"Hannibal," Year One

Spoilers for the first season ahead.

I've had such a love hate relationship with this show. On the one hand it's one of the most visually interesting crime dramas on television, thanks to the efforts of Bryan Fuller and crew. The cast is also to die for, with Mads Mikkelsen as an irresistible new version of Dr. Hannibal Lecter, and good supporting work from Lawrence Fishburne, Caroline Dhavernas, and Gillian Anderson. Hugh Dancy is still not quite up to par, but his performance grew on me eventually. I like that the corpses of the week often make me physical recoil in a way that I hadn't since the weirder episodes of "The X-files." I like that the case-of-the-week format is largely abandoned by the second half of the season to focus on the interactions of the main cast and the fallout of a single case that had been solved in the first episode. And even when it is tracking down guest star murderers, it doesn't play by the rules, paying far less attention to working out the weekly mystery than exploring what the new mystery means for the increasingly tenuous mental state of Will Graham.

On the other hand, "Hannibal" is often a slog, featuring long, long dialogue scenes of Will in psychoanalysis and puzzling his way through the various motives of the murders. The show's cental conflict between the FBI and Hannibal is sometimes wonderfully tense and thrilling to watch, and sometimes feels like they are going around in endless circles, dragging things out. It doesn't help that nobody in this show talks like a normal person, not the agents, not the lab tech comic relief, and not even the teenage girls. Instead, it's reams of obsessive exposition, often in the form of repetitive arguments and interrogations. Aside from Hannibal, everyone seems eager to recite what they're feeling at any particular moment with hardly any cueing. This is necessary for a show that is so concerned with the inner workings of Will's mind and tracking Hannibal's manipulations, but sometimes they lay it on way too thick. Alana and Will's romance predictably goes nowhere because within a few seconds of making her attraction clear, Alana is reciting all the reasons why the pair wouldn't work together, providing a very professional self-diagnosis of all her neuroses.

More troubling are the constant logic leaps the audience is expected to swallow - Jack insisting that Abigail Hobbs should be investigated as an accomplice to murder with hardly any evidence, Will failing to get a second opinion after the mysterious death of his physician, and the remarkably rushed introduction and dispatching of Abigail's best friend who coincidentally looks almost exactly like she does. Lord Dark Helmet once declared that "evil will always triumph, because good is dumb," but this was pushing things. I'm usually pretty forgiving of genre shows, but I do expect the basic plotting to be more solid, especially when we're talking about a show where all the main cast members are highly intelligent FBI agents or doctors or both. I really dislike how Jack Crawford is too often about as perceptive as a brick. If I were to suggest any improvements for next season, it would be to ease up on the "Shining" references and pay more attention to ensuring that the characters' actions make sense.

Last night's finale episode was one of the strongest of the season, though, and provided some very satisfactory payoff to weeks of escalating tensions. I expect I'd like "Hannibal" better if I watched multiple episodes in one sitting, giving the febrile atmosphere more of a chance to work its way into my skull. I may have my reservations about the overly analytical dialogue, but it does fit this heightened, stylized world that "Hannibal" exists in, where the most horrific crimes are often rendered exquisite through Hannibal's dinners and the artfully arranged crime scenes. The show evokes the creeps on very visceral level, but often understated or intellectualized in a way that makes them much more effective. No other horror series I've seen, not even the more graphic "Dexter" and "American Horror Story," has been more consistently disturbing. And as often as it's dull, it can be very clever. I loved the final scene of last night's episode, with that wonderful reversal on the most famous Hannibal Lecter appearance.

And finally, it was all worth it for Mads Mikkelsen's version of Hannibal Lecter, who is one of the best television characters I've met in some time. I'm glad the show's creators haven't been afraid to depart from their source material and expand on the characters in such delightful ways. "Hannibal" is far darker and more daring that I could have every hoped for, and has turned out to be a very good fit for television. I'm not convinced it's as good as some of its fans insist, but I'm looking forward to next year.
---

Read More

Hitting the Wall With "Homeland"

This is my second attempt to start watching "Homeland," the much awarded, much praised Showtime drama that became a great big deal when it premiered two years ago. The first time around, I watched the free episode that was released when the show first premiered. Not impressed, I didn't give it another thought until all the accolades started rolling in and I started getting recommendations from friends. This time around, I got through another episode, but I still have no desire to go any further. To put it bluntly, the show bothers me on several levels.

Damian Lewis stars as Sergeant Nicholas Brody, a Marine who was held captive by Al Qaeda for eight years before being rescued and returned to the United States. Worried that Brody might have been compromised during his time as a POW, a CIA intelligence officer, Carrie Mathison (Claire Danes) begins a one-woman campaign to watch his every move with the help of the CIA's surveillance equipment. She spends much of the first two episodes installing and then utilizing all manner of hidden cameras and microphones to spy on Brody, his wife Jessica (Morena Baccarin), and their two children. When she's not doing that, she's busy trying to justify her actions and the intense level fo scrutiny to her boss, David Estes (David Harewood) and her mentor Saul Berenson (Mandy Patinkin). Carrie's ultimate goal is to track down the terrorist Abu Nazir (Navid Negahban), who Brody was in contact with during his imprisonment.

I don't have an issue with the basics of this premise. The subject matter is timely and the ideas are intriguing. However, I have no patience with the typical, unrealistic complications that have been included to add more drama. It's not enough that Carrie is an underdog at the CIA, obsessing over a threat that only she seems to believe is there. No, she has to be bipolar and emotionally unstable too, constantly on the verge of a mental breakdown. Sure, it's believable that Jessica Brody would have had an affair that now has to be kept under wraps since her husband has returned from the dead. But did the affair have to be with his very best friend Captain Faber (Diego Klattenhoff)? I found it difficult to watch these episodes of "Homeland" and not see all the seams and the structuring, all the little things designed to make the show more tense and exciting, while at the same time making it feel like generic Hollywood product, completely undermining its believability.

I think part of the problem is that I know that this isn't how intelligence gathering really works, and it's jarring to see the procedures being flaunted so flagrantly left and right. I have this problem with police and lawyer shows too, though my brain has learned to treat them as fantasy after years and years of exposure. "Homeland," however, makes many overtures toward being more realistic than other spy media, but it doesn't make quite enough of them. When I'm watching it, I'm stuck in this odd mental place between the starkly candid "Zero Dark Thirty" and the obviously fantastical James Bond movies, not clear on how much real world logic is applicable to the events I'm seeing unfold. The universe seems similar to the dodgy one that "24" used to inhabit, with more nudity and profanity because this is a premium cable show. I don't think the adult content helps much. It just makes the whole story feel more tawdry and salacious.

I can see how "Homeland" could get much, much better, and I'm sure that it does eventually. However, I find myself totally disinterested in what it's shaping up to be. To me, "Homeland" looks like another paranoid, gung-ho military fantasy about chasing down mysterious terrorist threats and unraveling plots set in motion by evil foreigners - and like so many other films and television shows in the same vein, it feels exploitative, reductive, fear-mongering, xenophobic, and downright distasteful at times. I find it very hard to get any entertainment value out of this as a result. There's too much focus on visceral thrills and emotional turmoil, to the point where the elevated tensions feel very artificial and contrived. Playing up and twisting real-world fears about terrorism like this makes me extremely uncomfortable, especially where there's no grounding context to speak of, and the subject matter is such sensitive stuff. I'm guessing the story will get more nuanced, but the terrible old cliches are killing it right now.

What's worse, I don't find a single character likeable or intriguing enough to want to see more of. Sure, I like all the actors involved here, and I'm thrilled for Claire Danes that she got to sink her teeth into such a substantial role at last. She's great as Carrie Mathison. However, I have no interest in watching Carrie Mathison continue to obsess about Sergeant Brody. I don't care what happens to him or his wife or the kids who look nothing like their mother. The only character I find sympathetic is one of Carrie's intelligence assets, who is almost certainly going to get herself killed off soon in a way that imparts the maximum amount of trauma and guilt on Carrie. And you know what? I don't particularly want to watch that happen. Maybe after I finish off a few more shows and I'm in the mood for something darker I can try to suck it up and tackle "Homeland" again.

But not today.
---

Read More

"Side Effects" and "Behind the Candelabra"

These are the last two Steven Soderbergh films for the foreseeable future, since Soderbergh has announced his retirement. "Side Effects" was theatrically released back in February and just hit home media. "Behind the Candelabra" was produced by HBO as a television movie and premiered over Memorial Day weekend. I managed to catch one of the repeats last week. The films have nothing to do with each other, except, perhaps, that they can be seen as examples of Soderbergh's occasional genre experiments. "Side Effects" is a psychological thriller, a little more of the Brian De Palma than the Hitchcock variety. "Candelabra," on the other hand, is a campy examination of the romantic pairing of the famously extravagant pianist Liberace, and a young man named Scott Thorson, who gets caught up in his fame and excess. I don't have enough to say about them to warrant individual reviews, so I'm writing them up together here.

"Side Effects" is one of those films that is more enjoyable the less you know going in, so I'll stick to the basics of the premise. A young woman named Emily (Rooney Mara) suffers from depression and is being treated by a psychiatrist, Dr. Banks (Jude Law). Her condition proves difficult to combat, and Banks is convinced to put her on a new drug, which leads to some very bad consequences. Channing Tatum and Catherine Zeta-Jones are also in the mix as Emily's husband and one of her former psychiatrists respectively. "Side Effects" depends entirely on the performances of these four actors, and they all deliver. Rooney Mara is particularly impressive as the afflicted Emily, whose state of mind is so important and so difficult to ascertain. The film only works as written because of Mara's ability to keep us guessing. Jude Law also does a lot of commendable heavy lifting, as he becomes our central POV character for a good chunk of the film.

I can admire "Side Effects" for its craft and its ambitions. However, I didn't enjoy this one very much. All the characters are pretty terrible people, which meant I didn't care one way or another what happened to them. As good as the machinations of the plot played out, their impact was muted because I found it hard to connect with one side or another. Rooney Mara's Emily is fascinating, but remote, a puzzle of a woman whose claimed motivations sound like they could be just another layer of deception. Dr. Banks is initially positioned as the good guy, but quickly becomes just as despicable as everyone he believes is machinating against him. "Side Effects" too often feels like it's going through the motions, giving Soderbergh a chance to play with familiar genre conventions. There are some original ideas in the mix, and I enjoyed the early discussions of mental health treatments and medical ethics in particular. However, once the mystery elements kicked in, that all faded into the background very quickly. "Side Effects" is a very good film, but you get exactly what you'd expect..

