Lion of the Blogosphere

The Young Pope (no spoilers)

This is the new pretentious style of TV. No plot, because plot is for the proles. Instead there are weird characters, surreal dreams, gay sex—how can any show claim to be highbrow these days without gay sex?—and admittedly great acting, great costumes, and great sets with great lighting and great camera angles. Occasionally, the inventiveness of some of the scenes are even humorous and brought a forth mild chuckle (although nothing here is as hilariously funny as that Ferengi commando-team episode I mentioned in my review of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine).

There’s also lots of psychoanalysis type of stuff. The people who come up with pretentious TV series obviously believe that psychoanalysis stuff is really really deep. All of the issues that Lenny aka Pope Pius XIII has are attributed to the psychological trauma from being abandoned by his parents when he was a young child and left with the nuns.

It’s the very opposite of Star Trek: The Original Series. The acting was terrible, the sets are the cheapest sets ever, most “outdoor” scenes look like either bad paintings or the California desert. But every Star Trek episode had a story to it.

Another case of opposites is that everyone in Star Trek is an atheist, while everyone in The Young Pope publicly claims to believe in God, and I’d say that most of the characters in The Young Pope privately believe in God as well. But they don’t believe in a Catholic god. They believe in a Universalist god. The only time Jesus is ever discussed, that I can recall, is when Lenny, on multiple occasions, proclaims that he is more handsome than Jesus.

The people who wrote the scripts must believe that, although it’s possible for smart people like cardinals to believe in the existence of God, they couldn’t possibly take that Gospel stuff or that Trinity stuff or that Catholic doctrine stuff seriously.

I admit that I watched all 10 episodes, even though HBO is currently only on episode 8. Without giving away the ending, I will say that the payoff at the end does not satisfactorily justify the previous nine episodes.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

February 10, 2017 at 10:13 pm

Posted in Television

39 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. “…how can any show claim to be highbrow these days without gay sex?”

    What’s notable is that having lots of sex in a show isn’t quite yet considered prole. Yes, one reason why “Wolfhall” was more SWPL than “The Tudors” is that the latter had oodles of sex scenes, while the former doesn’t, but Game of Thrones is considered by most every SWPL to be an extremely high quality show, and it’s full of sex.

    Still, in five years or so it wouldn’t surprise me if straight sex scenes are for the proles, and every high brow SWPL show has nothing but gay sex.


    February 10, 2017 at 10:55 pm

    • European Regietheater is rife with grotesque and ugly sex acts, violence, bodily fluids and erratic acting, absurd costumes and sets that have nothing in common with the original play or opera. Regietheater has been going strong for many decades now and all of the criticism and ridicule did not make a dent.

      The Abduction of Opera

      Jonathan Haidt points out that liberals don’t feel disgust as much as conservatives. I believe that disgusting elite entertainment mainly serves the function to repel and exclude conservatives. Proles aren’t even aware of this stuff for the most part.


      February 11, 2017 at 4:44 pm

      • Proles have pretty disgusting tastes themselves; they show up en masse at gory horror films, so a lot of the stuff that Heather Mac Donald is repelled by in Regietheater wouldn’t bother them.


        February 12, 2017 at 10:10 am

  2. If you want a (relatively) young pope and quite a dissolute one, read “Hadrian the Seventh,” a novel from 1904. He chain-smokes; there’s an undertone of gay sex; and he is amazed to wander about the Vatican (akin to uncultured Trump exploring his new residence late at night).


    February 10, 2017 at 11:30 pm

  3. TBF, it’s the Catholic Church, which is up there with all-boys boarding schools, ancient Greece, the navy, secret fraternity initiations and Turkish prison.


    February 10, 2017 at 11:40 pm


    Actually seems like a pretty smart kid.


    February 10, 2017 at 11:56 pm

  5. There are lots of smart, Catholic intellectuals who are believers. Michael Dougherty and Ross Douthat are obvious examples. But some Catholics are more universalist than others. Viz., the Jesuits are kind of squishy.

    David Pinsen

    February 11, 2017 at 12:10 am

    • Two, wow, that’s a real movement. The Church an institution is rotten to the core. In the US, convents are aging and closing up shop. I do not say this gloatingly. They were the only Christian muscle to stand up to Islam, Inc.


      February 12, 2017 at 1:21 am

      • Two, wow, that’s a real movement

        Don’t be obtuse. My two examples were not meant to be an exhaustive list.

        David Pinsen

        February 13, 2017 at 3:23 am

      • Dave, my point is that a few Catholic intellectuals do not a culture make. In fact, Catholicism is now what it started out, truly a religion for the intellectual. It’s almost a parody of what Orwell said in his notes on Nationalism: “One has to belong to the intelligentsia to believe things like that: no ordinary man could be such a fool.” It has a complicated belief system and none of the cradle Catholics I know can stop from cracking up when they see the hierarchy on TV, which is the only place they see them.

