amount of technobable, it plausibly captures the approach and spirit of hacking and coding, like reverse engineering a memoryless chip by rigging up a hex LED system to read out the values for each of the 65536 inputs to a ROM.
The expertise of the coders are demonstrated mainly by others admiring the structural complexity of their code as objects of beauty. This is something that feels extra nostalgic now.
https://michaelchinen.com/2023/12/31/halt-and-catch-fire-pos...
https://bits.ashleyblewer.com/halt-and-catch-fire-syllabus/
It allows people to form a "watch club" around the show, similar to a book club, and have plenty of extra reading materials to understand the different tech eras covered in the show.
I think this show -- combined with the documentary "General Magic" and the book "Fire in the Valley" -- is a great way to be immersed in the techno-optimism of the early tech industry around the time of the desktop PC revolution and early internet.
For me, that sort of techno-optimism has stuck with me even if modern tech has more dystopian elements with which one has to grapple. It is still an amazing industry, all things considered.
p.s. total aside that Apple TV sells a digital "box set" of this show for a pretty low price these days. I am usually not a fan of "buying" a show from a streaming service but might be worth it in this case since it's around $16 USD for every episode across its 4 seasons, Apple has a good track record honoring digital purchases, and watching the show is a commitment.
The character of Cameron Howe resonated with me greatly.
What a fantastic show.
The feeling you're experiencing has a name: it's called "cringe". I can't watch Frasier for more than about half an episode because of it. Or I Love Lucy... same problem. But Seinfeld, which has plenty of the same humour mechanic, always seems to manage to stay just below the threshold for me.
Halt and Catch Fire is really, really good. Please trust us. Give it another shot. Skip forward a bit when you feel the need to. Skip the first episode entirely and just read a synopsis if you need to.
A related thing I find difficult to watch is when characters are in impending danger too often. Breaking Bad, for instance, was a bit hard for me to get into because of the continual tension and risk of everything going sideways. I managed to watch it anyway and am glad of it, but definitely found Better Call Saul to be a more pleasurable watch.
I was pretty bored by the time it got into browser wars stuff. And the ending of the show was kinda baffling and cringe-inducing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halt_and_Catch_Fire_(computing...
It's true that the characters are very flawed, but perfect characters would not make a compelling story... I guess you are talking about Cameron and not Donna, but if so I'd also say that I think the story does not really reward her, in the end.
Donna's experiences at TI mirror those friends related to me. The club the gang visited felt just like the Starck Club. Engineers at Cardiff "felt" just like the engineers I worked with.
Add to that the excellent performances by the whole cast... I love this show, especially the first season that started with a PC and ended with the Mac.
Other thoughtful and well made shows: Dark Matter, For All Mankind, Foundation (also Lee Pace and also stellar).
Silicon Valley, the insanity that it’s both a comedy and true to life
Seasons 2 through 4 were vastly more interesting. We've seen Joel a hundred times. Donna and Cameron and Gordon felt less worn, and Donna and Cameron's relationship vastly more interesting than Gordon (the skeptic) and Joel (the believer!) in Season 1.
If you prefer "great men" stuff, I can see preferring Season 1.
But it's not exactly a story you can't watch elsewhere.
> The story twists again: Joe loses his nerve. The Giant goes to market as a regular old fast/cheap PC. Then, in a Comdex hotel room darkened as if for a séance, Joe comes face-to-face with his first Macintosh, and realizes he’s made the wrong call: “It speaks,” he says, his voice full of wonder and dread. We realize we’ve spent the better part of a season watching these characters fail — that Gordon and Joe aren’t going to become the Jobs and Wozniak of this world because Jobs and Wozniak are the Jobs and Wozniak of this world.
https://grantland.com/hollywood-prospectus/silicon-valley-ha...
Cameron is just sort of an unstable tortured genius with a lot of baggage, and while Donna ends up being the responsible "den mother", it is really far from girlbossing, and rather trivializes those seasons and the characters to put it in such a way. And Joe does not take a backseat at all! He ends up being the main foil for most of the show, which is a really interesting turn for the character!
I do think Gordon gets sidelined (with a debilitating disease, no less!) far too easily. But then he's also sort of doomed to be a footnote, his fate is just all the more tragic for it.
I get why the writers ended up just sort of shrugging their shoulders and excluding him so often.
And please don't downvote my comment based on any political or social thoughts one might have. Based on the story line alone, I quit when, for no apparent reason, during a tense moment in the story, the lead sales guy has a kissing session with another guy. The lead guy isn't gay. I don't think the guy he kissed was gay. There is no reason given and none is forthcoming as to why all of a sudden he does this but it felt like another of many gimmicks to get people talking about the show rather than sticking to a story line.
For some, it's very meaningful. That character is bisexual, not gay, and it's pretty authentic representation. The reason why it's not so focused on is because people like this, especially at that time, often don't care much for labels. That scene you mention is with a closeted man. This is not unheard of. You may not have had this experience personally, but does that mean it didn't happen? The campy part? Okay. The show wasn't perfect. It did get canceled, after all. But it worries me that you singled this particular thing out because this is obviously a political topic, and you missed the fact that the scene did demonstrate some things about the character, like his recklessness, impulsiveness and opportunism.