"Behind the Candelabra" is more fun. Those of you hoping for a conventional Liberace biopic may be disappointed, because the movie focuses solely on the relationship of Liberace (Michael Douglas) and his much younger lover Scott Thorson (Matt Damon) during the late 70s and early 80s. Liberace is still famous and beloved, but getting on in years when he and Thorson first meet. The story is told entirely from Thorson's POV, and much of it concerns his gradual descent into drugs and emotional turmoil as the relationship goes from blissful to bitter to bizarre over the years. Buying into Liberace's lifestyle of easy hedonism and excess takes its toll, and the movie follows the arc of so many other drug memoirs and cautionary tales about the good life. What separates "Candelabra" from other made-for-TV tell-alls is that it has a great sense of humor about itself. You've got Michael Douglas, Matt Damon, and several other familiar faces willing to make themselves look utterly ridiculous in all manner of makeup and garish 70s fashions, and turning up their performances to gloriously campy heights.

I wish I was more familiar with Liberace, because I had trouble gauging Michael Douglas's performance. How much were Liberace's mannerisms and the voice exaggerated? The flamboyant persona works wonderfully when he's onstage performing, but is less convincing when he's not. Or is that the point Soderbergh and Douglas were trying to make? Ultimately "Candelabra" shows some affection for Liberace and what he stood for, but only after gleefully getting us acquainted with all of his secret vices and indulgences and bad habits. A word of warning - if you're not comfortable with onscreen sexuality of the same-sex kind, you may want to give this a pass. Nothing ever gets pornographic, but the portrayal of Liberace and Thorson's sex life is pretty candid. At times I thought it was a little too candid, but it did help to give the picture an unusual degree of intimacy. Even if you find these people ridiculous, as I did, you'll find yourself sympathizing with them.

"Behind the Candelabra" seems an odd choice for Soderbergh to end his filmmography with, but then his filmmography is full of outliers, so I guess it's fitting. I'm not sure if "Candelabra" is a good film. I suspect it may be a bad film with really exceptional execution. However, it's definitely a memorable one, and worth seeing. I'm a little less inclined to recommend "Side Effects," but only because there are so many other films like it. If you're in the mood for psychological thriller, it should certainly fit the bill. And if this is really it for Soderbergh, I think it's safe to say that he quit while he was ahead. So good for him.

Happy watching.
---

Read More

"Person of Interest," Year Two

As we work our way through sweeps, it's time to check in on "Person of Interest," which has been developing nicely in its second year. It started out as a crime procedural with some conspiracy elements and vaguely sci-fi concepts. Now it's handily juggling storylines involving organized crime, police corruption, government cover-ups, espionage, cyberterrorism, and a surprisingly strong dose of good, old-fashioned cyberpunk - with better fashion sense. "Person of Interest" has been particularly good at parsing out information, a little at a time, particularly the sequence of events that led Harold Finch (Michael Emerson) to his current cause, using the Machine to help people in need. Despite all the memorable antagonists he and John Reese (Jim Caviezel) have faced this year, it's the revelations about the past that had all the best moments. Some minor spoilers ahead.

First, let me acknowledge the new additions and the expanded roles of the show's ever-growing recurring cast. Alonzo Quinn (Clarke Peters) and Officer Simmons (Robert John Burke) were introduced as the top of the chain of the criminal HR organization, mostly keeping the pressure on Detective Fusco (Kevin Chapman) as he struggled to stay on the side of angels. Detective Cal Beecher (Sterling K. Brown), got a nice arc as a love interest for Detective Carter (Taraji P. Henson), who also may have been mixed up with HR. Nathan Ingram (Brett Cullen) and Grace Hendricks (Carrie Preston) got a lot of screen time as figures from Finch's past, while Kara Stanton (Annie Parisse) and Mark Snow (Michael Kelly) from the CIA showed up for a few episodes to complicate Reese's present. Amy Acker is far and away the show's best villain as the hacker Root, who walks that fine line between crazy and true believer. Every time she kidnaps Finch is a treat. Then there's the weaselly, but helpful Leon Tao (Ken Leung) and government assassin Samantha Shaw (Sarah Shahi), who become regular allies. Oh, and we can't forget Bear, the Belgian Shepherd attack dog who Reese adopted at the beginning of the season. He's become a great source of humor and a way to inject a little more humanity into his human partners.

It's surprising when you look back and see how much happened this season. All four of the leads, Finch, Reese, Carter, and Fusco got their own recurring storylines, and there was frequent switching around among them. You'd get Fusco battling HR one week, Carter navigating her relationship with Beecher in another, and then Reese getting an arc with the CIA to break things up. I found it especially clever that most of the flashbacks with Finch tended to happen in the case-of-the-week episodes that otherwise could be treated as filler. Even more impressive, it never felt like any of the conflicts or mysteries were being dragged out for too long. We got some very definite answers this year about the nature of the botched mission that Reese and Kara Stanton were sent on, about the loyalties of Fusco and Beecher, and lots of details about the Machine. The character who got the most development this year was arguably the Machine itself, which was revealed to be sentient at the end of last season, and this year has to battle a destructive virus, multiple factions trying to gain control of it, and finally a game-changing finale event that shifts the show's power dynamics considerably. I don't think there's a single of the series' big mysteries that didn't see some significant advancement this year, and a few were even resolved completely.

Week to week, "Person of Interest" certainly had its mediocre episodes. The big action setpieces with all the fancy weaponry were used sparingly, mostly saved for the episodes right before or after a breaks. The production wasn't quite as good as the best episodes from last year, but the quality remained very high and very consistent, with some especially spiffy new twists on the surveillance footage visuals. The writing rarely devolved into technobabble, but there was the usual reliance on technology so sophisticated it functions like magic, and the super-cool action hero antics of Mr. Reese and Shaw occasionally bordered on the cartoonish. These were the two characters who I don't think got as much attention as they probably should have, especially Shaw, who was introduced late in the year and abruptly became a major player. Mr. Reese, true to his name, is still rocking his mysterious Man-in-Suit persona, but considering how much we've learned about all of our other leads, he's starting to come off as a little two-dimensional by comparison, and the mannerisms increasingly seem affected.

Well, there's always next season to tackle those issues, and considering how much the second season got done, the third shouldn't have too much trouble getting Reese lined up for growth spurt. Maybe get Paige Turco's fixer character Zoe involved - she's always a highlight, and her appearances this year were too brief. "Person of Interest" moves to Tuesdays in the fall. Stay tuned.
---

Read More

Making Time for "The Hour"

Set in the 1956 UK, "The Hour" give us a behind-the-scenes look at the workings of a fictional BBC news magazine show, also titled "The Hour," billed as one of the first programs of its kind. The action centers on three characters: producer Bel Rowley (Romola Garai), fighting to prove herself in a male-dominated profession, her best friend Freddie Lyons (Ben Whishaw), a brilliant reporter with a difficult personality, and Hector Madden (Dominic West), the presenter with all the right connections. We see the intrigues, the politicking, and the fights with the censors, as they strive to push the journalistic envelope. To make things even more interesting, the first series involves a murder investigation and espionage conspiracy, while the second goes after a vice ring and police corruption.

Created by Abi Morgan, who scripted "Shame" and "The Iron Lady," "The Hour" is a top-of-the-line production, with beautiful period settings, compelling subject matter, and all the right talent involved. The first episode meanders a bit, but when the story gets going, it can be difficult to stop watching. I've seen other reviews compare "The Hour" to "Mad Men" because of the similar era and the focus on workplace tensions and sexy extracurricular activities. "The Hour" is smaller in scale, though, only having six episodes in each series and a smaller cast of characters. It really only tackles one major historical event, the Suez Canal crisis and the military aggression that followed. It also has considerably more straightforward storytelling, using a standard detective framework for each year's ongoing investigations. Nowhere to be found are any deeper, moodier meditations on living through the troubled era. Rather, "The Hour" resembles a lively crime serial as much as it resembles a serious social drama.

This isn't a bad thing, at all. "The Hour" may not have the ambitions or the thematic richness of "Mad Men," but it is still a smartly written and extraordinarily well-acted show. It's formula is familiar, but it knows how to do that formula well. Without question, the show's biggest assets are Ben Whishaw and Romola Garai as Lyons and Rowley, whose friendship is the bedrock of the series. Rowley is being given a major opportunity to prove herself, but is doubtful of her abilities, while Lyons is one of those insufferable, self-righteous young idealists who's always right and loves to prove it. They have an affectionate, sibling-like relationship where they argue and banter with each other. It's a lot of fun to just watch them do the walk-and-talk. Underlining the relative lightness of the show's tone, their nicknames for each other are "James" and "Moneypenny."

Dominic West as Hector Madden is positioned as the outsider, who quickly becomes entangled in both their lives when they all find themselves reluctant colleagues. He and Rowley quickly start making eyes at each other, while initially antagonistic encounters with Lyons evolve into something more mutually beneficial. West has the character with the most shades of gray, and the most potential for some in-depth social commentary, but doesn't get the chance to explore Hector's deeper recesses as much as I'd have liked to see. The plot tends to background him in the first season, so he never feels quite on the level of the other two. Still, West makes the most of his chances to shine, and it's good to see him back in front of the camera.

Backing up the trio are a wealth of strong supporting performances - Anton Lesser as the avuncular Head of News, Clarence Fendley, Joshua McGuire and Anna Chancellor as other newsroom contributors, Julian Rhind-Tutt as Angus McCain, an antagonistic government press liaison, Peter Capaldi in a second series role that is a massive spoiler, and Oona Chaplin as Hector's upper-crust wife Marnie. And I want to single out Burn Gorman, who has a small but important part in the first series as suspicious reporter, Thomas Kish. it's one of those performances that is so instantly memorable, I couldn't believe that I had never noticed the actor responsible before - and I've seen Gorman in plenty of other movies and television shows before this.

