Monday, January 30, 2012

Perhaps an Odd Commemoration

(This entry was started in late January, so it's being posted as such, even though life intervened, and then it ballooned to an unreasonable size as I just kept rambling. If you make it through this entire post I will give you candy. *Note: all candy must be retrieved in person.)

For several reasons, relating to grad school expectations unmet, relationship expectations dishonored, and personal expectations unfounded, 2002 was overall the worst year of my life. I entered grad school for a PhD in English in fall 2001, and by Christmas I realized the life it was preparing me for, professionally and personally, wasn't who I wanted to be. In the new year I remember a journal entry describing it as if my knees had been cut out from under me, and as 2002 progressed, things just got worse. A handful of friends new and old supported me and gave me strength to get through each day, and each week, and each month, though for most of that year I struggled with depression and had a generally bad time. Little things, like the lack of natural light in my apartment, would get me down to the point where I couldn't get out of bed in the morning. Little things, like dear friends who, even though he was working on a doctorate while she was working in campus ministry and they were both raising 3 kids, gave me a key to their house so I could come visit whenever I pleased, would remind me of how blessed I was and encourage me to see the good in my life. There were those I had to cut out of my life for my own well-being; there were many more who invited me into their own lives as friends and fellow travelers in the strange and dehumanizing world of grad school.

It wasn't all pain and gloom, of course. Being a natural introvert, having an active imagination, and liking to keep myself busy, I invented lots of projects for myself. Some were pretty large: for example, I took a musician friend's cassette archives of almost 40 of his live performances from 1987-1997, organized them, cataloged them, and transferred them to CD. It was wonderful to live alone and be able to shut the door on the world outside for the weekends. In warmer months I took to wandering the woods near my apartment, and eventually wrote a short story about that. I discovered the joy of 24-hour grocery stores and shopping after midnight. The music I gravitated towards was somewhat eclectic, ranging from escapist pop to serious-minded singer-songwriters. My two big finds that year, artists whose music and lyrics are still very important to me, were Sixpence None the Richer and Nick Drake; my two big guilty pleasures, which still make me smile even though I'm sometimes hestiant to admit I like them, were Michelle Branch and Roxette. But perhaps most importantly in terms of projects, 2002 was the year that Paramount fortuitously decided to release all seven seasons of Star Trek: The Next Generation on DVD.

Another guilty pleasure of mine was to wander my local Best Buy for an hour or so once a week, playing the video game demos and checking out new DVD releases. When promotional material came out hawking the release of season 1 in March, with a new season to follow every other month (with both seasons 6 and 7 to be released in December), I was intrigued. Best Buy then added their own promotion: if you bought a season set in the first or second day of its release, you got it for 50% off. This was all at the cusp of television on DVD; no one knew whether or not such a thing would be successful or popular. Paramount was actually taking a rather big gamble on committing to releasing all seven seasons in a year. Best Buy, no doubt, was contracted to take a certain amount of stock, and were hedging their bets by offering this 50% off deal, just to get a jump on depleting the number of sets they'd have to eat if the entire experiment didn't work. In the late 1990s, "letterbox" VHS tapes for movies were briefly all the rage, but almost immediately tanked, and some in the industry speculated that television on DVD would follow the same pattern: people would buy 2, maybe 3, of their favorite shows, and ignore everything else. 10 years on we know what actually happened, but back then, there was no Netflix, no Red One, no online streaming, and no web-only video content (much less webisodes or web series). The Blockbuster model, of blue roofed stores you visited for weekend deals, led the industry. About the biggest innovation at the time was that you could return rentals you got at one Blockbuster to a different Blockbuster - be still, my beating heart!

I of course had my own problems, and questions about the viability of TV on DVD never occurred to me at the time. All I knew was that one of the shows I grew up on in junior high and high school was coming out on DVD, and I could get all of it, and at 50% off. I liked to joke, then and now, that watching Next Gen was what got me through grad school, but there's actually a nickel's worth of truth there. It became a ritual, a cherished tradition: an episode a day, often with dinner or just before bed, starting in March with season 1 and continuing every time a new season was released. Of course life intervened and it didn't happen every single evening, but it was something I could look forward to with regularity, and there wasn't an abundance of things I could look forward to in those days. There were even a dozen or so episodes I'd never seen before for one reason or another, and because of the shortened release schedule at the end of the year, I was watching episodes into the spring of 2003 which, having decided long before to leave after getting a master's degree, was my last semester. So Next Gen really saw me through the rest of my grad school career, and those seven silver boxes have been sitting on shelves in first my apartment, and now my house, ever since.

I think it's important to commemorate both the good and bad things in our lives, and a decade on, I've decided to remember what 2002 was like by watching all of Next Gen once again throughout 2012. In January I rewatched seasons 1 & 2, and will be rewatching a season every other month for the rest of the year, tacking on the four Next Gen films after season 7 in November. So how did rewatching the first two seasons go? Wow, I'd forgotten how truly awful most of season 1 is. And yet, the first season was, by the standards of the day, successful. This is, in my opinion, due to three factors. The first was simply that American TV in 1987 was mostly waiting on "the next big thing," especially in terms of a dramatic series. Several successful shows ended multi-year runs in '87: The A-Team, Remington Steele, Silver Spoons, Gimme a Break, Scarecrow & Mrs. King, Fame, and likely the most important from 25 years on, Hill Street Blues. Blues was one of the first shows to introduce a serial form of storytelling into American prime time, the other major show being St. Elsewhere, which in 1987 was beginning its last season. Serial storytelling is, briefly, the kind of narrative in TV we're used to today in scripted dramas: ongoing intricate storylines spanning seasons and even entire series, with viewers expected to know what characters reference even if the plot point occured years earlier. A show like Lost or the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica - or even The Sopranos - simply wasn't possible in 1987; television was just starting to learn that the serial format, which worked to great effect on soap operas in the afternoon, could be applied to "serious" prime time drama. The biggest things on evening TV in '87 were half-hour sitcoms: The Cosby Show, Cheers, Family Ties, Growing Pains, The Golden Girls, Newhart, Who's the Boss, Designing Women, Night Court and, sadly, ALF. The rest of prime time was hour-long dramas which were either non-serialized (Murder She Wrote, Matlock, Magnum PI, Miami Vice, Cagney & Lacey, MacGyver) or were playing with serialization, but mostly as "prime time soaps" (Moonlighting, Dynasty, Dallas, Knots Landing), the one exception being Steven Bochco's L.A. Law, which had just started the previous year. Also, there was only one serious science fiction show on prime time: a new version of The Twilight Zone which had started in 1985.