        “The Church” used to be the bread and butter, the daily sustenance, of millions of ordinary people. It’s turned into sand. The intellectuals of whom you speak have zero influence except for some followers on twitter.


        February 13, 2017 at 7:46 pm

  6. Alex2, i was thrilled by the news you have posted. And then i found that it is a competition organized by google among (black) african-people. There is no way this kid would have ended even in the top 1000 if the competition had been worldwide bith asian and whites. The news is really presented in a very biased way, certainly due to the stupidity of the journalist and the agenda of the people who provided the news.

    Bruno from Paris

    February 11, 2017 at 4:56 am

  7. People should not talk until having saw the very ending of something . Last 2 episodes reveal that there was always a smart plot behind all and that the tv show is absolutely not against catholics .


    February 11, 2017 at 5:07 am

  8. Thanks for the review. It is helpful knowing what to avoid.


    February 11, 2017 at 7:25 am

  9. Progressive media shoe-horning gay stuff into shows has a few purposes:
    1) It shows how progressive and enlightened they are
    2) They can feel superior to bad-whites who have a disgust response to gays
    3) It keeps the diversity police off their backs

    I don’t mind with Game of Thrones because GOT is such a good show overall I can just ignore it, but I had to grit my teeth while watching Westworld because it was such a mediocre show to begin with.


    February 11, 2017 at 8:48 am

    • And, of course, in the case of The Young Pope, to subtly slander Catholicism and christians in general: “Look, they are all fags!” Of course we love fags now, but these are hypocritical christian ones, okay to show disgust towards.


      February 11, 2017 at 8:49 am

      • It looks like the show provides an acceptable way for SWPL’s to be homophobes.

        Mike Street Station

        February 11, 2017 at 9:38 am

  10. I watched the first installment, but not to the end. It was the most horrific anti-Catholic diatribe I have ever seen. It was fully the equivalent of having a guy in a KKK costume screaming the N word over and over for an hour.

    Everyone who participated in making this should be in a death camp. I mean that literally.

    bob sykes

    February 11, 2017 at 8:54 am

    • I really get tired of Catholic bashing in the media, but I will say that I think this Young Pope show is different. It’s made entirely by Italians, and I think Italians have more of a sense of humor regarding the Church than other people.

      Two in the Bush

      February 11, 2017 at 1:17 pm

    • I don’t think it’s Catholic bashing, seems very sympathetic with Catholicism. Also the show sincerely portrays Pius as a genuine worker of divine miracles.


      February 11, 2017 at 6:00 pm

  11. “I’d say that most of the characters in The Young Pope privately believe in God as well. But they don’t believe in a Catholic god. They believe in a Universalist god.”

    That seems to be the socially acceptable religion. I’m I watcher of ‘Supernatural.’ It’s12 seasons of killing all matter of supernatural creatures, but the interesting thing about the show’s mythology is that they treat the Bible as source material seriously. There have been various character arcs involving Satan, God (yes THE God), Cain, from Cain and Abel, and various angels and demons. Heaven, Hell, and Purgatory are all real and they take both Genesis and Revelations literally. The one Biblical character never mentioned? You guessed it: Jesus. He appears no where in the mythology and is never mentioned.

    Mike Street Station

    February 11, 2017 at 12:29 pm

    • Satan is much bigger in folk and modern Christianity than in the Bible. He just shows up a few times there, and is absent from most of the books. It isn’t even clear if all the bad angels in the Bible are the same character. Guy with horns living as king of the underworld encouraging evil is pretty pagan.


      February 11, 2017 at 2:12 pm

      • That’s the popular Christian depiction.

        Mike Street Station

        February 11, 2017 at 3:50 pm

      • Yes, but where does Satan show up in the Bible? In opposition to Jesus. Satan doesn’t bother make an appearance for ordinary folk. So, it is strange to be bringing up Satan but not Jesus.

        not too late

        February 13, 2017 at 8:01 am

  12. OT: How Obama is scheming to sabotage Trump’s presidency


    February 11, 2017 at 4:01 pm

    • Proles will abandon Trump very soon. No jobs, no money, and nothing else matters in America.


      February 11, 2017 at 4:57 pm

      • Proles will never abandond Trump. Trump has exceeded expextations thus far. Trimp is A+++++!


        February 11, 2017 at 7:07 pm

      • Yakov is correct. It’s very early but Trump has exceeded expectations. The establishment, globalists, msm and rent-a-mobs may be throwing tantrums. But I don’t think proles are buying it. They saw through it during the election and they’re not about to put the blinders back on.


        February 11, 2017 at 8:46 pm

      • “Proles will abandon Trump very soon. No jobs, no money, and nothing else matters in America.”

        Abandon him for whom? Go back to eating your poutine.