Sadly "The Hour" was cancelled after only two series and twelve episodes, and ends on a cliffhanger that will never be resolved. It's nowhere near as daring or as cutting-edge as the fictional program it examines, but "The Hour" makes the most of its material, delivering some terrifically tense and exciting hours of television. It's also a pretty easy watch, in spite of its torrents of literate dialogue, so I can happily recommend it to the people who prefer the lighter crime shows like "Sherlock" and "Luther" to the moral murkiness of "Mad Men." On the flip side, if you prefer the character drama of "Mad Men," "The Hour" has a couple of fascinating figures that are worth seeking out.
---

Read More

"Hannibal" Comes to Dinner

I'm not sure what I was expecting when NBC announced that they were doing a television show about the early days of Hannibal Lecter, but I didn't think that they'd go so far as to make "Hannibal" an actual horror program. We've seen some fairly intense and violent crime procedurals in recent years, like the early days of "Criminal Minds," but "Hannibal" pushes much farther, giving us shocking, yet tasteful blood and gore in amounts I don't believe I've ever seen on network television before. We're not in "American Horror Story" or "Dexter" territory, but it's pretty close.

This is only one of many interesting elements that "Hannibal" has going for it. However, this is one of those series that looks like it's going to need some time for the actors to settle into their roles, and for the writers to work out the dynamics of the characters' relationships. For instance, there's our main character, Will Graham (Hugh Dancy), a criminal profiler with the FBI, who has been reimagined as having unusually strong empathy that he can use to place himself in the mindset of killers and work out their motives and intentions. The price of this gift is severe social anxiety and other autism spectrum impediments. He has to be coaxed into participating in the FBI's latest serial killer manhunt by Agent Crawford (Laurence Fishburne). Dancy makes Graham nervous and awkward and a bit of a mumbler. He's not compelling yet, but he could be, depending on where his character arc takes him.

And then we have Mads Mikkelsen, the Danish actor who was recruited for a new take on Dr. Hannibal Lecter. His thick accent requires some sharp attention to penetrate, but he brings such a great presence to the screen. Lecter is not the subject of tonight's first manhunt, but rather a highly respected psychiatrist and forensic scientist who is brought in to consult on the case, eventually partnering up with Will Graham. The creators have a lot of fun hinting at his future depravities, showing multiple scenes of him eating servings of meat with carnivorous relish, and advising a nervous patient on the nature of fear. Lecter doesn't do much in the first episode, and doesn't even appear onscreen until the halfway mark. However, it is quickly established that his degree of moral turpitude is murky at best. He helps both sides in the case, exuding the appropriate amounts of charisma and menace as needed. No Anthony Hopkins impersonations here. None needed.

A few other characters are briefly introduced, including Dr. Alana Bloom (Caroline Dhavernas), another profiler who Agent Crawford goes to for help, and who the previews suggest will become Will Graham's major love interest. Hettienne Park, Aaron Abrams, and Scott Thompson (yes, from "Kids in the Hall") pop up as crime scene investigators, who provide rounds of helpful exposition with each new corpse. This is going to be a very dialogue-heavy show, as most crime procedurals are, and it's clear that our two leads haven't quite got the hang of delivering the usual verbal torrents of information yet. This is especially apparent when they're in a scene with Fishburne, a veteran of multiple seasons of "CSI."

This is where all the guts and gore really help. The snazzy technological tomfoolery of your average "CSI" episode has nothing on viscerality of the beautifully staged crime scenes and Will Graham's visions of bloody violence in "Hannibal." And this is where you really see the hand of the show's creator, Bryan Fuller, who was previously responsible for the whimsical worlds of "Pushing Daisies" and "Mockingbird Lane." "Hannibal" shows he's pretty handy with lurid Grand Guignol horrors too. I only wish that all the graphic content could have been put in service of a better script. For a first outing it's not bad, but there's plenty of room for improvement.

One thing to note is that "Hannibal" is being described as a limited series by NBC, which means only thirteen episodes to a season, faster payoff for major arcs, and hopefully a higher level of quality overall. It's a good sign that they're already pushing the envelope as far as the content, which means that we're more likely to see Dr. Lecter and friends get to the really dark and twisted places where they ultimately need to go. Bryan Fuller has mentioned in interviews that he wants to get to the events of "Red Dragon," the first of Thomas Harris' Lecter books, by season four.

I hope the series survives long enough to get there. The Thursday night 10PM timeslot has not been kind to NBC, having killed off several promising crime shows in recent years, including "Prime Suspect" and "Awake." Will it finally meet its match in Dr. Hannibal Lecter? Guess we'll have to stay tuned to see.
---

Read More

Regarding "Psychopaths"

"Seven Psychopaths" looks so good on paper. A struggling screenwriter named Marty (Colin Farrell), is trying to write a screenplay based only on a title, "Seven Psychopaths." However, he's distracted by the schemes of his pal Billy (Sam Rockwell), who kidnaps dogs to return them for the reward money. Billy's partner in dognapping is Hans (Christopher Walken), whose wife Myra (Linda Bright Clay) is in the hospital for cancer treatments. One day Billy and Hans grab the wrong dog, a little Shih Tzu named Bonny who belongs to the gangster Charlie Costello (Woody Harrelson). Other characters in the mix include a mysterious "Jack of Diamonds" killer who targets members of organized crime, Costello's lovely girlfriend Angela (Olga Kurylenko), a gentleman named Zachariah (Tom Waits), who used to be one half of a Bonnie-and-Clyde serial killer team, and a Vietnamese soldier (Long Nguyen) out for revenge.

"Psychopaths" is the brain child of Irish writer and director Martin McDonagh, who was also responsible for "In Bruges." I’ve been a fan of his for a long time, and I can see what he was going for here. This is a dark, dark satire of the action movie genre with a lot of self-referential, self-critical meta humor, that also takes a genuine stab at addressing several different forms and expressions and treatments of violence. McDonagh's script is frequently clever, has a wonderful puzzle-box structure, and is occasionally very touching. However, it's also wildly inconsistent, has too much going on, and it's hard to feel any sympathy for a pair of lead characters who spend so much time psychoanalyzing themselves through their screenplay, but feel like hastily thrown-together constructs, made of convenient tropes. I had a lot of trouble with Sam Rockwell's Billy, whose arc goes through a bunch of twisted convolutions that just didn't hold together. I could buy a lot of the wild coincidences and moments of action movie logic that the story depends on, but the twists involving Billy weren't properly set up and come off as pretty contrived.

Then again, you could argue that this is the point. "Seven Psychopath" presents itself as a deliberate critique on all the common fallacies of action movies, from the over-the-top badass combatants to the awful female characters (Abbie Cornish briefly appears as Marty's girlfriend) to increasingly outlandish confrontations. McDonagh doesn't push too far, saving the most ridiculous final standoff scenario for a proposed ending to the screenplay that Billy breathlessly describes to Marty with lots of kablooey sound effects. Then again, maybe the movie would have worked a bit better if he had. "Seven Psychopath" never gets as deliriously dark and biting as it could, because McDonagh does want you to care about the characters to some extent, and to consider his take on screen violence with some seriousness. He takes great pains to make sure that some of the deaths have real emotional impact, and shows that the act of killing can have unforeseen consequences. He also presents some thoughtful examples of positive violence to contrast with the usual senseless, negative variety. Some of this works to great effect. Some of it doesn't.

The film is at its best when taken scene by scene, piece by piece. There are some great performances here, particularly from Woody Harrelson and Christopher Walken, who gets one of the few really multilayered, memorable parts. Here is an oddball elderly man who has had a rough past, but dearly loves his ailing wife and has had time to reflect on the nature of his misdeeds. His attitude toward violence is the most informed one, and Walken is wonderful in the role, walking that thin line between kookiness and enlightenment. Harrelson's emotional mobster is broader, but he summons such wonderful humor and menace. Some of the film's best scenes involve his tense face-offs with other characters. Then there's Tom Waits, who shows up with a rabbit in his arms and a story to tell. He doesn't seem to be operating quite in the same universe as anyone else, but he makes such an impression that I wished we could have been watching a movie set in whatever universe his character was inhabiting.

There is a lot to get out of "Seven Psychopaths." Too much, maybe. Ultimately, I think McDonagh bit off a little more than he could chew. The ideas all have a lot of potential, but the execution needs work. There were tonal shifts and big reveals and stories within stories that I could see being very effective if they were handled right. McDonagh's not quite at the level to make something this complicated work the way he wants it to. There were a couple of big moments that fell completely flat for me, and a couple of obvious bits of symbolism and character parallels that didn't add up to much of anything. I really enjoy McDonagh as a writer, but his screenplays have been very hit-or-miss so far. And as a director, I think he needs to work a little harder.
---

Read More

The Next Movies Becoming TV Shows

It's pilot season in Hollywood, and we're about to get a new crop of television shows based on movies. This is a trend that has been around for decades, and has yielded plenty of classics. Some movie premises worked better as television shows, like "MASH" and "Buffy the Vampire Slayer." So I'm going to take a look at five of the movie-based series, currently in development, that may be coming soon to a small screen near you. I'm leaving out "Marvel's S.H.I.E.L.D.," which is really a spin-off of the Marvel films, and will only be featuring one or two of the minor characters, existing very much on the sidelines of the ongoing movie franchise.

"Beverly Hills Cop" (CBS) - The 80s action comedy series is becoming an hour-long police procedural. Brandon T. Jackson of "Tropic Thunder" fame will star as Axel Foley's son Aaron, a young police officer following his dad's footsteps. "The Shield" creator Shawn Ryan is on board as producer, and Barry Sonnenfeld is directing the pilot. No word yet on whether Axel himself will be stopping by the Beverley Hills Police Department to check up on his son. Interviews suggest that the tone of the show will stay light, but it won't be an out-and-out comedy. The original film series was heavily dependent on the charisma of Eddie Murphy, and new version without him might not work. However, between 80s nostalgia and the public's love of police procedurals, I can certainly see why the studios decided that a reboot deserved a shot.

"Bad Teacher" (CBS) - Remember the 2011 summer comedy starring Cameron Diaz? It did all right at the box office, but not well enough that anyone is clamoring for a sequel. However, CBS thought the premise has potential as a half-hour comedy, and is in the process of transmogrifying it into sitcom form. Ari Graynor will replace Cameron Diaz, and the new cast also includes David Alan Grier and Ryan Hansen. The raunch and the foul language of the movie is going to have to be toned way, way down for television audiences, to the point where I doubt the series will bear much resemblance to the film. Still, the concept of an immature, irresponsible female teacher looking for love should have plenty of legs. Television is generally friendlier to female-led comedies than the movies are, so the TV "Bad Teacher" may actually have a better shot there.