So even though much of the above was "good TV," the medium had a gap which something like Next Gen, a serious, serialized sci-fi show with broad based appeal and a strong brand name, could fill. The second reason the show was successful was purely its business model: Gene Roddenberry and Paramount decided to release the show in first-run syndication, which means that the show was produced and filmed without a specific network on board to broadcast it. Instead, broadcast rights were sold to regional or local TV stations, who usually (though not always) were affiliated with a network. Because the regional or local station now owned rights to broadcast, they chose the day and time the show aired. For the 1960s and 1970s, the biggest success of first-run syndication programming was game shows, which stations would air in mornings or afternoons as a niche kind of filler for when they ordinarily wouldn't have network programming. Often during these years, British miniseries were sometimes shown in the US this way. Many cancelled network programs found a second life in syndication, sometimes producing new episodes which were then distributed via the first-run syndication model. The original Star Trek itself (aka the Original Series), though it produced no new episodes after cancellation in 1969, had 79 episodes which were syndicated frequently in the 1970s, giving the show cult status and enough of a fan following to resurrect the show, briefly as a "Star Trek - Phase II" TV show which never got out of pre-production, but ended up paving the way for the feature film franchise.

Gene Roddenberry was heavily involved with Star Trek - Phase II and with Star Trek: The Motion Picture. But budget costs spiralled out of control on the movie, and partly because Roddenberry was such a bottleneck for all decisions, Paramount found him easy to blame when the film was poorly received critically, and although the film made money, it was far less than the studio's expectations. Paramount greelit a sequel, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, but ended up giving director Nicholas Meyer the lion's share of decision-making. When the film was not only made within budget (and with a much smaller budget than Star Trek I had), and was wildly successful both financially and critically, Paramount continued to release movies in the franchise and continued to slowly sideline Roddenberry. By the time the fourth movie came out in 1986, the creator of Star Trek had almost nothing to do with the film series. But the successes of the films made the public and Paramount want more of the Trek universe, and Roddenberry was able to sell them an idea of a show built around another Enterprise crew, set a century after Kirk's generation, with all new actors (who would cost considerably less).

The catch was, Roddenberry wanted to be the first and last decision-maker on the show. He would run casting, he would decide who was on production team, he would enlist the writers and directors. Together, Roddenberry and Paramount hit upon the first-run syndication model because it got them both things they wanted: it assured no network interference, which Roddenberry had had quite enough of already from NBC in the 1960s, and the syndication deal they decided on meant that stations had to agree to a 2-year contract, and essentially guarantee two full seasons (around 50 episodes) of Next Gen before a word of a script had been written or a casting call had gone out. This made sure Paramount would recoup its investment if the series was a flop, and Star Trek as a brand name had the cache to convince stations to make the 2-year commitment. And because Paramount would be making its money back even if the series tanked, they were quite willing to let Roddenberry be in complete control. After all, lightning had struck for him once with the Original Series in a syndication model - why not twice? If the series was successful in syndication and picked up for additional seasons, that would be cream financially for Paramount, and vindication for Roddenberry that he still knew what was best for Star Trek. Even better for the studio, a new show with new actors meant that not only was the original Trek cast available for more feature films, Roddenberry would be busy on the TV series and could be withdrawn entirely from the films. (Which proved to be true, though a mixed blessing for the studio and franchise: Star Trek V was directed and mostly written by William Shatner and was the poorest received of any original cast film; on the flip side, Roddenberry was adamantly against everything about the storyline of Star Trek VI, which then and now is widely seen as the second-best original cast film.)

This brings up the third and last reason the ghastly first season of Next Gen was successful: the vision of Gene Roddenberry himself. (Yeah, I know, you'd forgotten we were technically still within the three reasons list.) There seems little doubt, historically in both the Original Series and in the Next Generation, that Roddenberry's vision of the future, in general and in specifics, played a large role in the success of Star Trek. Roddenberry, rare among science fiction writers and dreamers, looked at the future of humanity and saw hope and unity. He saw an Earth united under one fair, benevolent goverment and part of a United Federation of Planets. There were not only hundreds of alien races in the universe besides our own, but they were mostly rational, intelligent beings with whom we could have meaningful alliances and advance science, learning, and the general well-being of all species. Poverty was eliminated through the Federation, as was much disease, and there was general enlightenment beyond the traditional barriers of race, gender, class, and creed. With the passing of these things, there was also the passing away of currency, greed, avarice, and most all forms of conflict on a societal level. Starfleet, the exploratory arm of the government, sent ships in search of more intelligent life in other galaxies, and was also an efficient military force for defense purposes against those who preferred to be at war, such as the Klingons and the Romulans.

When you really think about it, it's amazing such a rather utopian vision of the future ever caught on, in the 1960s, '70s, or '80s, or even today. (And yet, the "reboot" of the Star Trek film franchise by J.J. Abrams in 2009 showed the continuing appeal - and financial goldmine - of this kind of hope in this kind of future.) Of course, Roddenberry was never someone you could call "consistent" - one of the favorite jokes Trekkies have with one another, which Roddenberry confirmed privately while making Next Gen, was that the Trek canon was basically whatever Roddenberry felt it was at any given moment. He was a persuasive visionary, but not in any way a businessman or, frankly, much of a showrunner. In assembling a production team for Next Gen he brought back some old partners like Bob Justman and D.C. Fontana, but also took on new talent as well, including Mike Okuda and the heir apparent, Rick Berman, whom Roddenberry groomed to continue the legacy of Star Trek in the way Roddenberry wanted.

