Showing posts with label Damages. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Damages. Show all posts

Tuesday, 3 March 2009

Things we noticed watching tv this week 24 (spoilers)

After various end of season or mid season breaks, US shows have been back in force since the turn of the year. 24 came back, followed by Battlestar Galactica, Heroes, Damages and Desperate Housewives. There may be others, but these are the ones I watch - and that's probably more than enough!

24 has been good fun and exciting as ever. The move to Washington, the return of Tony and Jack generally kicking arse, has all made it a great watch. David has pretty much got this covered with a blow by blow account so head over there to check that out! What's been interesting in this season is that post Bush administration and Gumtanamo Bay, it's been super fun watching Jack run around smacking people, justifying all sorts of means to get the end he wants. Whether you agree with him or not, it's enjoyable TV!

Desperate Housewives has also started well, and continues to be an excellent study if you want to look at character specific motivations and dialogue. We know them so well by now, that we understand them completely, and yet things are never too predictable. And not being predictable is also at the heart of what makes Damages so sublime. We've talked a lot in recent weeks about how some shows are more character led and some are more plot led, how that works, and how indeed it can still work very well. But Damages is a fantastic example of how so much consideration has been given to both. The characters are fantastically complex, each with interesting back stories and secrets. But by the same token, the series is intricately plotted. Three episodes in and we haven't quite hit the heights of last year. William Hurt is not as much of a force as Ted Danson, and the flash forwards not as intriguing. But it's still top quality stuff and a great coup for the BBC (who still seem to hide it away in their schedule a little which is a bit weird.)

But the two shows that have really caught my attention are old favourites Battlestar Galatica and Heroes. Battlestar is now in its last season, earth found and ditched, the final five have been underwhelmingly revealed and major plot lines extinguished at the drop of a hat. But where the show still really works for me is when it functions as a comment on the world we are living in. This was most seen a couple of seasons ago, with the cylon occupation of New Caprica and the subsequent human resistance providing a handy reflection of Iraq. Some could argue the audience was a bit hit over the head with it, but what other shows were actually asking important questions? This season has at times been completely baffling as the final five have been dredging up their past, but the episodes focusing on the military coup and the moral questions that posed were really excellent.

After three disastrous seasons, Heroes is at last looking like it's back on track and echoing it's brilliant debut series. Gone is the mumbo jumbo about formulas and catalysts, back is the action and adventure. What's also noticeable is it's decision to dabble in some social commentary. This season the people with abilities have been labeled a threat to national security, and are on the run as fugitives. They are being pursued by a task force that does not seem to be bound by law, and if they are captured, the heroes face detention without trial. (The none too subtle orange jumpsuits and black hoods were also present just in case anyone didn't quite get it.) But hey, it works. It's exciting again and even manages to ask some moral questions. So I'm all for it.

Which brings me to my conclusion. I've read a couple of specs recently that have also attempted to use their plots, settings, themes etc to echo what is going on in the world today. One in particular I thought was excellent and until a winner is announced I assume is still in the running for the Red Planet Prize! It's always worth looking at the stories we are telling and thinking about what, if anything, does this have to tell us about the world today? (And 'tell us' can of course just mean asking questions about how we live our lives today.) A word of caution would be not to jack hammer it in. The primary job is to just tell a cracking story. If the metaphor is not there, then it's not there. Trying to force one would probably be disastrous. But think about it. There may even be something there that you haven't even seen yourself yet and it could be this very thing that lifts it from being good to great.

Monday, 13 October 2008

Things we noticed watching tv this week (spoilers)

With everything that's been going on, I haven't watched as much telly as usual! But, having missed it first time around on BBC1, I caught the beginning of the Damages re-run on BBC4. I'd heard good things about it of course, but wow, I was immediately very impressed indeed. Episodes are being shown in blocks of two, so in under 120 minutes of screen time, I am already hooked.

Continuing our discussion about caring about morally questionable characters, Damages comes up with two absolute gems. I guess the protagonist of the show is actually Ellen Parsons. She's the Tom Cruise of The Firm character; a young, idealistic lawyer unaware of what the hell she is getting into. But far more fascinating to watch are Patty Hewes, her ruthless boss played by Glenn Close, and Arthur Frobisher, the man she is taking to court, played by Ted Danson (doing something we've never really seen from him before?). Very quickly, the intricate twists in the plot made us feel sympathy and revulsion for both characters in equal measure. First you were on the side of one, then the other. It's mighty writing and it did make me wonder, yet again, why we can't do more of this over here?

It can't be that the audience won't like it, because we lap these shows up when they come over from the states. I don't believe we don't have the writers, although it's true that maybe enough of the newer ones aren't getting a chance. We probably don't have enough risk takers in commissioning, but even that seems a weak excuse. Take Sunshine, on BBC1 with Steve Coogan. I will be talking more about this show next week but I happen to like it, in terms of what it was and what it set out to deliver. But it was all so frothy and cuddly. It's about a guy, a good guy at heart, who loved the people around him, and yet also has a gambling addiction that makes him betray them, and us as the audience, at every turn. The show didn't need to be horrible and grim and depressing. But some complexity might have been a good thing. Does it need, for example, the annoying, sugary voice over from his young son? What is this actually adding. The most poignant moment of the first episode was the sequence where opera music played over it and we saw Coogan lose all their savings and teeter on the edge. But tonally, it was completely out of sync with everything that had come before it.

But as I say, I liked the show and it's only 3 parts (another weird thing - can we not make longer running series either?) so I will be tuning into the rest. Can't wait for the next installment of Damages though. Saturday night, BBC4