"About A Boy" (NBC) - A decade ago, "About a Boy" was a decent sized hit, but I have no idea what prompted writer-executive producer Jason Katims to decide that now was the time to revisit the property and convert it into half-hour sitcom form. Still, this is the guy who resurrected "Friday Night Lights" and "Parenthood" as critically acclaimed television series, so I'm not inclined to question his instincts. FOX actually tried to turn "About a Boy" into a series way back in 2003 with a different creative team, but nothing came of it. This time, they’ve gotten as far as a pilot directed by John Favreau. No word on casting yet, but considering the scarcity of Hugh Grant over the past few years, and the rate that major movie stars have been doing television projects, I don’t think it’s outside the realm of possibility that he’d consider returning to the role.

"The Joneses" (Bravo) - This David Duchovny and Demi Moore indie was released in theaters in 2010, but hardly anyone saw it. That's a shame, because the idea at its core was a fascinating one. The main characters are employees of an advertising agency who are hired to live together as a fake family, push products to their neighbors, and encourage them to keep up with the Joneses (Get it?). Bravo has ordered a pilot as part of its first foray into scripted programming, after ABC took a shot at development. Considering how the movie ended, the television series will likely be a total reboot. Since so few people saw the original "Joneses," it should escape being called a retread. However, I'm not sure about Bravo's claim that it will speak "to the Bravo brand of great aspirational female-driven upscale worlds.” My irony alarm is going off.

"Zombieland" (Amazon) - And finally, Amazon is hot to catch up with Netflix in the production of its own content. It has ordered a half-hour comedy pilot based on 2009's "Zombieland." A sequel never quite came together though there was a lot of interest in one, and the possibility of a television adaptation has been lobbed around Hollywood for a while. Amazon finally took the initiative. The film's original writers have scripted the pilot, and three of the four leads have been recast so far. The zombie craze is still going strong this year, so I expect this one to have a high chance of success. On the other hand, Amazon's distribution system isn't quite where Netflix's is at the moment, and I'm not sure if they have the subscriber base to support a show like this. There are a lot of different factors that could affect this one, so stay tuned.

Happy watching!
---

Read More

"The Wire" Wrap-Up

When I first started watching "The Wire," it was with one question in mind. Is this really the best dramatic series that has ever been made, as claimed by so many of its fans? After sixty episodes, I'm inclined to say yes. And I'm also inclined to point out that the show is a total fluke that we may never see the likes of again.

I've been reading up on "The Wire" since I finished the series, and what strikes me about most of the coverage is how far under the radar it was for most of its run. It never won a single Emmy, and its only major nominations were for writing. Most of the cast is still working regularly, but there were no breakout stars. A possible exception is Idris Elba, and that was really only due to his follow-up roles in his native UK. The ratings were dismal throughout the entire run of "The Wire," even for a premium service like HBO. The critics always liked it, but nobody pays attention to TV critics, and probably never will. The only reason the fourth and fifth seasons exist at all is because the HBO executives liked the storylines enough to take a major risk on their success. That risk wouldn't pay off until years later, after the show became a cult hit.

And it has become a hit. References to "The Wire" have crept into the mainstream culture. Omar Little and Stringer Bell have quietly become minor icons. Audiences continue to hear about "The Wire" mostly through word-of-mouth and watch it through the DVD sets. All sixty episodes ran on BBC2 in the UK a few years ago, eventually attracting an audience several times the size of its original audience in the US, despite a smaller overall population. It actually became the source of some mild handwringing in 2009 by the British media, who held it up as a prime example of quality American drama, and wondered in multiple editorials why their television industry couldn't come up with anything in the same vein. Of course, "The Wire" could not have existed anywhere else but HBO, a premium subscription channel that has the luxury of not worrying too much about ratings and cost overruns. The serialized story, difficult material, and unusual level of realism - the major elements that "The Wire" has won so much praise for - would have made it a difficult sell even to basic cable audiences. It wouldn't have lasted beyond a season on the major broadcast networks, or even half a season the way things have been going lately.

HBO and other content producers are still responsible for plenty of innovative and socially relevant and challenging shows, but rarely do all of these qualities converge in a single program quite the same way as they did in "The Wire," and it was really the combination of all these factors that made the show one of the greats. "Game of Thrones" is a complicated serial told on a huge scale, and "Veep" has plenty of social critique, and "Girls" pushes lots of social boundaries, but only "The Wire" did all of these things at once. The impact of the series has also proven to be fairly limited. While "The Sopranos" created a genre of anti-hero centered dramas including "Breaking Bad" and "Boardwalk Empire," there hasn't been much eagerness to follow in the footsteps of "The Wire." We still see plenty of police and lawyer shows, but nobody is interested in looking at the bigger picture the way David Simon and crew did.

The potential for creating shows on the same level as "The Wire" is still there, which I find encouraging, but I don't see much desire to try. After all, even HBO has to pay attention to the bottom line. During the run of "The Wire," two other little watched, but much beloved series were cancelled before their time: "Deadwood" and "Carnivale." Meanwhile, David Simon's "Treme," considered the spiritual successor to "The Wire," will be ending this year after a truncated fourth season. While I enjoy "Game of Thrones," I worry that HBO and its imitators are going to look toward more genre shows in the future, leaving more interesting dramatic experiments on the shelf. "The Wire" proved that a show about difficult social issues with unusual characters could be compelling entertainment, but the longer it remains the only one of its kind, the more it becomes an exception to the rule.

I'm glad "The Wire" exists, that the right conditions were there and all the stars were aligned to allow for its creation. However, at the same time this looks like a once-in-a-generation media event that largely came about thanks to luck and good timing. Instead of comparing "The Wire" to "Oz" or "The Sopranos," the one piece of television I see the most similarities to is the 1977 "Roots" miniseries, which was also a total fluke, and never truly matched in its category by anything that followed.
---

Read More

"The Wire" Year Five

Minor spoilers below.

The last season of "The Wire" is noticeably truncated, down to ten episodes instead of the usual twelve or thirteen. After such a showstopper of a fourth season, year five is also inevitably a step down from that former high. That's not to say that the season isn't still excellent, that the major storylines don't progress as they should, or that the show's creators don't continue to deliver great drama and great social commentary. Targeting the media, in the form of the Baltimore Sun newsroom, yielded some strong storylines that I wish would have played out even further. However, it's hard to ignore that the season's central crime story involves a gimmick similar to the creation of Hamsterdam in season three. In this instance, the Major Crimes Unit is unable to keep working the Marlo Stanfield case because of cutbacks on the police department. So Jimmy McNulty, having backslid into self-destructive behavior, cooks up a fake serial killer to get the money rolling again. Of course, the deception soon grows too big for him to handle, and threatens to spiral out of control.

The reporters and editors of the Baltimore Sun are instrumental in the spreading of the fake story. Our major POV character here is Gus Haynes (Clark Johnson) the city editor of the paper, dealing with a shrinking staff and limited resources. Young reporters Scott Templeton (Thomas McCarthy) and Alma Gutierrez (Michelle Paress) fight to land front page bylines while the management, led by Thomas Klebanow (David Constabile) and James Whiting (Sam Freed), are out of touch and too willing to let transgressions slide if it suits their interests. I expected the media storyline to be more sensationalist, but "The Wire" is more interested in establishing how the newsroom is plagued by the same problems that everyone else in the city is facing: not enough money, a leadership driven by greed and politics, and numerous systemic dysfunctions. Though I don't think that the media storyline turns out to be one of the better ones in the series, it's still a far more thoughtful portrayal of the media than I've seen in just about any other television show. You also get a sense that the show's writers are having more fun with this material, indulging in more florid language and literary allusions than usual.

However, it's the continuing storylines that I stayed more invested in, and found more rewarding. Bubbles, who I was worried would be heading for a bitter end after hitting rock bottom last season, manages to stay clean this season. His redemption is honestly a little hokier than I think was necessary, particularly his interactions with reporter Mike Fletcher (Brandon Young), but it provides a good antidote to the overwhelming cynicism that characterizes so much of the later seasons. Watching Michael and Dukie slip further into the grasp of the street is depressing, especially when it becomes clear what Michael's eventual profession is going to be. Marlo's gang has been a poor substitute for the Barksdale organization, but the show still gets me to feel for Marlo and Snoop in the end. And then there's Omar, who along with Bubbles has survived all the way to the fifth season, and feels like one of the characters who really embodies what the series is all about. Here's a hardened criminal with no remorse about what he does, yet who also operates by a code of deeply-held morals and displays great loyalty. And he's the one who ends up having a major hand in delivering justice, more so than most of the police.

The political storylines have been very solid since they were first introduced in the third season, and hit a new high point here. Carcetti's back and forth with the police department keeps him conflicted and frustrated enough to still be mildly sympathetic, even as he sells out his city more and more blatantly with each passing episode. We finally get to see the outcome of the ongoing Daniels storyline involving his potential ascension to Police Commissioner, which proves wholly satisfying to see play out. I wish I could say the same of the our protagonists in law enforcement, but the fake serial killer storyline never came off quite right. I could buy Hamsterdam as the experiment of a single misguided commander cashing in a lot of goodwill, or an unethical reporter blowing a smaller lie of McNulty's all out of proportion, but there were too many smart characters who got drawn into the mess, and kept it going, to sustain any believability. You had to essentially turn McNulty into a suicidal nutter and drag Lester Freamon down with him. Bunk, of all people, was left being the reasonable one!

But even if I wasn't thrilled with the bigger storylines of this season, it was still gratifying to be able to check in with familiar faces like Herc, Carver, Cutty, Randy, Beadie, Prez, and Colvin, if only for a minor scene here and there. I'm not clear on when the writers found out that the fifth season of "The Wire" would be the last, but they did manage to create a good sense of finality about the final episodes. At the same time, it's clear that the show could have gone on considerably longer.

I'll be back with wrap up thoughts on the series in a couple of days.
---

Read More

"The Wire" Year Three

Minor spoilers ahead.