Part of the truth of things was that, in 1987, Gene Roddenberry was 66 years old and starting to have health problems. As the first season got underway, there were issues from the very beginning in the writer's room, and Roddenberry increasingly focused his attentions there, leaving more of the daily production to Justman and Berman. There's been much speculation as to the nature of the problems in the writer's room during season 1, and though various facts are known (including that Roddenberry ended up doing the final rewrites, some of them extensive, on the first 14 epsiodes regardless of who else wrote them) there's also been a fair amount of protection Roddenberry's associates onscreen and off have given him. What can be inferred without much difficulty is that Roddenberry wanted the scripts to work a certain way, to generate conflict more from the situations on new planets the crew found themselves in, instead of among the crew themselves. There would be no more antagonism a la Spock and McCoy (well, actually, there would be, but that's in season 2). There would be new, dangerous enemies which would reappear frequently, and the biggest successes of these would come from Roddenberry, who created the idea for the Borg, and created Q entirely on his own. Unfortunately, Roddenberry also created the Ferengi, who were simply creepy in an uncomfortable instead of a threatening way.

Though many of the characters and casting decisions were exactly right (such as a more contemplative, diplomatic captain, paired with a first officer leading Away Missions who seemed to take on the more honorable aspects of Kirk's character), he had to be strongly persuaded by his colleagues to make Worf a main character, and for much of season 1 Worf has almost nothing to do but growl and make recommendations that the captain should act aggressively. Roddenberry's own ideas of who Klingons could and couldn't be were rather shockingly limited; in the first and second seasons, ideas made for advancing Worf's character came from other writers. Perhaps his biggest character misstep, though, was Wesley Crusher, who was given Roddenberry's middle name and who became a surrogate for Roddenberry himself in terms of his own desires: to be a young man in this brave new future who was brilliant and had the rest of his life in front of him. Wesley had little to do in season 1 as well, mostly limited to being in awe of everything, spout arrogant technobabble and, more than a few times, save the entire ship because of his genius. Wil Wheaton played Wesley and rather unfairly got the brunt of almost immediate and long-lasting fan hatred. Really, Roddenberry is to blame for being too close to the Wesley character and for using it as an outlet for wish-fulfillment.

Poor story decisions were made at the outset, too. While the Q sections of the pilot episode "Encounter at Farpoint" work fairly well, little else does, and the second episode, "The Naked Now," is basically a rehash of an Original Series episode called "The Naked Time," with the crew encountering a new strain of an emotion-releasing, deadly fever that the previous crew encountered. Barely after meeting these characters, not only do we unfairly see their deepest emotions revealed all at once, but in a ripoff of a story done 20 years earlier. The next epsiode, "Code of Honor," depicts the bad guys as African tribesmen, and then "The Last Outpost" introduces the Ferengi, who have big electric whips and talk about how shameful it is for humans to clothe their females; neither episode works at all. (One of Roddenberry's more dirty-old-man moments involved a full page of the writer's bible to the first season devoted to Ferengi mating habits.) But people were watching, and maybe through a soft spot for the world of Trek, were saying the new episodes had the flavor of the old series, if not the quality. A basic restatement of why it's important to explore the galaxy came in "Where No One Has Gone Before," and we get a first-grade recitation of why the Prime Directive is important (before Picard breaks it) in "Justice." In these early episodes, Picard is pedantic and rambling, Riker cold and driven, and Troi is Captain Obvious with her Betazoid spidey sense. Wesley is annoyingly right all the time. Wesley will remain annoyingly right all the time for most of the next two years.

But after ten or so episodes, things do pick up. It's hard to say exactly why: there was a revolving door on the writer's room, as scribes frustrated with Roddenberry's reworking of their stories left and others came and then they left too. Eventually it seemed like a few writers began to grok the world Roddenberry wanted to create, and also that these characters were not cardboard cutouts for Roddenberry's ideals, though sometimes he wrote them as such. In the slightly better episodes, Q returns in "Hide and Q" to tempt Riker with phenominal cosmic powers, and "Haven" takes what could have been a disastrous story idea, of the arranged marriage Deanna Troi's father set up for her long ago, into a roller coaster ride with a brilliant guest star and character: Lwaxana Troi, played by Majel Barrett, Roddenberry's wife. "The Big Goodbye" introduced the holodeck, which now we all know is for porn, but in 1987 was a real innovation for storytelling and played into the virtual reality craze of the time. The episode, where Picard, Data, and Dr. Crusher don 1940s attire and muck about in the noir world of Dixon Hill, private eye, was given a Peabody Award, the first syndicated show to receive that honor. It's actually difficult to imagine Next Gen without the holodeck, and if there's one cultural referent which Next Gen alone can entirely be credited with, it's that empty black room with the yellow gridlines which can become anything.

Episodes remained hit and miss for the rest of the season. Cast members seriously wondered if Paramount would pull the plug, and some started looking for other jobs. (Denise Crosby, who played Tasha Yar, found another gig and asked to be let go from her contract, which Roddenberry permitted. Her character died near the end of the season in "Skin of Evil.") The holodeck was again used and its ability to mimic nature analyzed in more detail, speculating on its abuses, in "11001001," a rather enjoyable episode despite some heavy-handed plot twists. Data's evil twin brother appeared in "Datalore," an entirely cringeworthy event. What could have been a mature exploration into gender roles becomes a series of predictable whiny rants in "Angel One." Still, there's some stories which are moderately well-done and definitely feel like classic Trek: an old negotiator uses an experimental drug to make him younger for one last mission in "Too Short a Season;" Picard's long lost love reappears, married to a sweet but nutjob scientist who may accidentally blow the universe apart in "We'll Always Have Paris;" and even Wesley gets to be less of a jerk when he and other Enterprise children are kidnapped by a society who have become sterile in "When the Bough Breaks." Worf gets to be the focus of the episode "Heart of Glory," as rebel Klingons are rescued by the Enterprise and try to convince Worf to join them against the Klingon Empire. Though it skirts the real relationship of the Federation and the Empire, as a set piece for learning more about Klingons and Worf's character, it's actually rather well done.

