Let's Play Lions . . . Part Two: The Mrs.

I invariably associate Gina Bellman with the sock puppet scene in Coupling. The episode is called Jane and the Truth Snake. Gina Bellman's character, Jane, overdoses after she loses her job. While hopped up on drugs, she decides to become a children's television host with her sock puppet, Jake, as a side kick. This disturbs Sally, Susan, and Steve, but Sally especially for reasons I will not go into here. The scene is laugh out loud funny, and epitomizes the craziness/airheadedness that is Jane. I never thought I'd be able to picture Gina Bellman as anyone but Jane. Of course, then I watched Jekyll.


The minute I realized "Jane" was playing Mrs. Claire Jackman in Steven Moffat's Jekyll, I thought "Oh no." I fully intended to be annoyed by her character, but I wasn't. She wasn't the dumb, pushover wife I expected her to be. Gina Bellman's Claire was a strong woman and she was definitely feisty when it came to her property i.e. Tom/Hyde.

At first in Jekyll, she came off as merely a victim. Tom Jackman, or Dr. Jekyll, left her without an explanation when he began having his "episodes." She is understandably upset and desperate during their first meeting in the miniseries. Claire this sort of weak woman until we arrive at Episode Three when she finally learns the truth about Hyde. She knocks him out with a wine bottle after he changes, chains him up, and slaps him when she learns that Hyde hasn’t been faithful to her. Her relationship with Hyde is brilliant overall. He sees her as his wife, but he doesn't feel any obligation to her at the beginning. She sees it differently. She sees Tom even when sees looking at her husband's alter ego. She doesn’t take any crap from Hyde or anyone else. She bristles when she meets Jackman/Hyde’s pretty assistant Katherine and stakes her claim there too. Claire is not an airhead like Jane. She’s a feisty woman who brings out the best in both versions of her husband.

When watching the extras, I wasn't surprised to find that Moffat had reservations when she auditioned for the role. He wrote Coupling and so in his mind she was also associated with Jane. However, she blew them all away in her audition. Gina Bellman really does take you by surprise in Jekyll. By the end of the movie, I wondered if the story was as much hers as it was Jackman's.

Let's Play Lions . . . Part 1: The Book

I have little patience for novels written like “The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.” I read enough of that type of fiction while studying for my English degree. The narrative technique is complicated because the story is not told to us by the protagonist. In fact, the protagonist is rarely physically present in this type of narrative. The technique may have worked in the early days of fiction when authors were trying to trick their readers into believing they weren’t in fact writing fiction, but today’s readers aren’t so easily fooled.


In college, I read many books from the 19th century which used this technique. Wuthering Heights, Frankenstein, and the Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym are a few examples of this sort of writing. In Frankenstein, the story is told to us through a narrator’s letter to his sister. The narrator meets Dr. Frankenstein and the doctor tells him the story of his creation. Of course, at times, the narrative gets even more complicated when we are reading the monster‘s story told by Frankenstein to the narrator who is still writing every thing down in letters. Wuthering Heights uses more of a mix match of ways to get Heathcliff and Cathy’s story across. The narrator first hears the story through Cathy’s diary, but then when the entries stop, he is forced to question the old maid who may or may not be a reliable in her answers. Likewise, in Jekyll’s story, the narrator is Jekyll’s lawyer. He hears the story of Hyde first from acquaintances and then through letters from Dr. Lanyon and Dr. Jekyll himself. Dr. Jekyll is only present in a scene once or twice in the entire story.

I become frustrated with this sort of storytelling because it forces the reader to be removed from the action of the story. When I read, I like very visceral description and also being allowed to be right in the action with the characters. This is why I sometimes have little patience for literary fiction as well. I love beauty in language but when I read for pleasure, I want a good story. I had enough of elegant prose in college and now that I’ve graduated I want to read the fun stuff. I can appreciate complicated narrative techniques like those in Jekyll and Hyde but for now, I’m planning on avoiding them like the plague.

Bring on the pop fiction!

Something Blue

Next week, the finale of Buffy Season Eight is coming out. I haven't been buying them (I wait for the compilation to come out), but this time I'm heading out to the store. The cover of this comic mocks the New Moon movie poster with Angel replacing Edward and Spike taking Jacob's place. As soon as I heard about the cover, I knew I had to have it.

I'm not on the Twilight bandwagon. I don't like dark, broody vampires and I hate Bella swooning all over Edward. I like my heroines strong and my vampires bad. This is the reason why I'm such a huge fan of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. If one person knows how to write strong women, its Joss Whedon, the creator of the series. Buffy, Willow, Anya, Faith, Dawn, and Tara are all excellent characters. They had strong personalities and would never qualify as a "Mary Sue." Oh yeah, and the vamps? They are the bad guys - even the main vampires, Angel and Spike, aren't pinnacles of goodness. Anyway, I managed to watch all seven seasons within a year (okay, I did skip bits of seasons three, four, and six) and I still can't believe how awesome the series is and how insanely different it is from Twilight.

Season Eight of Buffy has given me a chance to hope that Buffy and Xander may finally become a couple. Jane Espenson teased it in the last volume and I still don't know whether to have hope or not. Espenson always liked those two together and I can only hope that Joss feels the same way. You see, the moment Xander skated into the handrail outside of Sunnydale High in the first episode, I wanted him and Buffy to get together. I am not one to root for vampire/human relationships. I do think Buffy should be with a human in the end. Xander would be so much healthier for her than Angel, Spike, or even Riley. Of course, all this is coming from the girl who wholeheartedly shipped Spuffy from the first time Spike came on the scene. I'm not proud of my fickleness. Deep down, I've always rooted for Xander, but I just got distracted sometimes.

By Season Four, I was very distracted from my hopes for Xander. Spike was finally becoming a weekly character and the writers were beginning to tease us with Spuffy love. Something Blue, in particular, was meant to be a wish fulfillment episode for those who shipped Buffy and Spike like myself. At the time of writing it, the writers may or may not have known the course the next season would take. (Spike falls in love with Buffy in Season Five and by Season Six, Buffy and Spike actually begin a relationship.) These two may be as dysfunctional as it gets, but I love them together anyways. I know Joss Whedon will never have them end up together and I'm fine with that. This is why Something Blue is so great: we get to see what Buffy and Spike would have been like together if things had been different. Needless to say, this episode is one of my favorites.

In Something Blue, Willow is reeling after Oz leaves her. Unfortunately, no one has the time to comfort her. Xander is busy with Anya. Giles has Spike tied up in his bathtub. And Buffy is just beginning to date Riley. Willow becomes desperate to get rid of the pain and tries to cast a spell to help her get over Oz. Of course, everything goes haywire. Xander becomes a demon magnet, Buffy and Spike get engaged, and Giles loses his sight. Its a lot of fun watching Buffy and Spike plan their wedding and be all cuddly together. It is even more fun to watch the reactions of Giles and the rest of the Scoobies. They are freaked out about lovey-dovey Spike and Buffy for obvious reasons. Buffy is a brilliantly written show and while there are episodes which are better (The Body and Once More with Feeling), you'll be hard pressed to find one which is more fun.

Oh well, maybe I'm still a bit distracted with hopes of Spuffy.

Life on Mars

Over Spring Break this year, I picked up the first season of Life on Mars. I'd wanted to watch it ever since I'd seen John Simm play the Master in Season Three of Doctor Who. Unfortunately, at the time, the series wasn't available in the U.S. Two years later, I was the first with a hold on the series when the library ordered it.


You may remember the short lived American series of the same name. The American series was a cheap rip off of the original. When the American version aired, I avoided watching it because the plot didn't really appeal to me. About halfway through the series, however, I picked it up and got hooked. I have watched part of the American series again after watching the British and I was really disappointed (You have no idea how I cringed when I thought Harvey Cartel might come out of the pool in a speedo in the second episode. Phillip Glennister is no hottie, but I'd already seen way too much of Harvey Cartel thanks to the Piano.) While the British version is the best written television show I've seen, the American version is definitely not. The American version suffered from bad casting, copycatting, horrible pacing, and a complete lack of edginess. The British version excelled because it had an amazing cast and never relented in pushing the series as far as it could go.

Life on Mars stars John Simm as D.I. Sam Tyler and Phillip Glennister as D.C.I. Gene Hunt. LoM is basically a cop show with a scifi twist. In 2006, Sam is hit by a car and he wakes up in 1973. He doesn't know if he's a time traveler, insane, or in a coma. Throughout the series, we see a lot of evidence for options two and three. Sam often receives calls from 2006 and hears the beeping sounds of a heart monitor. He has hallucinations of a creepy little girl and her stuffed clown and also of people taking to him through his television set. Through his bouts with madness, he has Annie Cartwright to help him. She is a police officer in the woman's unit and the most patient person you can imagine. She listens to all of his ranting and becomes his friend (their relationship is the sweetest I've ever seen in movies or television). At the station much of the tension is concerned with Sam adjusting to the old way of doing things. He has no computer, it takes two weeks for finger prints to come back from processing, and people mishandle evidence without a second thought. He brings about some changes like he always records interrogations and he begins protecting crime scenes. These changes aren't enough, however, to combat the violence and unconventional methods of his superior officer, Gene Hunt.

Sam, Gene, and Annie

The most important relationship in the series is between Gene and Sam. They each have very different methods when it comes to their profession. Sam is by the book and Gene, well, he has his own way of doing things. Gene beats up those he interrogates, he threatens, he makes deals with bad guys, and he covers up evidence. Obviously, they clash constantly. It is really difficult to get Gene Hunt across properly in writing. He's racist, sexist, and about any other 'ist' you can think of, but still you can't help but like him. He's unapologetically himself and the viewer appreciates this about him. Sam, thankfully, is the one who has to deal with him and not us. These characters slowly gain a mutual appreciation for each other. The final conflict of the series revolves around their relationship - Sam is given the choice to betray Gene and return to his old life or stick with him. Its a harder decision for Sam than you would expect. These two men have a very unusual bromance.

After rewatching the first episode of the series, I was surprised to find how much it ties in to both the season one finale and the series finale. In the first episode, we are given a brief glimpse of a woman in a red dress running through the woods. We see this image repeatedly throughout season one, but it isn't until the final episode that we discover why this image/memory is so important to Sam. The final scene of the first episode is also very telling. Sam is standing on a roof preparing to jump. He believes that in jumping he can return to his real life. In the final episode of the series, he stands on the same roof with the same dilemma. I really don't want to give anything away. The treat of the series is seeing how everything fits together.

I could go on and on about how much I love this show, but I've written enough for now. I'll probably go into more specifics another day since I am excited to work my way through the series once again. The entire series is short (not even the length of your average American season) but its worth every minute. The series finale, in particular, is absolutely amazing - perfectly paced and wonderfully executed. The ending is open to debate but, as there is a spinoff series called Ashes to Ashes, it couldn't have had the starker ending it probably deserved. (Gene Hunt returns in the spinoff, but Sam does not. Keeley Hawes is the "time traveler" this time. The series hasn't yet been released in the U. S. but I'm hoping it will come out soon since its just finished its run on BBC America.) All I can say is that LOST could have taken some pointers from Life on Mars.


P.S. Just so you know, as Life on Mars is a British show, the content can be iffy at times, but most of the series would be rated PG-13.

Coming to Masterpiece Theatre in October. . .

Roses

I'm submitting a creative non-fiction story to several journals (one down, three to go).  Fingers crossed. 

Premieres

Next month is premiere time for television. Gone will be the dog days of reality television and other bad summer shows. Starting early September, our television will be hopping with new shows doomed for failure and old shows on their last leg. We will grieve the loss of shows such as Dollhouse and Lost, but be thankful no longer to be subjected to the onslaught of convoluted plots and awkward endings. Its time to call the cancellations and hits. Here's hoping that all writers will not serve us pointless procedurals week after week. Here's hoping that characters who die will stay dead. And here's hoping that next year we'll get Terra Nova.


I am looking forward to the return of Supernatural (September 24) and that's about it. Season five was absolutely brilliant. Where other shows were going downhill, this one was only getting better. The apocalypse has been done before in TV, but never quite like this. The Winchester gang created Team Freewill and fought both angels and demons to save the world. They did it too - against the odds. We last saw the Winchester brothers at the end of the Apocalypse - Dean retired, Sam and the other brother died yet again, and Castiel went away to regroup heaven. The original Supernatural story arc was only meant to go five seasons, but the show got a sixth. Kripke's gone but here's hoping the new showrunner can come up with a sixth season to rival the amazing fifth.

Other than Supernatural, I'm looking forward to the new Nikita (September 9). There's been two previous television incarnations of the story (Le Femme Nikita and Alias). This time Nikita is trying to bring down Division from the outside. There will apparently be new assassins within Division training to take her place. I love a good spy show (Covert Affairs was seriously disappointing. Female spies shouldn't be weak and motivated only by their relationships with men.) and so I'm hoping this one with stay on. Nikita is getting paired up with Vampire Diaries which bodes well for it. On a side note, I dislike Shane West but am willing to accept him as Michael if the story is decent.

The Good Guys is coming back this fall too (September 3)! The best summer show EVER. This cop show is absolutely hilarious. Its like a super lighthearted Life on Mars without the time travel. Every episode has an epic shoot out and Dan never fails to amaze me with his strangeness (he calls computers "computer-machines” and David Caruso "the leprechaun who's always taking off his sun glasses"). I can't wait for it to begin again. Every week it took me an half an hour to get Fox coming in for The Good Guys, but it was always worth it.

Last year, I promised myself that I would not watch Heroes. This was a difficult promise to keep because of the amount of air time Syler got last season, but I stuck with it. You see, the show only made me yell at the television which isn‘t a good thing. Heroes is thankfully cancelled, but this year, I have decided to make a similar promise to myself.

Shows I WILL not be watching this year:
1. Fringe - I give up on J. J. Abrams. In every episode, one of the three main characters is in danger of being killed. It was silly. I knew the writers couldn't kill any of those characters off. Oh, and I did yell at the television during the horrific "Brown Betty" episode. It was not a musical. "Once More with Feeling" was a musical. Singing a couple lines twice in a episode does not make it a musical. I couldn't believe I missed an episode of Supernatural for that junk. Anyways . . .
2. Chuck - I hate Chuck and Sarah as a couple. That's my only reason for not watching this fun show.

With two more weeks to slog through until premieres, previews are plenty and hopes are high. Personally, I can’t wait to see if any show can managed to crash and burn as hard as the Jay Leno experiment. Oh wait, that’s impossible.