Each season of "The Wire" looks at the institutional dysfunctions of Baltimore from a different perspective. The first year we were introduced to the major players in the local drug trade and the police. The second year moved the action to the docks. Year three returns to the streets, reuniting the audience with all the major players from year one - Avon Barksdale, Stringer Bell, Omar, Bubbles, and the rest. Officers McNulty and Greggs are hot on the trail once again, as part of Lieutenant Daniels' Major Crimes Unit. However, this time the show's sights are set considerably broader, and more time is devoted to characters higher up in the chain of command. Deputy Commissioner Rawls and Acting Commissioner Burrell are more prominent, and Major Howard Colvin (Robert Wisdom), commander of the city's Western district, becomes one of the season's major characters. New faces include Tommy Carcetti (Aidan Gillen), an ambitious city councilman, Mayor Royce (Glynn Turman), and political consultant Theresa D'Agostino (Brandy Burre).

It took me a few episodes to catch on, but the system that the third season explores is the political infrastructure that encompasses the police, and how genuine attempts at reform are frustrated by various forces. The season starts with the destruction of the Towers, the apartment complexes that were major drug dealing sites during the first season. This reflects an increased pressure to reduce crime, coming from the politicians as they jockey for power. However, law enforcement is hampered by a lack of funds and the usual dysfunctions of the system. Major Colvin strikes upon the idea to push all the dealers into special zones where the drug trade will be ignored, thereby removing their presence from the rest of the Western district. The zones are set up in secret and nicknamed "Hamsterdam." They end up at the center of several of the season's major storylines, which range from Carcetti's efforts to get himself elected to higher office to Stringer Bell's attempts to become a legitimate businessman. Bell is hampered by his unfamiliarity with the ins and outs of real estate development, and the return of Avon Barksdale. The final major new character in the mix is Cutty Wise (Chad Coleman), a former major player in the drug trade who returns to the streets after a long stint in prison, facing an uncertain future.

More than either of the two previous seasons, year three of "The Wire" is an anthology of interconnected stories, examining the larger situation from several different angles. The members of the Major Crime Unit are still in the mix, but their investigation into the Barksdale operation feels more incidental this time, and there are other events going on that are of equal or greater importance. The broader scope and the departure from formula open up the show considerably. Compared to the second season, where each reappearance of one of the Barksdale gang members felt like a digression from the big case, the third season is better able to combine all these disparate personal stories into a single, satisfying whole. Season Three also sees the satisfying payoff of several story threads continued from the previous seasons (occasionally when you least expect them), and sets up a few more.

It helps that the players that "The Wire" chooses to focus its attention on here are extremely strong. Major Colvin is one of the show's most fascinating additions, an officer who clearly cares about his community and is is willing to take a major risk to effect a positive change. Unfortunately, he doesn't appreciate how much risk he's really taking on, or how his actions will be perceived and used by others. How his good intentions become twisted and turned against him is one of the show's most tragic stories. It's disappointing that Robert Wisdom hasn't been given a role as remotely interesting before or since. Then there's the significant time spent building up Carcetti and Cutty Wise, who are not especially important characters for most of the season, but provide invaluable insights and POVs. Of course, the show's regulars are still hard at work. Stringer Bell, Avon Barksdale, and Omar continue to impress.

The universe of "The Wire" is quickly becoming one of the richest, and most well-realized in all of television. The most exciting part is that there are still two years to go, and all this ground work has been laid for so many possible storylines in the future. "The Wire" could really go anywhere from here, returning to the examination of a smaller system like the Baltimore schools, which I know is coming up in Season Four, or pushing even bigger and more expansive.

I'm still not convinced at this point that "The Wire" is the greatest TV drama ever made, but by the time we're done, I can certainly see how it could be.
---

Read More

Digging Into "Zero Dark Thirty"

I have a few bones to pick with the marketing for "Zero Dark Thirty," which allows it to be easily confused for a typical Hollywood action spectacular, and muddles its intentions. For those who are going to see the film curious to learn how the CIA managed to track down Osama bin Laden, the answer is long and complicated, and requires facing some ugly realities about what the U.S. government was willing to do in order to win the war on terror. And it leaves the audience with far more questions to grapple with, and perhaps some may leave the theater regretting that they peeked behind the curtain.

"Zero Dark Thirty" is only very briefly an action film, during an intense climax sequence recreating the raid on the bin Laden compound in Abbottabad. For the two preceding hours, it is the long, slow, harrowing story of a CIA operative code named Maya (Jessica Chastain) who spends long years gathering intelligence on Al Qaeda, chasing down potential leads on the location of Osama bin Laden. We first meet her as she is participating in her first interrogation and torture of a detainee, Ammar (Reda Kateb), in an undisclosed CIA Black Site prison. Initially Maya is visibly shaken by the casual cruelty displayed by Dan (Jason Clarke), a more seasoned officer tasked with showing her the ropes. However, as time goes by, she becomes acclimated to using these tactics herself, and her obsession with tracking down bin Laden grows.

We never learn much about Maya, but it's suggested that there isn't much to learn. She has given her entire life to the job, and her few friends are co-workers like Jessica (Jennifer Ehle) and Jack (Harold Perrineau), who she spends most of her time with. However, we do get to watch her develop from a dedicated agent into a full-blown crusader, pushing her superiors to give her more resources, to take greater risks. That Maya is generally soft-spoken and reserved just makes Jessica Chastain's performance all the more fascinating. However, I think Jason Clarke is probably going to benefit the most from his work here, as a terribly likable intelligence officer who is capable of doing awful, inhumane things to other human beings.

It's the torture scenes that have drawn the most attention and controversy, which is exactly why I think director Kathryn Bigelow included them. The scenes are not particularly gratuitous, but they are very uncomfortable to watch because Bigelow shows us everything, doesn't cut away, and doesn't try to sugarcoat or justify what's going on. There is a notable lack of commentary either for or against the use of torture that we see depicted, which some have taken as tacit approval. However, the rest of the film is just as cold and clinical and unrelenting, and it becomes clear that the film's messages are considerably subtler than its harsher critics are giving it credit for. It's easy to read in jingoism or nationalistic sentiments into some scenes, but then you notice how the camera frames the CIA agents during the interrogation scenes, and how it lingers on the faces of frightened children during the raid.

Kathryn Bigelow got a significant amount of flak for some of the inaccuracies in her last film, "The Hurt Locker," and in "Zero Dark Thirty" it sometimes feels like she's overcompensating. This is about the least glamorized, least sexed up war film I've seen. The cinematography is lovely, but starkly realistic, and even the Alexandre Desplat score is barely noticeable. Clearly some events and characters were invented or combined in order to facilitate the storytelling, but it's not so easy to see the seams. Even if some of the finer details aren't right, Bigelow and screenwriter Mark Boal got the big point across. Osama bin laden was caught because of a decade of intelligence gathering, which is slow and tedious and grinding work. And so while there are plenty of exciting things that happen in the earlier parts of the film, including several terrorist attacks, the narrative stays right in that grind. Instead of trying to compare the film to "Argo" or "Act of Valor," I think it's much closer to David Fincher's labyrinthine "Zodiac."

It's important to remember, Kathryn Bigelow was working on putting together a film about the hunt for Osama bin Laden before he was killed, and I suspect most of the major pieces of the story, as well as its most critical messages, were already in place when it suddenly became billed as the film about how we got Osama bin Laden. But that's not what "Zero Dark Thirty" is, ultimately. It's about how, for a decade, we didn't get bin Laden, and what our frustration and fear cost us. As exciting and intense as that final raid sequence is, it's only in the context of those first two hours – and a haunting, heartbreaking final shot – that it becomes truly great cinema.
---

Read More

Whatever Happened to the Films of 2009?

No, you read that right. In light of all the articles that have been circulating about the most anticipated films of 2013, I was going to spend today's post comparing my happy thoughts about my most highly anticipated films of 2012, written up a year ago, with how they actually turned out. And then I stumbled across a list I had written of my most anticipated films at the beginning of 2009, which presents me with a much more interesting opportunity. 2009 was only three years ago, and yet our memories of the movies that came out that year have receded fairly quickly. Most have already started appearing on cable television, and exited "New Release" status in our DVD and streaming queues. In some cases, people's attitudes towards certain films have shifted very quickly, and in interesting ways. Consider this a "where are they now" retrospective of sorts.

Avatar - The biggest film of 2009 in so many ways. It is still the highest grossing film of all time, still constantly referenced in all discussions of 3D presentations and new projection technology, and emblematic of a certain type of CGI-heavy event film that the studios are depending more and more heavily on. However, "Avatar" has faded from the public consciousness pretty quickly. It's apparent from the lack of a lasting fandom, minimal interest in the upcoming sequels, and a certain degree of derision in certain circles about its "Dances With Smurfs" storyline, that "Avatar" was just a passing fad. James Cameron disappeared back into the ether, perhaps for another decade, and poor leading man Sam Worthington still barely registers in the mainstream consciousness. However, the raised ticket prices and 3D conversions "Avatar" propelled remain with us.

Watchmen - Remember when this was the most anticipated film for every comic book fan, the movie that was supposed to usher in a new era of adult-oriented superhero films at last? Yeah, that didn't turn out so well. Director Zack Snyder won over some fans with his faithful visuals and willingness to embrace darker themes and adult content. However, just as many viewers were repulsed, confused, or just underwhelmed. "Watchmen" failed to cross over to general audiences, and its underperformance at the box office severely curtailed the studios' appetite for more R-rated comic book films. Zack Snyder would go on to make another costly fanboy-oriented bomb, "Sucker Punch," and was then recruited to helm the "Superman" reboot. Superhero films are still very popular, but Snyder will have to learn to love the PG-13 rating.

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince - It's amazing how fast the "Harry Potter" franchise is becoming part of the past. Currently "Twilight" clones dot the 2013 landscape, while the biggest remaining "Potter" contribution seems to be the higher and higher numbered sequels. "The Half-Blood Prince" was highly anticipated at the time because of a lengthy delay due to the writers' strike, and the beginning of the ramp-up to the series' end. However, reactions to the film were mixed, especially regarding its big reveal, which was handled with inexplicable clumsiness. Speeding along the series passage into oblivion was that these later installments became more and more kid-unfriendly, and harder to market to anyone but existing "Harry Potter" fans.