The season ends with two quite odd episodes, "Conspiracy" and "The Neutral Zone," the former the most hard sci-fi episode I know of in Next Gen, with flesh-consuming aliens living inside a highly-placed Starfleet aide and trying to take over the organization, the latter involving the Enterprise finding three humans cryogenically frozen for thousands of years and trying to help them adjust to the 24th Century, while also dealing with the Romulans, who suddenly appear in the Neutral Zone and accuse the Federation of destroying their outposts there. The former is a scary, creepy episode and one I've never liked; the latter is quite flat and boring, even with the Romulans. When the cast and crew reminisce about season 1, they tend to describe it as being exciting in the beginning, but then just as a slog to get through, lots of growing pains, and they're just thankful things kept moving and got better in season 2.

And season 2 really is better than season 1. In fact, the series' first two truly excellent episodes show up, the eighth and ninth of the season. The first, "A Matter of Honor," involves Riker participating in an officer exchange program with the Klingons; he has to overcome both the Klingons' distrust and a very real Ferengi threat to the Enterprise at the same time. It almost perfectly blends the action-adventure and intelligent character drama which Next Gen became famous for and which I remember growing up. The show's willingness to take on important social debate appeared in the next episode, "The Measure of a Man," where a Starfleet engineer wants to take Data apart to make many more copies to serve on other starships. Picard takes him to trial and fights for Data's right to choose his own fate as an individual, not as the mechanical property of Starfleet. The one-two punch of being an almost perfect illustration of what Star Trek is all about and Patrick Stewart's acting prowess makes the episode one of the best Trek episodes ever. Watching it this month, probably for the fifth or sixth time, I still got a shiver when Picard turns to point at Data and says "Your Honor, Starfleet was founded to seek out new life - well, there it sits! Waiting."

Season 2 also had many solid, enjoyable episodes, from Data and Geordi's first run on the holodeck as Holmes and Watson in "Elementary, Dear Data" to a deaf guest star appearing as a deaf mediator who must find a new way to communicate when his "chorus" is accidentally killed in "Loud as a Whisper." There's the first of several "time loop" episodes with "Time Squared," where a Picard from 18 hours in the future appears adrift in a shuttlecraft. There's an updated version of Romeo and Juliet with "The Outrageous Okona," Riker's dad stops by and causes problems in "The Icarus Factor," Worf's first love stops by and causes problems in "The Emissary," and Lwaxana Troi stops by and causes lots of problems in "Manhunt" as she looks for a new husband and decides the captain would be an excellent choice. The TNG writers were learning that the show was often at its best when exploring the personal lives of the main characters, not something sci-fi was known for in the 1980s, and something the Original Series itself had dipped into only infrequently.

Perhaps most important in terms of episodes, Q shows up in "Q Who?" and sends the Enterprise spinning into the Delta Quadrant, where they first encounter the most popular adversary ever in the Star Trek universe: the Borg. And there's one of my own personal favorite episodes of the series, "The Royale," which sees Riker, Data, and Worf trying to solve the mystery of why a casino populated with alien beings in human forms appears on an otherwise uninhabitated planet... and why the three of them can't leave the casino. It's just so classic Trek, with an amusing script and a rather clever explanation. Season 2 marked the beginning of a recurring role for Whoopi Goldberg as Guinan, ship's bartender (and a new permanent set in Ten-Forward, the Enterprise bar/social space). The role was pursued by Goldberg herself, having been a fan of the Original Series and of Nichelle Nichols, who played Uhura, specifically. At first the producers didn't take her seriously, but when she was persistent, Roddenberry happily cast her and created the role of Guinan for her. Goldberg would guest star in several episodes over the rest of the series, ocassionally playing a major role (including another of my all-time favorite episodes, Time's Arrow, where the crew go back to 1893 and meet Mark Twain).

But as the casting of Goldberg was satisfying to fans, another big casting decision was a minor disaster. At the end of season 1, Gates McFadden, who played Dr. Crusher, was let go and Roddenberry decided to bring on Diana Muldaur as the new ship's medic, Dr. Pulaski. Muldaur had appeared twice in the Original Series as two different supporting characters, so she had the Trek pedigree, and definitely had the acting chops as well. Unfortunately, Roddenberry decided to try to build up some of the old McCoy-Spock antagonism, this time with Dr. Pulaski and Data. It didn't work, not only in the scripts (except in rare instances) and never on screen, as Data had been a fan favorite from the beginning of the show, and Dr. Pulaski was seen as too prickly, too stubborn, and as played by Muldaur, enjoyed mocking Data a little too much. As the season continued, some of her antagonism was switched to Picard from Data, but this didn't work very well either, and thankfully the character was removed at the end of season 2. McFadden was approached to return for season 3, and wasn't planning to, but Patrick Stewart called her and convinced her to give the show another try. McFadden stayed for the rest of the run.

There were, of course, a large handful of dud scripts too. An arrogant, selfish scientist near to death transfers his brain into Data in "The Schizoid Man." Aliens who are rather dumb trick the Enterprise crew into helping them by playing dumb in "Samaritan Snare," which is the worst episode of the season. What had the potential to be a decent story, of a scientific community developing eugenically enhanced children getting struck by an aging disease, instead becomes a vehicle for Dr. Pulaski being stubborn for an hour in "Unnatural Selection." Wesley has his first crush, on a young shape-shifting diplomat in "The Dauphin," with predictably cringeworthy results. Cut short by a writer's strike, season 2 only wound up with 22 episodes, but over half of them are what I'd call good, with a few standouts as I've mentioned. The world of Next Gen was taking shape, the writers' room still had a bit of a revolving door but had settled some, and though Roddenberry's decisions were hit-or-miss, overall the fanbase and even most of the critics had judged Next Gen as not only a worthy successor to the Original Series, but an enjoyable show in its own right.

