Showing posts with label the man in the high castle. Show all posts
Showing posts with label the man in the high castle. Show all posts

Thursday, June 9, 2011

Telly Finales: Which Got It Right and Which Got It Less-Right

Finales are tricky things.

Hell. Writing in general is tricky.

But I think finales are particularly important. They should tease a person. They should force the viewer to anticipate the return.

They should, in fact, torture a person with the agony of wondering what happens next.

Unfortunately, shows tend to have a very narrow definition of what it takes to get the audience to that hunger.

It's not surprising -- narrow is "safe" and "safe" usually means more money.

It's a difficult tension that telly has to navigate. But really good telly navigates it well.

Like in crafting a story in general, there are two broad elements that can drive a finale: plot and character. I prefer character stories myself because I find them to be more substantive, but as with all things, whatever floats your boat. I'll be looking at the finales from both of these elements.

I only have a few television shows I watch regularly (or somewhat regularly -- SGU pissed me off to no end with it's non-hulu streaming and then the crappy quality on its site, I just waited for netflix to stream it and finished watching it today, so I know I'm way behind on the real finales).

So here we go:

Glee

Glee is a guilty pleasure of mine even though I think the show has its issues. However, looking at it from a strictly craft perspective, I have to say that Glee's finale failed as a finale. It didn't rip my heart a new one (like another did), and that was nice not having to pick up the pieces (again), but even happy-ish finales can still produce that hunger for more. And Glee still failed in that regard.

The lack of character development really crippled the ability for Glee to craft a story that would make an audience hunger for what happens next (obviously, it makes the audience want more, but that's a different sort of want -- it's more of a this-is-tasty-let's-have-some-more, not an agony, I guess).

So, even though people are saying "i love you" and characters are suddenly together that never had any real chemistry before just becomes part of the normal scenery that Glee is in the habit of lobbing at the viewer. Basically, there is no resonance (well, for me, obviously) between myself and the people on the screen. I am not emotionally attached to people (well, except for Kurt), so at the finale ends, I'm not really hurting that I won't be seeing these characters for a few months.

Therefore there is no agony regarding the welfare of these people either on a plot or emotional level. Character development stalled out long before season 1 even finished its run -- I see no reason why season 3 should change its tune now (so that even rules out hope for something new). I fully expect to see the same melodrama in different clothes spun out in season 3 that was rehashed in season 2 and trotted out in season 1.

But it'll be done in song, so it'll be worth it.

Even the plot wasn't all that surprising. They couldn't win nationals because then there wouldn't be plot stakes for season 3. And, because there are only so many plots available to a high school glee club, there isn't really a lot of ground that hasn't been covered.

Unless they do something daring and surprising in which case -- more power to them!

Castle

I lurve Castle in the same way I lurve me some pie. Which is, I'm fond of pie. But I'm not like Dean-Winchester-in-Love-with-Pie.

I can survive without pie.

Castle is one of the more fun procedural shows (which I generally despise) for me to watch. But unfortunately, there isn't a lot of character development that goes on. So, the finale fell back on plot -- oh, no! Beckett's been shot!

But really, the viewer can't really feel anxious about her welfare because the chances that she'll live are high -- if she were to die, the atmosphere of the show would be drastically changed. The tenor would be different.

It would be a huge risk to kill off Beckett -- and if next season takes it, good for them.

But Castle plays it safe. So, even though I'm looking forward to its return, I'm not agonizing over it. The only real stake is if Beckett Will Live Or Die -- and as I've already explained, it's not much of a stake.

Bones

For procedural shows I supposedly hate, I seem to watch a few of them, don't I?

I haven't really cared much for this season of Bones -- I'm not sure why. Something's missing. But the finale bugged me -- Angela had her baby, Booth and Bones dressed up as these ridiculous characters undercover, and then Bones ends up telling Booth that she's pregnant.

It's probably just my thing against pregnancy story lines. But just for the record, I find it out of character that Bones wasn't on birth control.

I'm not really sure what the stakes are supposed to be here -- how Bones' and Booth's relationship will develop? I feel like this question has posed before though.

Anyway, the episode itself was meh. The question it poses is meh and a bit stale.

Fringe

Oh Fringe. You know I love you. Fringe had a good season finale I thought -- it opened up new avenues of tension that hadn't been able to be explored before because of how the universes were so separated. But now they're not. That opens up a whole new world of conflict. So that's good--that's always good.

But then they made a mistake (I think from a craft perspective) of erasing Peter's character (I haven't kept up with the spoilers, but I'm assuming he's coming back?). But even if the character does return, taking him away essentially "reset" a lot of character development, especially in the case of Olivia.

So she used to be hard and emotionally closed off, but Peter helped break her out of that. Without Peter in her life, logically, her character should be reset to Pre-Peter.

If it's not reset, then there's issues with the plot and the rules its established. And that's never fun.