The Princess and the Frog - A real heartbreaker in more ways than one. This was supposed to be the big return of Disney to the traditionally animated musicals of the 1990s. It had an all star team of animators and a big marketing push behind it. Alas, the box office returns were only so-so. "Princess and the Frog" was much beloved by some audiences, but failed to connect more widely. It wouldn't be until 2010's CGI "Tangled," that Disney Animation would have a real hit on its hands again, and traditional animation has largely been abandoned as economically unfeasible. Nowadays, you'll still find the heroine Tiana on Disney Princess merchandise, and at the theme parks, but it feels like she doesn't get nearly as much love as she should.

Public Enemies - Remember when Michael Mann making a movie about gangster John Dillinger, starring Johnny Depp, sounded like a good idea? This remains one of the most inexplicable films of 2009, a sparse period drama with little exposition, shot on handheld digital camera. The style was so distracting and the narrative so inaccessible, it detracted from the good work being done by the strong cast. "Public Enemies" eventually turned a profit, but it was a major disappointment for those grown-up viewers who were hoping for something with a little more charm and substance in a fairly lackluster summer. Michael Mann hasn't directed another movie since, though he did contribute the pilot episode of the terribly unlucky HBO series "Luck."

Star Trek - Of course, 2009 did have its bright spots. One of the brightest was the resurrection of one of the most beloved science-fiction geek franchises, "Star Trek." J.J. Abrams assembled a perfect cast, took the Enterprise out of storage, shined up his lens flares, and sent us all on a rip-roaring space adventure. Sure, the plot was kind of flimsy and there was a notable lack of plausible science in the science-fiction, but the 2009 "Star Trek" reboot was exactly the kind of enjoyable romp that the series needed to get back on its feet. It proved popular with newbies and old school Trekkers alike. "Star Trek: Into Darkness" is one of the most highly anticipated 2013 summer films as a result.
---

Read More

"Cult" and Fandom

Of all the mid-season television offerings that are premiering over the next two months, there was one in particular that caught my eye. The CW will be premiering "Cult" on February 19th, a mystery drama about a series of disappearances that are tied to the fandom of a popular television show. Creator Rockne S. O'Bannon, veteran of many science-fiction programs, claims that he came up with idea while working on "Farscape," which had a healthy and boisterous fanbase back in the early 2000s. So far most of the press coverage has been focusing on the twists and turns of the development of "Cult," which was originally slated to air on the WB network before the merger, and resurrected six years later after some retooling.

At the center of "Cult" is a popular television crime series, also titled "Cult," which follows the efforts of a detective, Kelly Collins (Alona Tal), to take down a charismatic cult leader, Billy Grimm (Robert Knepper). The show has a fanatical following that searches for clues to its mysteries in a manner that recalls the devotees of "Lost" trying to make sense of those bizarre early seasons. One of these "Cult" fans is Nate Sefton (James Pizzinato), who becomes paranoid that someone is out to get him. After Nate disappears, his reporter brother Jeff (Matt Davis), recruits "Cult" production assistant Skye (Jessica Lucas) to help him investigate the extreme "Cult" fandom to find out what's going on. The show within a show promises meta in abundance, and plenty of opportunities to jab at show biz conventions.

By all indications, the portrayal of the fandom experience is not going to be too positive. That's fine, because fandom has its unsavory side like everything else, but my worry is that "Cult" is going to demonize obsessive fans in a way that's not really fair to them. I've been a participant in media fandoms for well over a decade now, and worked some minor events and autograph lines in my time. I've heard plenty of the horror stories and the seen some of the crazy stuff up close. You've got the usual stalkers and conspiracy theorists, especially in the fandoms with photogenic actors like "Supernatural" or "Twilight." Occasionally you've got the scammers who will exploit fan goodwill to make a profit. "Lord of the Rings" and "Harry Potter" had a couple of these when they were at their height. Fan conventions always seem to be a never-ending source of drama, frequently an excuse for reckless behavior. And then there are the seemingly normal folks who just lose their goddamned minds if you put them within a certain distance of their favorite star or creative genius.

Over the years there have been enough bad incidents and general negativity associated with crazy fans that they've given fandom a bad reputation. Individual fans may be singled out for praise if they draw nice fan art or manage to convert their porny fanfiction into a surprise bestseller, but fandom as a whole tends to be viewed with suspicion and wariness by Hollywood and by proxy, everybody else. While it's true that there are those fans that completely lose perspective and truly deserve to be called fanatics, by and large fandom is pretty harmless. It's just a bunch of bored nerds and geeks finding common ground through media. Not very sexy at all. Even when there is a fringe element, it's mostly composed of young, undersocialized kids with deeper problems fueling their bad behavior, and they usually come off as more pitiable than threatening. Next to rioting sports fans and religious zealots, there's no comparison. Of course, from the point of view of the objects of their devotion, media fans probably look much less benign.

The idea of "Cult," the show within a show, spawning a real cult is not such a silly idea in a world where Scientology exists, but it smacks of a certain degree of vanity. Has an television show really managed to fuel dangerous fanaticism? I can think of a few notable nutters who happened to be fans of certain shows or movies or video games, but nothing as organized or as dogmatic as what "Cult," the CW show, seems to be leaning towards. No, the grand conspiracies and puzzle games of a show like "Cult" have almost no basis in reality. They're just a new spin on the common procedural formula. And I expect that it's going to have its work cut out for it trying to attract a real audience, trying to sell a convoluted gimmick like this.

What I'm really interested in is what "Cult" will say about the love-hate relationship between creators and fans. Thanks to the internet and social media, the two sides are edging closer than ever before, with some notable instances of friction. So how much responsibility does the creator of "Cult" have if his work inspires so much fanaticism? How about the media in general? These are questions that I don't expect "Cult" will be in hurry to answer, but they're the ones I think will have to be answered eventually if "Cult" wants to honestly explore the phenomenon of media fandom. After all, what's a fandom without the object of its affections?
---

Read More

"The Wire" Year Two

Spoilers ahead for the first and second seasons of "The Wire."

Watching the series is going faster than I expected, probably because I'm enjoying it so much. Season Two is an easier watch than Season One, even though in many ways it has to start over from the beginning, introducing us to a new set of characters involved in crime and corruption, and the unseen social forces behind them that contribute to this. It also continues to follow most of the characters from the police and the Barksdale organization from Season One, and sets up future conflicts in subsequent seasons.

Season Two is about the Baltimore docks, home to the International Brotherhood of Stevedores union. Work is scarce and growing scarcer, so union treasurer Frank Sobotka (Chris Bauer) has been working with a group of Greek smugglers to move drugs and contraband, and spreading the money around for political leverage. His nephew Nick (Pablo Schreiber) and son Ziggy (James Ransone) are major POV characters, who start to do extra jobs on the side for warehouse owner Spiros Vondopoulos (Paul Ben-Victor) and his mysterious boss, known only as "The Greek" (Bill Raymond). The big case of the season is the discovery of thirteen dead Jane Does suffocated to death in one of the shipping containers by Port Authority officer Beadie Russell (Amy Ryan). A separate Jane Doe is discovered by McNulty who appears to be connected to the others. Finally, police Major Valcheck (Al Brown) gets into a petty feud with Frank Sobotka and puts together a detail to investigate him. All three investigations eventually become a single, complicated case.

As a kid I was always frustrated by television shows that insisted on returning everything to an established status quo at the end of every episode, so it was hard to ignore the way that the second season of "The Wire" spends so much time reuniting all the major members of the team that brought down Avon Barksdale in Season One, even though several of those members, including Daniels and McNulty, are on the verge of quitting the police entirely. Moreover, the establishment of the major crimes unit headed by Lt. Daniels seems to be an awfully big contrivance to keep them all together. It really undermines the sense of uncertainty and institutional dysfunction of Season One. However, I do appreciate that Daniels and McNulty get ahead by using the flaws of the system to their own advantage, and their motives are less than pure. McNulty gets Homicide on the hook for the Jane Does as revenge for his demotion by Rawls (John Doman). Prez is Valcheck's son-in-law, and it's ultimately nepotism and Valcheck's outsized sense of entitlement that gets Daniels involved and the ball rolling. Still, it all seems a little too convenient and expected.

And then they kill off D'Angelo Barksdale. This was a major shock, as D'Angelo was one of my favorite characters from Season One, and I expected that "The Wire" would continue to chart his growth and disillusionment through the rest of its run. Now it's Omar and Stringer Bell who are being maneuvered into the lead positions of the local drug trade storyline, which stays firmly in the background for most of the year, but is quietly building up to something bigger to come. Rival kingpin Proposition Joe (Robert F. Chew) and Bodie Broadus (J.D. Williams) become more prominent, along with a new character, assassin Brother Mouzone (Michael Potts), who may be the most caricatured, almost cartoonish figure in the show so far. I haven't decided one way or the other about him yet, but seeing him clash with Omar is a lot of fun. Otherwise, Stringer and Avon's troubles trying to run the operation with Avon in prison are rarely very compelling. I expect all the slow character-building will pay off next season though.

I didn't find the characters from the docks nearly as interesting as the Barksdale gang members. The trouble is that none of them are particularly smart and you don't get the sense that they're trapped in their lives the way that the drug dealers in the courtyard were. Frank Sabotka, who has such altruistic intentions, is awfully sympathetic though. Chris Bauer's performance is fantastic, embodying a working class man with very deep loyalties and convictions, grappling with the unintended consequences of dealing with the wrong people. He's a perfect tragic figure, whose fairly mild aspirations end up costing him everything. Unfortunately, nobody else around him operates at the same level. Ziggy and Nick are a pretty dull set of lunkheads, even if Ziggy is occasionally a very creative and whimsical lunkhead. The Greeks don't make much of an impression.

All in all, Season Two feels slighter than Season One. Sabotka and The Greek aren't nearly as formidable as Avon Barksdale and Stringer Bell. The fight to get the case solved doesn't seem nearly as arduous. It's easy to tell who the good guys and the bad guys are. Still, the season definitely has its moments. The "the dead girls in a can" crime is shocking, not so much for the crime itself, but for the way all the different agencies keep trying to pass responsibility off on one another, and how the girls are ultimately used as political and bureaucratic leverage by various characters. It becomes clearer than ever that McNulty is not necessarily a good guy, displaying self-destructive tendencies that are probably going to get him killed. And Omar's appearance in court, tying up loose ends from one of last year's murders, is one for the ages.