It's interesting to think about how, as Roddenberry's health would decline in season 3 to the extent that Rick Berman took over all showrunning duties, how that season marked the beginning of Next Gen's best years, which I'd say are seasons 3, 4, and 5, with the overall quality of episodes in seasons 6 and 7 still being measurably better than seasons 1 and 2. To me, it doesn't diminish the idea that lightning did indeed strike twice for Gene Roddenberry, but I do think that for Next Gen to really move forward, it had to be entrusted to other writers and showrunners. Roddenberry set it all in motion, and kept it going through a rough first two years, and on the basis on his vision, his inheritors continued creating memorable, enjoyable science fiction worthy of being Star Trek. We could of course debate how far that could stretch, as with each new Trek series (Deep Space Nine, Voyager, Enterprise) there was a law of diminishing returns. Still, the franchise only lay fallow for four years, 2005-2009, between the last episode of Enterprise and the Abrams reboot of the Original Series in film form. I look forward to seeing the "continuing missions" of Kirk, Spock, McCoy, and who knows who else in the years to come as the franchise reinvents itself once again. For this year, though, I'm quite content to revisit my old friends in the 24th Century, commemorating how I enjoyed exploring the final frontier with them as a kid, and how a decade ago they helped me out once again, by getting me through grad school and by contributing to the viability of TV on DVD, both of which I'm very grateful for.

Thursday, January 19, 2012

A Month in the Old Republic

So, it's literally been a month since Star Wars: The Old Republic (TOR) released, and as I've mentioned before, my World of Warcraft guild had decided to switch en masse. In fact, my friends and I were among the many who pre-ordered and got 3 or 4 days of early access to the game. (This, by the way, was a brilliant move by BioWare. By staggering invites, with pre-orders gaining access in groups throughout the week before the official launch date, it provided a way for the servers to "ramp-up" operations, and not only gave those of us who'd been eagerly waiting for the release a little reward of "getting in early," it also meant that we early birds could level characters out of the starting zones before the onslaught of the release day and prevent the scourge of all MMO gamers: server lag.) Now that we've spent a month there, it's pretty obvious TOR is going to be our game of choice for quite a while.

If you've read my previous post on the backstory for my main character, you'll know that we're on a role-playing (RP) server, in the Sith faction, and I'm playing an Inquisitor named Raymus Qel-Davro, an exiled cousin of the prince of Alderaan, who developed Force abilities unexpectedly and is on a quest for personal power, with a secret in his past concerning why he's connected to the Force at all, and a private vendetta against Alderaan's royal house. It's been interesting to be on a RP server because, during most of the few week or two of the release, no one was really behaving or talking in character, among my guild or in the general population. We were all just trying to get used to the game and figure out how it worked, which wasn't difficult (especially for those of us coming from other MMO experiences) but it was also pretty nice to see a general attitude of helpfulness on our server. Someone would ask a question in general chat about where to find a specific quest, or how to change a certain game setting, and immediately there'd be various people chiming in on an answer. For various quests, two or more players are needed, and for heroic quests (which are repeatable daily), four players are required. Four players are also required for "flashpoints," the TOR version of instances or dungeons. General chat was and continues to be rife with "LFG" or "LFM" (looking for group or looking for more) and the name of a quest or flashpoint, and people are very interested in grouping up so all of them can benefit from the extra xp and credits (in-game money) that a heroic quest or flashpoint gives. Gradually, more and more people are beginning to talk and behave as their characters, and so far, my guild has tended to do so more often when we're in a flashpoint together or when we're writing letters to each other to give items our character can't use but theirs can. When we're just on the game at the same time but doing our own individual storylines and quests we're more inclined to chat as ourselves, catching up on each others' lives and sharing ideas and opinions about the game, which has always been a central component of why the guild exists.

Rather than give as complete an overview as I did with World of Warcraft way back when, I think I'll give a brief overall introduction to TOR gameplay, perhaps point out a few major differences from WoW, and talk about why we are so impressed with it. So, like most MMOs, you choose the kind of server you're interested in: the standard player-versus-environment (PvE), player-versus-player, where opposite faction characters can attack each other on sight (PvP), standard role-playing (RP), and role-playing with player-versus-player (RP-PvP). The two factions, the Galactic Republic and the Sith Empire, each have four classes to choose a character from, and half a dozen races. However, unline WoW, the race of your character is purely a personal choice; no special stats are given to the various races, so there's no "better" races if you wanted a character who could do X ability or have Y automatic skill. Everything in TOR is focused on classes. The Republic has Jedi Knight (think Luke Skywalker), Jedi Consular (think Obi-Wan in episode 4), Smuggler (think Han Solo), and Trooper (think of, um, good-guy Stormtroopers, I guess). The Empire has Sith Warrior (think Darth Vader), Sith Inquisitor (think Emperor Palpatine), Imperial Agent (think of a trained sniper-assassin type), and Bounty Hunter (think Boba Fett). The classes are, as you might notice, loosely paired across factions in the order I've mentioned them. At level 10, each character is required to choose a specialization, and each class has two specializations. This allows for more unique characters and play, and also opens up more options for roles in groups. (Currently you can level to 50, so for most of the game you play as your specialization.)