SGU

SGU had so much potential. And even though I wanted to shake their shoulders over the "Epilogue" episode (where their Other!Selves established a colonization) because they still had the girls in pioneering skirts instead of pants (they were wearing pants on the ship! why would they revert to wearing skirts when that's less practical -- so fucking gendered) and for not showing Ray's date (even though showed whom everyone else ended up with -- I don't care that Ray never got together with anyone but I do want to know who the mysterious "she" was) and for that terrible montage of women giving birth -- alkjadsfkldfsa.

deep breath.

SGU had its flaws.

But it had a beautiful finale. I'm going to classify it as happy, simply because it didn't make me want to pick up the pieces of my heart (again).

The plot is relatively simple -- if it had been renewed it would have opened up opportunities for new tensions, just as with Fringe. So, plot-wise, strong.

Its real strength, though, were its character moments. Eli comes into his own. And it's so beautiful the newfound confidence he has. And, as I was watching it (I hadn't realized I was on the last episode since I had lost count), I couldn't wait to see how his development would affect the other characters around him.

How would he handle himself when he exited the honey-moon period of newfound confidence? Would he regress? Would he change into something new, something great, something dangerous? Could he eventually replace Young as the captain of the ship? How would he and Rush get along? Sure, Rush seems okay with it for now, but there's nothing he can do about it, not when they have to make it for three years.

Oh, and yeah, plot question here -- does Eli survive? Does he manage to fix the pod? If he didn't, would he have had the courage to kill himself?

These are all questions I want answered.

And I will never get them answered because the finale ended on that final moment of endless possibility.

It torture knowing that I'll never see those possibilities explored.

And yes, this is probably the most surprising of the finales. When I was watching the season, I saw its potential, I saw it finding its feet, but I wasn't expecting the quality that the finale delivered.

It was a pleasant surprise.

Supernatural

The other finales focused on Sam and Dean which, despite my love for Supernatural, was a bit "safe." I mean, the show is about Sam and Dean. No matter what, they're going to pull through all right -- physically and characteristically speaking (not that I find the soulless!Sam plot a waste of time, all these moments of exploration are good too, but they provide different kinds of satisfaction than what a finale should provide, I think).

So focusing their what-happens-now moment on the third character that has grown by leaps and bounds and is positively one of the most beautiful and purest characters in the history of the show was a brilliant move, craft-wise.

Story-wise, it just broke my heart to fucking pieces.

I like the shift from "what-will-happen-to-Sam-and-Dean" to "what-will-happen-to-the-state-of-Cas's-character?" because there are real stakes there.

And it just seems to escalate, even though I'm trying not to take whatever I hear too seriously. Knowing that Cas was supposed to die at the end of season 6, knowing that Collins has been demoted from regular to guest just increases the anticipation.

Especially since the stakes are actually two-fold:

will Castiel die either as the Big Bad or in some other fashion early in the season?

and, the more important one to me,

will Castiel be redeemed in character whether or not he dies physically?

And that's torture.

So even though the finale just pounded me bloody (and it's still bleeding my heart, I think about Supernatural all the time), I think it was a really good move from a craft perspective.

The agony of not knowing whether Castiel will survive in tact (character wise, especially) is almost overwhelming for me.

And then of course, this question also affects the show's core too: how will it affect Dean's relationship with Cas -- and even Sam's, to an extent. Because he just stabbed the person he said he'd die for -- doing that does things to a person.

Then of course, there's also the plot element of the wall in Sam's brain being removed, and how he's gonna deal with that trauma.

Yeah. Having Cas become God is serving double and triple duty all connected to plot and character elements that are just pregnant with possibility.

I just hope they succeed in following it up and choose not to retreat into "safe and easy" territory. Which I don't think they will, it just wouldn't make sense from a craft perspective, but hey. Shit happens all the time.

Monday, July 19, 2010

The Man in the High Castle: A Discourse

I didn't really get a lot of it, which is embarrassing since I'm a senior in college, majoring in English. So you'd think I could put on my collegiate hat and spout off some academic jargon. Yeah, not so much.

So, I will instead explore my first impressions before I go on about my hap-hazard visit to Wikipedia that revealed some other interesting themes.

First Impressions

I really like What If It Had Happened This Way books, which is what The Man in the High Castle is (another example of which I was quite fond was Superman: Red Son). I think these books help us put things in perspective - instead of whites being empowered and privileged, other empowered people view them with prejudice, as lower "placed" individuals.

I also like the idea of "place" Dick explored - it reminded me of how empowered individuals would tell other, supposedly "inferior" individuals to "learn your place." And it's really disgusting, forcing people into these hierarchies that don't exist - or shouldn't exist. I think people who don't realize their privilege need to be able to see themselves in somebody else's shoes, and I believe this fostering of empathy is one of the greatest functions that literature serves.

It also tickled me that the titular character (oddly enough not one of the protagonists) was an author. Not only that, but his book, which revealed another alternate reality where the Allies won instead of the Axis powers, was banned. Yeah, that's right. Ban literature all you want - it just means people are going to read it and see the things you don't want them to see - perspectives will break upon them as a new dawn of realization. Literature is a weapon - the greatest weapon because it appeals to the intellect, to the brain - it wields ideas instead of fire and metal. And it is beautiful that, with all the might at their disposal, the Germans feared this book.