Onward to Season Three.
---

Read More

"The Wire," Year One

Some minor spoilers, but I'll try to keep them to a minimum.

Maybe it shouldn't have surprised me, but I find "The Wire" to be a considerably easier watch than "The Sopranos." Sure, the legalese and the policework is more difficult to follow, it's harder to keep track of the various players, and I found it significantly harder to penetrate the culture of West Side Baltimore than the New Jersey wiseguys. When you get down to it, though, the basic mechanisms are identical. Just swap out the comares for shorties, and the lifted merchandise for drugs, and it's the same old game. The difference with "The Wire" is that there is no charismatic central anti-hero figure. Sure, Stringer Bell has a lot of similarities to Tony Soprano, but the show's not about him. "The Wire" is about the system.

The individual characters in "The Wire" may not be a deftly drawn or as compelling as the ones in "The Sopranos," but I find them much easier to relate to and sympathize with. Detective McNulty is a typical hothead, with the same family problems and libido problems that we see in a lot of similar characters. However, he's not the typical hero figure and gets about the same amount of screen time as a half dozen other members of the large ensemble. It's really the story that drives the show, the day to day ins and outs of the investigation. McNulty becomes sympathetic because the harder he and Lt. Daniels and Detectives Greggs and Freamon push, the more resistance they meet with from their superiors. Every step forward requires the joint efforts of multiple actors, and the balancing of personal interests and political concerns from every corner. With the odds stacked so high against them, it's difficult not to root for the investigators.

It's the same for the characters who are members of Avon Barksdale's drug operations. The drug trade is portrayed as its own institution, with its own problematic rules and internal politics. Omar, the show's wild card who has no particular allegiance to either side, calls it "the game." One scene in particular caught my attention toward the end of the season, when an attorney is consulting with the leadership of the organization, laying out the requirements for a plea deal, calculating how many of their associates are going to have to go to prison and for how long, and who will have to be paid off to ensure their cooperation. The police are entangled in their institutions out of choice, but it's worse for the low level drug dealers and enforcers because these kids don't appear to have any alternatives. Every attempt to extricate themselves just leads to disaster. The drug trade is insidious, but most of the individual participants within it seem to have so little control of their circumstances, it's hard not to care about them too.

The first season of "The Wire" stands on its own very well by using this macroscopic approach, and limiting the story to a single investigation. Though it bucks the conventions of a typical police procedural, creator David Simon, veteran of many cop shows, knows those conventions well enough to use them to his advantage. So we get minor characters like Herc and Carver, who provide a lot of comic relief, but are not limited to being comic relief characters. So we get subplots like Bubbles' doomed attempt to get clean, which gives us a glimpse of the situation from the POV of the junkies being exploited by Barksdale's gang. Then there's poor Homicide Detective Santangelo, who gets caught up in department politics and ends up a pawn between McNulty and their supervisor, Landsman. It's not a big part, but it's one that is wonderfully emblematic of the intricacy and complexity of "The Wire," which shows us again and again how the systems function based on the decisions of the individuals within it, where all the myriad stress points and opportunities for corruption can occur.

"The Wire" may be one of the densest shows I've ever watched, far more challenging than something like "Game of Thrones." The approach to the subject matter is so comprehensive and so uncompromising, it's a little intimidating at first. However, the show does an exceptional job of getting viewers to feel for the plight of crooked cops and drug dealers, for humanizing the people who rarely receive this kind of time and attention anywhere else on television. And then there's the fact that the season has a definitive ending, unlike most police procedurals that deliberately leave the door open for more. Here the investigation concludes, the special unit disperses, and the perpetrators go to jail to do their time. The big problems remain unsolved and there's not much victory to go around. For most, it's back to business as usual. It's a rare finale that leaves the audiences with finality, but with few reassurances.

So where does the show go in Season Two?
---

Read More

Disentangling "Cloud Atlas"

"Cloud Atlas," the ambitious new film directed by Lana and Andy Wachowski and Tom Tykwer, tells six very different stories in different genres, settings, and time periods that are connected to each other. Some share characters. Several are linked by one character in one story reading or watching parts of another, which influences their actions. They all share the same ensemble of actors, who play different parts in each piece. The stories can be broken down as follows:

1. In 1849, a young notary named Adam Ewing (Jim Sturgess), helps an escaped slave Autua (David Gyasi), who has stowed away on the ship bringing Adam from the South Pacific home to San Francisco.

2. In 1936, a young composer, Robert Frobisher (Ben Whishaw), writes letters to his lover Rufus Sixsmith (James D'Arcy), about his employment with an older composer, Vyvyan Ayrs (Jim Broadbent).

3. In 1973, reporter Luisa Rey (Halle Berry) tries to uncover the truth about a newly opening nuclear power plant while being pursued by hit man Bill Smoke (Hugo Weaving).

4. In 2012, elderly publisher Timothy Cavendish (Jim Broadbent), is tricked into confinement at a nursing home by his brother Denholme (Hugh Grant), and joins forces with the other patients to escape.

5. In 2144, Sonmi 451 (Doona Bae), is a slave-like clone called a Fabricant, who is liberated from her servitude by a freedom fighter named Hae-Joo Chang (Jim Sturgess).

6. Finally, in 2312, in a post-apocalyptic era, Zachry (Tom Hanks), from the tribal Valleymen, meets Meronym (Halle Berry) , who comes from a more technologically advanced people, and is trying to contact the lost human colonies in space.

To summarize, we have a historical adventure, a brooding romantic memoir, a pulp mystery, a comic farce, a little cyberpunk action, and a headier science-fiction story. Some are stronger than others. All have some good moments, and some bad. I expect many viewers will enjoy two or three of the stories, but few will walk away completely satisfied with all six. The filmmakers make it difficult to engage with any of the individual stories since they tell them all at the same time, cross-cutting from one to another at an often alarming pace. Sometimes there will be parallels, in action scenes, in love scenes, and in moments of despair or dread, but it doesn't happen nearly as much as it should. More often than not the different narratives and tones and pacing end up clashing. Then again, some of the stories depend on the context provided by the others, and wouldn't be able to stand alone by themselves.

I have to commend Tykwer and the Wachowskis for attempting something this huge in scale and this conceptually daring. I've seen films use this kind of structure successfully before, notably Yoshihiro Nakamura's "Fish Story," which told three different stories that were revealed to be connected. However, "Fish Story" didn't make nearly as many demands on its audience. The "Cloud Atlas" stories are more complicated and involve more characters. In the Zachry story, for instance, the characters speak a pidgin form of English which requires some significant concentration to comprehend. The Frobisher story is primarily concerned with the art of musical composition, and the Sonmi 451 story has to introduce the concept of Fabricants. A viewer has a steep learning curve and ends up having to juggle the particulars of a half dozen different universes over the course of the movie's nearly three-hour running time.

Then there's the gimmick with having the same cast for each story. You may have heard about the controversy about the "Cloud Atlas" actors playing different ethnicities and genders through the use of make-up. The effect is wildly uneven, with some of the transformations done so well that the actors are totally unrecognizable, but others are terrible. Easily the worst and the most distracting example is the Sonmi 451 story, where Jim Sturgess and several other Caucasian actors play Asian characters, but fail to resemble any actual Asian person who ever lived. Trying to make Doona Bae look like a Caucasian woman is a similarly doomed affair, rendering several important scenes almost laughable. You could argue over the merit of the directors' artistic intentions in choosing to do this, but the execution is simply not good enough to pass muster.

However, there are some wonderful moments that do make all the effort and the frustration worthwhile. Doona Bae singlehandedly saves the Sonmi 451 story with her performance. Ben Whishaw does the same for the Robert Frobisher one. Though there are some elements that don't work in the Zachry story, the worldbuilding is fantastic, and it ended up being the one I wished we could have seen a full feature for. "Cloud Atlas" relies far too much on gimmicks and narrative tricks, to the point where the basic storytelling suffers for it. And yet, there are sequences where everything clicks, and the pieces do add up to a greater whole. It's such an interesting puzzle of a picture, it's hard not to be drawn into the fun of figuring out how all of these myriad, wildly different stories and characters connect. It's a mess, but it's a fascinating mess, and even occasionally a very entertaining mess.

So with all those caveats in mind, I recommend it. If you have three hours to spare and want to give your brain a workout, give it a chance. There hasn't ever been a film quite like "Cloud Atlas," and I doubt we'll see another like it in a long, long time.
---

Read More

"Vegas" and "Last Resort"

CBS's new period crime drama "Vegas" premiered Tuesday night and ABC's submarine adventure series "Last Resort" premieres tonight. I've seen both pilots now, so let's have a look.

"Vegas" is immediately eye-catching because of the high-profile cast and beautifully recreated 1960s setting. Dennis Quaid stars as Ralph Lamb, the new sheriff in town who would like nothing more than to run his ranch in peace, but Vegas needs a law man, and there's no one better for the job. It's fun to watch Quaid get into fistfights, rough up a gang of bikers and their lawyer, and play the kind of super-masculine cowboy hero that you don't see much anymore. With the help of his newly deputized brother Jack (Jason O'Mara) and Assistant DA Katherine O'Connell (Carrie-Anne Moss), Lamb quickly establishes himself as a major force to be reckoned with. This is not a welcome development for Vincent Savino (Michael Chiklis), a volatile Chicago mobster who has come to Vegas to make a name for himself, and has a few initial skirmishes with Sheriff Lamb during in the hour. Clearly we can expect more in the weeks to come.

Out of all the networks pilots this year, "Vegas" looks the best. It's got the dusty open desert, the glitzy interiors, and shimmering views of the vintage Strip, complete with all the old casinos that fell victim to the wrecking ball. It looks like a show that should be on HBO, Showtime, or AMC, but the big question is, does it match up in quality? Despite the involvement of the mobster Savino, "Vegas" strikes me as more of a Western. Lamb is a no-nonsense, punch first and ask questions later kind of sheriff and gets several hero shots astride a horse, wielding firearms, and intimidating suspects. A lot of emphasis is placed on his background as a rancher, a man of the vanishing frontier. Not a very nuanced character, to say the least, but this is just a first impression. The real test for "Vegas" is going to be what happens next week and the week after as we chart the progress of Lamb and Savino and see if there is any complexity under these familiar exteriors. And I certainly hope that Carrie-Anne Moss gets more to do than just show up looking lovely in a different outfit for every scene. "Vegas" could easily settle for being yet another CBS crime procedural, and I'm sure it would be a very good one, but it has the potential to be a lot more with this kind of talent involved.