As you may remember, in group quests or in flashpoints, there are three main "roles" players have in MMOs. The first is the tank, the leader of the group, who jumps in and starts bashing enemies, with the goal of doing as much damage as possible and the enemy focusing as much of their own firepower as possible on the tank. The second is the healer, who ideally stands back from most of the action, perhaps entirely, and focuses on healing the rest of the group, especially the tank. The third role is DPS, or damage-per-second. These are players who are part of the fighting but are the second-line of sorts, and tend to deal damage to the enemy in ways that require more time to effect, or require them to not be hit in order to keep the damage going over time. Tanks usually have melee weapons, things you can hold in your hand (axes, swords, lightsabers, etc.); DPS usually have distance weapons like guns or crossbows, or have "spells" like shooting fireballs or Force lightning. DPS also can often have AOE or area-of-effect weapons, which deal damage within a circle to multiple enemies; sometimes healers can have their own version of AOE which heals multiple team members at once. Specializations in TOR mean that the number of classes branch from 4 per faction to 8.

How this works effectively involves the skill trees, another common trope in MMOs. Starting at level 10, each character is given a skill point with every level they attain. Each character has 3 skill trees, with one shared tree based on class and two others based on specialization. Adding points to trees opens up new abilities or increases effectiveness of abilities already gained. They're referred to as trees because each begins with a bottom layer you have put skill points into to "open up" the next layer, and so on. Even though two Inquisitors may be standing next to each other, they could have radically different skill trees and so be wearing different gear and using different kinds of offensive and defensive attacks in combat, even if they're the same specialization, but even more if they're different specializations. This goes a long way towards customizing the game play towards each person's preferences, and allows for lots of variety in group combat because of all the myraid combinations which could exist. The secret is, all TOR classes are, at baseline, DPS classes, which is the happy medium for solo questing. With specialization, each character can continue in the shared skill tree and continue being DPS, or with the other two skill trees, move towards more of a tank or healer role. And so each class could be a tank, or a healer, or a DPS. It's a real advancement over WoW, where most of the classes are more narrowly defined in group roles: a priest could kinda do DPS briefly but is mostly a healer; a warrior could kinda do DPS briefly but is mostly a tank; a mage could kinda do tanking briefly but is mostly a DPS.

The real nail in the coffin of TOR over WoW for me and my guild, however, is the emphasis on storyline in all aspects of TOR, especially in terms of class quests, and also how quests of any kind are begun and ended. BioWare has apparently re-used and updated an interaction engine they used in the game Mass Effect, in which a player can interact with an NPC (non-player character) and select responses via multiple choice. Sometimes the conversation will continue along similar lines no matter what response is chosen, but often different responses will lead the conversation in different directions. For TOR, there are certain conversations which, depending on your responses, will result in points which increase your standing with the Light side or Dark side of the Force, occasionally lead to fundamentally different relationships with certain NPCs (including but not limited to loyalty, disgust, being more or less helpful, and even romance), and rarely even determine which quest you're offered. Additionally, throughout TOR each player, depending on their class, is joined as they level up by various "companions" who aid in solo combat. Each companion has its own personality and depending on your responses to NPCs, will gain or lose "affection points" towards you. Lose too many, and they'll desert you or betray you.

Here's an example. This isn't a real example, but something I've made up in terms of how things can go in-game. Say you're playing a warrior who is looking for a secret research facility and you, personally in terms of how you're playing your character, see helping the poor and outcast as beneath you. You're offered a quest by a ragged-looking man to stop a local gang from terrorizing the transients in a section of the city. He promises you information he says is crucial to your search, so you're tempted to help. You're also offered a huge amount of credits to do it, and you happen to have a companion at the moment who by default tends to be excited by any job which promises a big payout (all companions have set-in-stone preferences in interactions). So saying no would satisfy your own concept of your character's personality, but you'd lose affection points from your companion, who wants the money. Saying no also might, concievably, cut you off from future quests this ragged man might offer. Let's say you say yes, grudgingly. Your companion is pleased and you gain 15 affection points. You go off to the section of the city the ragged guy tells you about and kill 12 thugs. (While you're there, a side quest opens up to short-circuit the gang's communications network, which is patched into the city's electrical grids. By shorting out 6 of their patches, you automatically gain some extra xp and credits.) You return to the ragged man and as you interact with him, he hands over the money, but doesn't actually have the information about the research facility he said he did. He also doesn't have any more quests for you. You're now given options to walk away, threaten to report him to the city authorities, or kill him on the spot. All options will give you Light side or Dark side points (and, in a small divergence from the rules of the Star Wars universe, you can have a Sith who is on the Light side of the Force, and Jedi who are on the Dark side. It's a sliding scale, which can make characters more interesting). But your character is pissed - you were offering grudging help in the first place, mainly to get the information. You kill him with your lightsaber and gain 50 Dark side points, as well as the credits promised and the xp from completing the quest. Your companion, focused on the money, doesn't really care about the guy one way or the other, so you don't gain or lose anything with him.

As you can guess, this multiple-choice interaction engine makes the game dependent on cutscenes and voice acting, which frankly introduces a degree of nuance and subtlety into the game which has simply never existed in any other MMO previously. The game is already in the Guiness Book of World Records for the most amount of voice acting in any video game ever. It helps make your character, your companions, and a few of the NPCs with whom you interact frequently more complex, more interesting, and approach slightly closer to being "real." Most importantly, the writers have put serious thought and energy into the class-specific quests. In fact, though regular open quests and flashpoints have specific storylines involved (and the flashpoints in particular have involved storylines) the most intricate and realistic involve class quests. From levels 1-10, each character has a class "Prologue," encompassing the beginning of their story on a starting planet (for example, Korriban, with its Sith Academy, for Inquisitors and Warriors; Hutta, under control of the Hutt cartel lords, for Smugglers and Bounty Hunters) up the point where, at level 10, each player is given their own ship and let loose in the galaxy. Different planets have different suggested levels, but what really guides players is a 3-act story structure, based on class, which sends you to the planets in specific order to accomplish overall missions and takes your character along an arc from levels 10-50.

Raymus is at level 28 and he's still in Act 1. He's an Assassin instead of a Sorcerer. My Prologue involved me making a name for myself at the Sith Academy, overcoming the prejudices of my trainer, a narrow-minded guy who preferred another recruit to myself, and by beating that other recruit, attracting the professional attention of Zash, a powerful Sith Lord who enlists me in helping her find various artifacts which once belonged to Tulak Hord, one of the most powerful ancient Sith masters. From Korriban I was taken to the Imperial Fleet, a hub for various things you can do (upgrading armor and weapons from vendors, engaging in PvP arenas similar to WoW's battlegrounds, most importantly getting your own ship) and then took my ship to Dromund Kaas, Balmorra, Nar Shaddaa, and currently, Tatooine, where on each planet, along with the various regular quests, flashpoints, and space combat missions which presented themselves, I've been in search of the various artifacts. On Dromund Kaas I had to not only discover an artifact in a buried temple, I had to defeat Darth Skotia, the Lord who owns the temple and its archaeological dig and who also has a vendetta against my new master, Lord Zash. On Balmorra, the artifact is located in a pit crawling with colicoids, giant venomous oversized bugs, so first I had to track down how to make an antidote to their venom before even attempting to access the pit. On Nar Shaddaa, another artifict is in the personal collection of Paladius, the leader of a cult with devoted, homicidal followers. I'm enlisted by a brother and sister who are trying to stop the cult and they convince me into developing a new cult, based around me as leader, to challenge Paladius's authority and, once his power is curtailed, I pursue him to take the artifact from him. (A completely divergent choice I could have made would have been to minister to the many sick people on the planet and build my reputation that way.) Now, on Tatooine, I'm temporarily in a tenuous partnership with a space pirate whose former first mate has another of these artifiacts. I want the artifiact; the pirate wants to kill his old mate. All that is still in process, and I'm only about 1/3 through Tatooine.

Each of these overall planetary class quests has multiple steps and side quests associated with them, and nothing is ever as straightforward as it appears. On Nar Shaddaa, for example, concerning this brother and sister I team up with: the brother is out for power and control for himself, and the sister is oddly taken with my character and keeps making these flirty comments. Oh, and have I mentioned yet that in between Nar Shaddaa and Tatooine I have a dream where a strangely armored Sith appears to me and warns me that Zash will betray and kill me once I collect all the artifacts she wants? But I don't know who this apparition is and whether or not they can be trusted. In other words, the highly engaging, well-mapped-out storylines for the class quests are largely character-driven, and the mechanic of the interaction engine makes it possible to experience these stories in a more immersive way than other MMOs have been able to do. It also means replay value, in creating alternate characters of other classes, means that even though the regular quests on each planet are the same, the class quests and arcs are each entirely different. And so if you want to play both Republic and Empire characters, that's 8 entirely different class arcs to work your way through. And if BioWare and LucasArts ever decide to add more content in the form of specialization-specific quests (it'd probably be quests within the context of the overall arcs), that's 16 different baseline character experiences to some potential degree.

My guild and I are very, very happy with the game. For myself, I'm probably playing it for some part of a majority of my evenings, sometimes for 20 minutes (to do a few space missions, maybe), sometimes for 3 hours between solo questing and running flashpoints with the other guild members. As usual, some in the guild are on the game much more often than I am, and a few are on the game less. Our enthusiasm is pretty constant, however, and though I haven't created an alt character yet, others in the guild have, and I look forward to doing so. (I'm thinking an Imperial Agent, though I don't have a strong backstory idea for him - or her - yet.) I'll also say, we're open to more guild members and we're all about making the experience as pleasant as we can. We're glad to help teach you how to play, and run flashpoints or quests with you, and we follow our #1 rule pretty closely: If you're having fun, play, and if you're not having fun, stop playing. Though we're enthusiastic, we're not obsessive (much) and are definitely not going to start yelling at each other when things go wrong. Just last night, three other guildies and myself had to tackle a flashpoint end-boss 6 times, three times to figure out how to beat him, once because I made a stupid mistake (I didn't get into the room far enough when the fight began and got locked out) and then two more tries to actually defeat him. Let me know if you're curious about what it would look like to join us. As my girlfriend would say, come over to the Dark Side - we have cookies!

Friday, December 30, 2011

Top 10 Books of 2011

Of course you are wondering why it’s only a top 10 instead of a top 15 as in previous years. Well, dear reader, it seems that I tend to read less when I stop having annoying neighbors. It’s an unanticipated minor disaster. You see, back in the apartment, when the guy across the landing got into one of his manic furniture-moving moods, I knew I had to leave the place for a few hours. Likewise, when the girl downstairs would experiment with cooking, which often involved cabbage or overcooked soups or both, I knew I had to leave the place for a few hours. Since I was a 2-minute walk from the library, I’d grab whatever book I was reading and spend some time in a comfy chair in the quiet back sections of the building. Since getting my house, the random extra hours of reading have vanished and I haven’t been intentional about replacing them. So I’ve only read 30 books in 2011, and so a top 10 would be the top third of them, which is what I’ve decided to go with. The other interesting thing to note, as I look back over the full list, is that only half a dozen were books of poetry, far less than in previous years. I’m not sure where that came from, but I do think it’s probably correlative to my own output of poems dropping off throughout the past year to barely a dozen. Still, there were some really great books I got to read this year, so let’s get to the list.

title – author – year published

10 – Master and Commander – Patrick O’Brian – 1969.
The Napoleonic Wars are not my period of history, nor are ships and sailing a particular interest. Which probably explains why, when I saw and loved the movie version of Master and Commander in 2004 and decided to read the original novel, it didn’t actually happen for seven years. The book is almost entirely different from the movie, which cherrypicked various events from half a dozen of the 20 novels in the series and made some serious changes to Captain Jack Aubrey. The movie presents he and Stephen Maturin as long-time friends just at the beginning of middle-age, whereas the novel starts with their first meeting as younger men just starting their careers. While Maturin’s character seems much as Paul Bettany played him, a grave and serious-minded scientist and doctor, Aubrey is best described as an ambitious, ballsy, impulsive man, very jolly and outgoing, not much for gravitas but a great one for speechifying, and oh yeah, a womanizer. In other words, an 18th Century version of James Kirk. Still, the interactions between Aubrey and Maturin are much of the draw of the novel, as is the very realized world O’Brian creates around them, which feels quite authentic and has all the naval technicalities and jargon rather perfect. The story is episodic, with the crew here chasing a foreign vessel to plunder, there in port getting refitted, and over there being chased by a larger, more powerful ship, culminating in the crew playing an indirect role in the Battle of Algiceras near the Rock of Gibraltar. I may or may not read further in the Aubrey-Maturin series, but I’m glad I finally got around to dipping my toe into O’Brian’s world, which is so unlike where I usually spend my time.