He complicated something that could've been simpler, and he did this because he had a hard time separating his personal thoughts and feelings from his work. This is a theme that plays out a lot in his interactions, and I wonder if your understandable discomfort and lack of familiarity with the other aspects of the scene colored your perception here.
Doesn't that refer to a lot of pop culture? I can remember the 1980s and my memories of that period rarely bear much resemblance to the TV/films I see nowadays set in that period. I don't think it's just my personal experience. It goes deeper than that because many of the writers can't remember it well, or at all. That said I think the author of "Ready Player One" could remember the 1980s, just not my 1980s.
1. "Kissing session," "kissed," etc. Funny stuff. I hope you don't really think they were just looking for wine when they were off camera.
2. He's bi. We meet an ex boyfriend in a later episode, although the fact of his ahem "kissing session" would seem to be evidence enough.
3. The reason is obvious enough if you watch through the end of the dinner.
I'm glad I stuck with it though, the rest of the series was much, much better.
Lee Pace did an awesome performance recently in Asimov's Foundation. Mackenzie Davis, another lead in the show, demonstrated good potential but she seems not to get much afterward (Terminator, Station 11 etc)
This article? Not so much. Is OP one of the one's discovering it?
It is an all timer.
https://www.ratingraph.com/tv-shows/halt-and-catch-fire-rati...
In the same way that the beginning of Parks and Rec feels like they were setting out to make a version of The Office before it really became its own thing, the first season of HaCF felt like "what if we had a Don Draper type but instead it was Texas in the 80s?"
They could have compressed those into fewer episodes and it would have been more watchable.
I liked the storytelling in it, but, like I said earlier, it's pretty Six Feet Under-ish, in that as it progresses it is less and less about the original concept of the show and more about the relationships between characters built up over years of episodes. Whether that's a good or bad thing for you depends in part on how much fan service you want; it's why I find Mr. Robot completely unwatchable.
Maybe that's a challenge for the audience to stay with it, but it's definitely worth it for the payoff.
And those s04 episode titles matching http error codes? That might be the most masterful thing I've ever seen pulled off from a TV show.
But the other seasons were great in their own ways too. Random PC revolution personalities showing up in dotcom startups was both disjointed and inspired.
"In computer engineering, Halt and Catch Fire, known by the assembly language mnemonic HCF, is an idiom referring to a computer machine code instruction that causes the computer's central processing unit (CPU) to cease meaningful operation, typically requiring a restart of the computer. It originally referred to a fictitious instruction in IBM System/360 computers (introduced in 1964), making a joke about its numerous non-obvious instruction mnemonics." (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halt_and_Catch_Fire_(computing)
The series is a memorable instance of what any self-respecting geek ought to have watched. It's better than "Silicon Valley", although the latter has pulled one scientific stunt regarding scientific advisory that is unique in film.What other films/series are "must watch" material for geeks?
- War Games
- Silicon Valley
- The Social Network
- The Intern
- Mr. Robot
- Black Mirror
- Hackers
- 2001: A Space Odyssey
- ...?
I've not seen that since the 90s so it might not be a classic but if you've ever seen an unexpected pi symbol (look on the bottom right of old.reddit.com) in software then they're probably referencing that movie.
- Pirates of Silicon Valley
- Snowden
- The IT Crowd
- Real Genius
- The Great Hack
- Virtuosity
- The Conversation
- Who Am I
- Anon
- Ghost in the Shell (Anime)
- The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo
- The Accountant & The Accountant 2
- Office Space
- The Imitation Game
- I Am Mother
- Eye in the Sky
- The Circle
- 1984
- Elysium
- Minority Report
There's only four seasons and they're all solid.
However it seems most people liked it the other way around.
It was engrossing as all hell, but it's one of the only shows I ever finished while really not liking it.
It feels so fake, and tries to keep your attention with gimmicks and artificial drama. When things are working out, characters sabotage things purposely to add drama back, as if it can't possibly be dramatic to succeed. The show basically ends up being a group of 4 or 5 assholes being assholes to each other for no reason.
No actually, 4 individuals are not solely responsible for 20 years of early computing history and making that so is absurd and kills my suspension of disbelief.
But it's short and self contained and there's enough character stuff to see that it's still worth experiencing.
I don't know how people say it's like "Soul of a New Machine" by Tracey Kidder. I read that book and there's just nothing comparable in the show. Soul of a new machine was a wonderful journey that was full of real people and real experiences, and maybe the first season of HaCF was like the McDonalds version of that.
...The engineer then rolls his eyes like "yeah no duh". If we could just magically do stuff like that, we would have done it already. Classic management thinking they have an original idea with no understanding of the engineering beneath it all. I thought they would just tell him off and that would be it. I really felt seen in that moment.
The frustrating thing is, they then take pointy haired boss's idea seriously. The rest of the season is spent actually pursuing that dumb, dumb idea... This felt disrespectful, and I stopped watching.