"Last Resort," on the other hand, left me kind of baffled. I enjoyed the first half where the crew of a nuclear submarine, led by Captain Marcus Chaplin (Andre Braugher) and XO Lt. Commander Sam Kendall (Scott Speedman) are ordered to fire on Pakistan and start a war through questionable channels. Their refusal results in the sub being marked as rogue by the US government, which has possibly been compromised by some kind of internal struggle. Then Chaplin decides that their best course of action is to take over an island with a NATO communications outpost and declares that he'll hold it until the crew can figure out what happened and how to clear their names. Other players include navigator Lt. Shepard (Daisy Betts), her father Admiral Shepard (Bruce Davison), who will be their contact in Washington, Kylie Sinclair (Autumn Reeser), a weapons manufacturing lobbyist, Sophie Girard (Camille de Pazzis) with NATO, and finally suspicious islanders Julian (Sahr Ngaujah) and Tani (Dichen Lachmann).

The trouble is that the first episode tries to do too much. It introduces over a dozen major characters at a breakneck pace, so nobody gets much time to make an impression besides Captain Chaplin and Lt. Shepard. The reams of plot crammed in here could have easily filled twice the amount of time allotted for it, especially toward the end as the crew of the sub take over the outpost, deal with a potential mutiny, and make their intentions known to the rest of the world. I found the depiction of life aboard the sub very strong, so it was a disappointment to realize that "Last Resort" was probably going to be spending the majority of its time on a tropical island well above water. The more I think about it, the more "Last Resort" looks like "Lost," which had its big series mysteries, but spent a great deal of time on the interpersonal conflicts of all these stranded souls who had been thrown together by fate. So while the show is billing itself as an epic adventure with the big submarine and all, the scenery's not going to change much from week to week. The pilot really should have spent more time in getting us invested in the characters, because that's clearly where the bulk of any interesting drama will come from.
---

Read More

Facing the Endgame of "Breaking Bad"

Spoilers ahead for all episodes of "Breaking Bad" that have aired so far.

This has certainly been the showiest season, or half-season of "Breaking Bad," with the train robbery, the magnet heist, and giant piles of money. There have also been several major, ambitious transitions, from Walt being Gus Fring's employee and rival, to a shaky partnership with Mike and Jesse, to a new arrangement with Lydia and Todd after the prior situation implodes. While it's certainly been a lot of fun week to week, and watching Walter White go full Heisenberg at last has been satisfying, there have also been some aspects of this run of episodes I've found worrisome.

The most obvious change in this year has been the pacing, which has picked up significantly from the slow burns of seasons three and four. Suddenly major developments were happening every week, character arcs were being accelerated, and some of the show's biggest constants were no longer there. This meant that events felt increasingly orchestrated, and sometimes weren't as logically sound as they'd been in the past. Several developments concerning Mike Ehrmantraut and his downfall undercut the image of the cool, collected, smart professional we'd gotten to know. While he certainly went out on a high note, shouldn't he have known better than to make the stupid mistakes that ultimately cost him his life?

Walt's ascension to the meth kingpin of Albuquerque was also accompanied by a lot of foolhardy risk taking and displays of arrogance, though it was more believable behavior from him. I was concerned during some of the earlier episodes that they were making Walt into too much of an over-the-top villain. The plot clearly needed Skyler and Jesse to break away from him, and to tease that Walt was inviting his own destruction, but I wish it didn't require Walt having to become quite so obviously unpleasant so quickly. I was glad that in last night's episode, Walt did learn for himself that success wasn't all it was cracked up to be, and come back down to earth. He's still terrifying, but has become sympathetic enough to root for again.

And I think it's going to be necessary to want to root for Walter White in the next set of episodes, because the show is pushing past the "Scarface" phase of his career, and seeing what might lie beyond it. We still haven't caught up with the flash-forward from the season premiere, where Walt was heading back into town after a long absence, under a different name and heavily armed. I think it's very possible that he could be going up against Declan or Todd for some skirmish, but the in the long term, Walt's final opponent will almost certainly be Hank. Good old Agent Schrader has often been overshadowed by the show's flashier villains, including Gus Fring, Tio Salamanca, and Mike, but we've seen Hank slowly but surely come into his own as a major figure in this universe. And in the last episode, his beef with Walter has gotten very, very personal.

It was probably the best season so far for Skyler, and the way the series is going, I’m worried that this is going to be as good as it gets. Since Walt has decided to quit the meth business and Skyler seems willing to patch things up, all the interesting tensions between them may end up buried for good. I was expecting that she or Jesse would have to take down Walt if he got really monstrous, but this is looking less likely. Walt has backed off from the abyss himself, after proving that he could be just as ruthless and successful as he always wanted. This was also a very good year for the advancement of Jesse's character. He got fed up enough with Walt's tactics to break off their partnership for good, in some of the best scenes of the season. I'm sure he'll end up involved in the finale, but how it will happen remains a mystery.

Plus, we have a few new players on the board who have to be factored in. Laura Fraser's twitchy, high strung Lydia Rodarte-Quayle is the most entertaining female character "Breaking Bad" has come up with so far, a baddie who enables Walt and clearly cannot be trusted. Then there's Todd, played by Jesse Plemons, who has mostly remained a question mark so far. Everything about him points to trouble, but how much trouble? Someone who could shoot a child without a thought surely wouldn't hesitate to resort to blackmail, extortion, or worse if Walt crosses him.

Best of all, I have no idea what's going to happen next. Most of the predictions and theories I came up with at the beginning of the season have been subverted. I didn't think Walt would survive without Jesse and Mike. I didn't think Skyler would stay long enough to consider reconciliation. Of course, the brief taste of success is surely just setting Walt up for the final fall, but the tantalizing hope that he could get away with everything – that's what the season needed and what the last episode provided.

It's going to be a long wait for next year.
---

Read More

I Don't Like Skyler White Either

So I'm enjoying the current season of "Breaking Bad," and you can expect a review post in a few weeks, after it wraps up. However, I'd like to take a minute to comment on the ongoing debate over Skyler White, played by Anna Gunn, who has been a controversial figure for the last few seasons. For those of you who are unfamiliar with "Breaking Bad," Skyler is the wife of the show's central anti-hero figure, Walter White, who was kept in the dark about her husband's activities until the third season. Her finding out about his meth cooking operations resulted in a contentious separation, an ill-considered affair, a shaky reconciliation, and Skyler becoming more and more complicit in Walt's crimes. She's also the link, by way of her sister Marie (Betsy Brandt), to DEA Agent Hank Schrader (Dean Norris), Marie's husband and one of the show's major antagonists.

A certain segment of the fandom does not like Skyler, and is very vocal about it, often disparaging her and occasionally using some unfortunate misogynist language to do it. These fans have been rightly called out for their bad behavior by other "Breaking Bad" fans, and there have been ongoing discussions over whether being unsympathetic to Skyler might be indicative of a deeper problem with women in general, or if fans might be too overzealous in defending the character of Walter White, who has gone from mild-mannered chemistry teacher to cold-blooded drug kingpin and killer over the course of five seasons. The debate has intensified this year as the balance of power between Walt and Skyler has shifted dramatically, favoring Walt, and Skyler has pretty much become a hostage in her own home, terrified of her husband.

I know which side of this debate I'm supposed to be on, but here's the thing - I don't like Skyler White either. I'm sympathetic to her problems, and I certainly haven't been rooting for Walt for a long time. However, from the beginning I've found Skyler abrasive, dismissive, sanctimonious, and boring. She has a difficult personality, and the show hasn't often shown her good side. I'm pretty sure that's by design. Skyler was supposed to be a major source of aggravation for Walt in the early seasons, and then an antagonist for the duration of the separation storyline. It wasn't until last year, when Skyler was firmly on Walt's side at last, that we got to see her being smart and resourceful on a regular basis. And it's only been very recently, as Walt has gotten more and more corrupt, that Skyler has been shown in a better light by comparison.

There have been some great pieces discussing Skyler as a common type of female character in anti-hero dramas, who are set up to be vilified because they're always stuck being the killjoy and the spoilsport. Skyler's been moved away from that role, but I think the damage was already done. It's no wonder that some viewers have had trouble letting go of the image of Skyler as the clueless, busybody housewife, because that's what "Breaking Bad" introduced her as, what the show needed her to be originally. For most of the series, she hasn't been a very well-written character. She's still the least fleshed out member of the main cast compared to Jesse (Aaron Paul), Mike (Jonathan Banks), and even Hank. She doesn't get to be funny, like Marie or the twitchy newbie, Lydia (Laura Fraser). We rarely even get to see her being maternal to her kids.

And I feel bad about saying this, but I don't find Anna Gunn to be a particularly strong actress. She's had some great moments, but she always comes off as very stiff and bland to me. The blow-up between Walt and Skyler in "Fifty-One," for instance, was a good, intense sequence and the kind of material that I wish we got more of. I couldn't help comparing it to the "Whitecaps" episode of "The Sopranos" that I saw recently, where Tony and Carmela Soprano's marriage combusts in really spectacular fashion. The Sopranos' fight is much better than the Whites' not only because of the level of the performances, but because portrayal of Walt and Skyler's marriage in "Breaking Bad" doesn't have anything close to the same depth or nuance of Carmela and Tony's in "The Sopranos." It's one of the show's weak points that it has often neglected what should be one of its most important relationships.

Maybe this will change in these last few episodes. "Breaking Bad" has always been an extremely male-centric series, and the show has invested way more time and attention in Walt's partnership with Jesse, but as the danger moves closer to home, Skyler might come to the forefront. It has been a very good season for her so far, and I'm curious where the show is going with her current storyline. I don't like Skyler White, but that doesn't mean I'm not invested in what's going to happen to her or that I don't enjoy what she adds to the show. After all, I don't much like Walter White either.
---

Read More