        February 11, 2017 at 10:51 pm

      • For nobody. I don’t eat poutine. It’s junk food.


        February 12, 2017 at 12:46 pm

      • If “pro-white” elites in America really wanted to help White America, bloodshed would have happened already.


        February 12, 2017 at 12:47 pm

      • JS may be a froggy wannabe. But his tastes run more towards ajvar.


        February 12, 2017 at 6:15 pm

      • Calling the French, frogs is prole to say the least!


        February 12, 2017 at 8:24 pm

    • I linked to that in another post that was oriented towards politics. I think Lion wants to clean up the blog.


      February 12, 2017 at 1:23 am

  13. I always thought that TV was for idiots. I don’t have one and none of my adult kids have one. So I realy, realy can’t understand why Lion, or UDJ, or Mike Street Station would watch these stupid shows or horrible whores like Lady Gaga or Katy Perry? Then I thought that maybe because I’m low IQ and low intelligence and take my time learning new things, I mean I’m slow, this is why I think that TV is stupid. Maybe it’s just the guys in the middle like me that feel this way? So TV is realy for idiots and realy smart guys somehow? There is hole in this theory though and that hole is Katy Perry, because no matter how smart you are she is still trash.

    Think, why would a normal guy waste his life on this nonsense? These shows are all fake anyway. The recent posts on law and politics were very good. Can you get analysis like this on TV from the talking heads? No way!

    JS, you watch these idiotic shows or not?


    February 11, 2017 at 7:23 pm

    • I don’t have one and none of my adult kids have one. So I realy, realy can’t understand why Lion, or UDJ, or Mike Street Station would watch these stupid shows or horrible whores like Lady Gaga or Katy Perry?

      I don’t subscribe to cable or even HBO Now since there’s nothing worth watching on it. I certainly do not listen to those two individuals.

      Then I thought that maybe because I’m low IQ and low intelligence and take my time learning new things, I mean I’m slow, this is why I think that TV is stupid.

      But you make up for with wisdom brought about by years of experience.

      What do you think of this* article? I discuss whether Stalin was a Progressive; my conclusion is ‘No’ because Stalin was too prole and heterosexual to be a Progressive. In fact homosexuality in Uncle Joe’s time, correct?


      Proletarian Socialism was led either by proles, those who were a generation or two from proledom, or former aristocrats who joined the proletarian cause.

      They were proles who looked like Josef Stalin, Leon Trotsky, Vladimir Lenin, Alexander Schliapnakov, Pyotr Kropotkin, Viktor Nogin, “The Iron Felix” Dzerzhinsky, Nestor Makhno, Alexei Rykov, Nikolai Krylenko, Lazar Kaganovich, Leon Kamenev, Nikolai Gorbunov, Mikhail Bakunin, Pavel Dybenko, Nikolai Bukharin, Ivan Teodorovich, Georgy Chicherin, and Lavrenti Beria.

      These Proletarian radicals were ferocious in appearance and action, meat eating, often bearded, cis-gendered, white male, tobacco using, vodka drinking, and heavily armed proles or prole sympathizers; robust proles as capable of chopping down trees to build a hideout cabin as they were breaking rocks in Siberian labor camps.

      By itself the physical difference between the Technocrats and Proletarian Socialists is so striking that one may also phrase their difference as – Eastern Bloc Communists were Proletarians who would inspire fear in a bar fight; Progressive Bureaucrats are “Communists” who would inspire laughter at their expense in a bar fight .

      Comrades, Stalin was a prole.

      His Progressive admirers in the West were not proles and therefore were never Communists; they were the weak characters Orwell as early as the 1930s already had trained his political radar on and who have only become weaker since.

      If anyone still holds to the argument Progressivism is Communism they must show how Progressive “Communists” can be both anti-proletarian, and in favor of class stratification.

      We see no way to reconcile tendencies so antithetical with Marxism; we doubt anyone can since Marx himself would rightly call Progressivism incompatible with Communism on class grounds.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      February 12, 2017 at 2:55 pm

    • Yakov — I’ve similarly been disappointed by people who should know better cooing over programs, pop music, etc. Though I admit to streaming some scifi/fantasy, etc; I agree that most of what’s on tv is crap. So I’ve set some rules to limit what I watch and how much time I spend doing it. Fortunately, limiting myself isn’t a problem because most of what’s on tv is propaganda, degenerate or just plain dumb.


      February 12, 2017 at 8:20 pm

  14. Like I was saying it’s just simple common sense:


    February 12, 2017 at 9:36 am

    • Another guy who should just write his thoughts down in a blog post instead of blathering in videos.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      February 12, 2017 at 9:39 am

      • He did put out a few books, I haven’t read any of them though. I dunno, maybe you shiuld go on youtube and put out a few clips, the guy has got 900,000 subscribers, how many have you got?


        February 12, 2017 at 9:59 am

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: