Madman and Izzy talk trash about television. This week: crash survivors and colonials confront unknowable enemies in an unforgiving universe. Lost and Battlestar Galactica -- it's all about war.
(logo thanks to cskendrick)MitM: Humankind is forced to run for its life when the sentient machines they created come back years after a devasting war to get their revenge on Battlestar Galactica. This is one of the best written shows on television, and each successive episode reveals layers of unexpected intrigue.
Like many, I was skeptical, and I tend to find the endless recycling of old shows, old movies and old songs to be a sign of an utterly moribund culture, but Battlestar has shown that even the slightest piece of pop fluff can be redeemed and reimagined.
Izzy: I admit I haven't watched much of either the new or the old Battlestar Galactica, okay none, but I can tell from the commercials that the new one is much better. I just couldn't get past all the hairspray in that old one. This one has much better stylists. Does the show focus on action or dialogue?
MitM: it actually focuses on both, and dwells on what government means, how the military should serve civilian government. The proper way to protest. Oh, and the space battles are amazing, with some of the best physics I've ever seen on a science fiction show.
Izzy: During the battles, is the focus more on strategy and fighting, or does it explore the characters and their feelings while the action is going on around them?
MitM: there is a strong focus on the stress of command, especially during combat, and the different tests of loyalty people face when their lives are threatened. These are fully fleshed out characters, with complex histories. Even the Cylons who pass as human, such as Boomer, wrestle with their loyalties.
Izzy: Oh, fine then, I feel totally ready to commence my review -- Battlestar Gallactica is totally about war, unlike Lost -- how can you even say that? In any case, I'm not that interested in BG unless you tell me something really intriguing -- hey, is Calamity Jane in it?
Lost, on the other hand, is an excellent show. In part because it is so studiously not about war when it could so easily be that way. Instead, it focuses on human nature. It explores violence, greed, weakness, and power -- all the things that contribute to war. And there are fights and violence, but they are shown as side effects of what's going on with the characters and how it flows out of the group dynamic.
MitM: Lost accomplishes much the same thing. It takes the old castaway stories, mixes in some X-Files with a little bit of soap opera, and makes the best use of flashbacks as a storytelling device that I've seen in a very long time.
Izzy: I agree. It doesn't turn the genre inside out, but it makes it feel new. And I usually hate flashbacks, but these are really good. They somehow add to the narrative instead of derailing it.
MitM; Oh, and with President Laura Roslin & Lt Kara (Starbuck) Thrace on Battlestar, as well as Kate and Jin on Lost, we are treated to some of the best women characters ever seen on TV.
Izzy: I like the female characters on Lost, but I don't know that I'd classify any one or two of them as the best I've ever seen. What I've noticed is that each woman on the show is a stereotype -- there's a young, unwed mother; an older, wise woman; a spoiled, rich girl; Jin is the abused wife; and Kate is like Bonnie without her Clyde.
So at first glance I wouldn't say the show has provided any groundbreaking female roles. But all of the women are strong and the show seems to be deliberately shattering the cultural expectations set up by the situations. Taken as a collective, I can only conclude this was intentional. Lost continually sets up standard situations and then shocks the hell out of you. After, you realize they'd been carefully luring you in a certain direction, playing with cultural biases you didn't even know you had, only to explode them in some deeply satisfying way.
MitM; Oh, I love the way the female characters are developing. They may have started as stereotypes, but the island reduces everyone to a blank slate, offering a fresh start. I'm especially fascinated by Jin. I can't wait to see how she develops, and to watch the effect her growth has on her husband. As she's asserted herself, he's reached out to others on the island as well. They had both been trapped by their traditional roles. She's freed them from that. She found the strength to open that door through her compassion for the others.
Izzy: Lost really plays on power structures, group behavior, and human nature. You can watch it strictly as an action/adventure show -- the pacing is incredible and it's rip-roaring fun -- but it's also high entertainment for those interested in psychology or sociology. Like Lord of the Flies crossed with Indiana Jones. And for your conspiracy and puzzle fans, it's a treasure trove of subtle clues and oblique cultural references. I don't pay much attention to that part, but it's spawned a rabid internet following.
MitM; I still think that there is an undercurrent of people under threat, with the hidden (and sometimes not-so-hidden) dangers of the beasts and other people on the island. I can't wait to see what happens next.
Izzy: Hey! Undercurrent of threat? Are you insinuating Lost is about war?!? Again? Now you've gone too far -- this means war! Um, I mean an intellectual discussion exploring the roots of our conflict, of course.
Comments
Add Comment