As I said above, the reader doesn't actually meet the author of the book, the man in the high castle, until the very last few pages, which only heightens how powerful ideas and literature and words really are. Quite elegant, really.

The Question Marks Form

Though I like the idea of this book, I must be utterly truthful: I had a difficult time feeling anything for the characters - I had difficulties relating to any one of them. It wasn't until the very end when something struck me:

And what will that leave, that Third World Insanity? Will that put an end to all life, of every kind, everywhere? When our planet becomes a dead planet, by our own hands?

He could not believe that. Even if all life on our planet is destroyed, there must be other life somewhere which we know nothing. It is impossible that ours is the only world; there must be world after world unseen by us, in some region or dimension that we simply do not perceive.

[. . .]

Whatever happens, it is evil beyond compare. Why struggle, then? Why choose? If all alternatives are the same...

Evidently we go on, as we always have. From day to day. At this moment, we work against Operation Dandelion [nuclear warfare]. Later on, at another moment, we work to defeat the police. But we cannot do it all at once; it is a sequence. An unfolding process. We can only control the end by making a choice at each step.

He thought, We can only hope. And try.


This was like -- Doctor Who, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead, and Angel all mixed together like a Reeses Peanutbutter with an Additional Very-Delicious-But-as-of-Yet Undiscovered Component. And then, it grieved me that those different stories in different mediums from different cultures from different time periods still address the same flaws of the human condition in a different language each time -- hoping, hoping, perhaps, that eventually we'll catch on and start being magnificent instead of "eat[ing] one another."

Double grr argh.

The idea of the alternate world connected with both Dick and the Man writing alternate versions of history reminded me of a fancy I had as a child: writers discover worlds, alternate dimensions (something kinda/sorta explored in the film Stranger than Fiction). Thus, writers are excavators, mining and discovering and exploring new entire worlds - perhaps gods themselves or simply rediscovering that which already existed (it really depended on my views of inspiration at the time).

But, I never really connected this idea with the rest of the novel until I read the wiki article about the themes of the text.

Which was highly embarrassing and discomfiting because I just saw Inception on Friday and I've been thinking about it nonstop over the weekend and I should have been wondering in bright, neon green, blinking signs if Nolan had been sleeping with Dick under his pillow. And that's not even mentioning the fact that I also just finished Life on Mars over the weekend which also explores reality vs. unreal worlds.

Because seriously. With all that hovering in the brain, you'd think the implications would have hit me like a bitch-slap but it did not!

Summer is not an excuse to take off one's thinking cap, but yet I apparently did. I do humbly apologize and swear to never do it again.

So, as can be seen in the link above, the reader is presented with these various scenes of authenticity verses fraud. There are fake artifacts and there are real artifacts. There is authentic history and alternative histories (ie, both the novel within the novel and the text itself) -- and there are even examples of this within the text (when Mr. Tagomi stumbles into a restaurant where the whites won't give up their seats as Mr. Wikipedia Article informs my furiously blushing ears). And then, of course, there is the scene where Julianna discovers through the I Ching or the Oracle that the Germans and the Japanese had actually lost the war. Before I read the wiki article, I had instead considered that the definitions of "winning" and "losing" were relative - perhaps the material measurement of land or power did not equate to "winning" -- or, perhaps, that in war everybody loses. However, by connecting their discovery (that the Axis had lost) to this idea of fake vs authentic universes/dimensions/experiences really heightens the complexity of the text for me (while also increasing my pique that I hadn't formulated the connection myself).

Which means that the Novel Within the Novel of the Text is just as true as the reality in which they live and that there are other worlds - each just as true as the other - or perhaps false as the other.

Truly mind-bending.

Guildenstern: There must have been a moment at the beginning, where we could have said no. Somehow we missed it. Well, we'll know better next time.

Angel: If nothing we do matters, then the only thing that matters is what we do.

Doctor: The future pivots around you - here, now. So do good. For humanity, and for earth.

Rudolf Wegener: We can only hope. And try.


Even if there aren't other universes, even if we can't be blessed like Mr. Tagomino with a glimpse of an alternative dimension to truly give us some perspective, even if we won't have an Oracle telling us that our world isn't the real world, we still have to construct our reality. With every choice we make, every idea we believe, every word we speak or write, we construct something with lasting consequences.

Still...we should all be like Juliana:

"How strange," Juliana said. "I never would have thought the truth would make you angry." Truth, she thought. As terrible as death. But harder to find. I'm lucky. "I thought you'd be as pleased and excited as I am. It's a misunderstanding, isn't it?"


Also, very Rosencrantz and Guildenstern...

I fear that I am not being very articulate at the moment so I shall end this. Very thoughtful book, I highly recommend it. And if you want your mind reeling under this exploration of authenticity vs. non-authenticity, read it after watching Inception and Life on Mars.