9 – McSorley’s Wonderful Saloon – Joseph Mitchell – 1943.
Joseph Mitchell wrote of my all-time favorite books, Joe Gould’s Secret, which was made into one of my all-time favorite movies. So I knew I had to visit other works of his, and this collection of long and short pieces for the New York World-Telegram and the New Yorker during the ’30s and early ’40s, provides much of the same human insight and distinct flavor for honest, straightforward reporting which characterized both his writing and himself. Always attracted to the more unstable denizens of the Big Apple, his subjects for portraiture include a bearded lady, the old ticket-taker at a run-down theater, the Gypsies he can find in the city, a homeless traveler who writes extravagant checks to those who help him, and a tribe of Native Americans who were tapped to build many of New York’s bridges because they’re completely unafraid of heights. For all the fascinating characters and strong writing, one of the most intriguing things about the book for me was how poorly Mitchell’s attitude has aged: there simply are no picaresque, charming bums anymore, if ever there were. Underneath it all I suspect Mitchell had a bit of Huck Finn in him, with the back part of his brain always tempted to light out for the territories, and since by the 1930s there was no more frontier (Alaska and Hawaii not yet on the horizon for the U.S.), he took to chronicling the outsiders, the mavericks, the law-avoiders and law-breakers of the city he loved.

8 – The Great Wheel – Paul Mariani – 1997.
The only poetry book of the half-dozen this year to end up on the top 10, Paul Mariani’s poems have appeared on my top lists before, in 2008 with Prime Mover. Here, he uses the familiar Shakespearean trope of the turning of the wheel of fortune to wrestle with the past, his own and collectively America’s as well, giving glimpses of how battles both won and lost resurface and need to be fought again in our private and public lives. At the same time, things we’ve lost come back to us, sometimes a good thing, sometimes not so good. Still, his touch in applying this symbolism is light, knowing that the starkness of the basic idea is enough to carry its own weight without much additional pressure: there are mundane things like round bar stools, naturalism like the sun at noon, to modern machines like the ferris wheel and the classical circles of heaven and hell from Dante.

7 – The Warriors: Reflections on Men in Battle – J. Glenn Gray – 1959.
Working at Bluebell I get the chance to run across syllabi from all kinds of classes, and this one came from a psychology course a friend was taking. Almost immediately after receiving a PhD in philosophy from Columbia in 1941, Gray was drafted and served in Italy as a counter-intelligence officer, later becoming a philosophy professor at Colorado College. A decade later he published this book, a penetrating, thoughtful mix of distilled interviews and the author’s own experiences, set up as a philosophical exploration of and against war. He explores, through revisiting his war diaries and diaries of other soldiers, what war does to the thought processes and emotions of a soldier, towards himself, towards his fellow troops, towards “the enemy,” towards his family, and towards death. It’s a fine line to walk, trying to balance such rough, sometimes scarring experiences with as objective and philosophical attitude as possible, but Gray does an admirable job much of the time, providing some real insight and real questions for any reader, even one like myself who has seen very few of the realities of war.

6 – A Handful of Dust – Evelyn Waugh – 1934.
Waugh will show up again soon, so the entry for this novel will be brief. A modernist story by turns satirical, sympathetic, and philosophical (as if Waugh were reading Virginia Woolf and Thornton Wilder simultaneously), the novel shifts between tones and themes, the first part being mostly about the breakdown of an aristocratic couple’s marriage through the wife’s affair with a socially ambitious middle-class urbanite. Then the couple’s young son dies unexpectedly, which leads the wife to ask for a divorce. At first willing to grant it, the husband finds her family demanding a settlement so large he’d have to sell his ancestral home (a huge, decrepit stone house in the Gothic style) and so he refuses, instead running away from the problem by joining an expedition to Brazil. The novel’s third section stays with the husband and his ill-fated expedition, where he is eventually held hostage by an insane but polite colonialist, revered as a god/father by a local tribe, whose sole purpose for keeping the husband around is so the latter can read the works of Dickens to him each night. Ostensibly a rumination on the subtleties of savagery within civil society and the aristocracy in particular, the combination of a rather off-the-cuff plot with Waugh’s impeccably precise writing and snarky wit made this a simply fun carnival ride, not so much a roller-coaster as one of those contraptions which swings back and forth until it gains enough momentum to upend its passengers and make a 360 degree turn.

5 – The Last Days of Disco, With Cocktails at Petrossian Afterwards – Whit Stillman – 2000.
I’ve mentioned that in my spate of rewatching some movies this past summer, one which really grabbed me was Whit Stillman’s The Last Days of Disco from 1998, and two years later, Stillman wrote a novelization of the movie, told from the perspective of one of the secondary characters and including some of the scenes which never made it into the screenplay, plus an epilogue reflecting on the characters from years later. Jimmy Steinway is an ad-man in New York in the early 1980s, dangerously close to losing to his job. One of the few reasons he’s kept on staff is because he can get clients into The Club, a 54-esque night spot with a line outside the door and the coolest new disco tunes on the dance floor inside. Though in some ways a stereotypical rich kid/yuppie, Jimmy is not without a degree of observational prowess and has perhaps more than his share of windy pop philosophy. He falls in with a small social group who circle around Alice and Charlotte, two newly minted Hampshire grads who work together at one of the old publishing houses as lowly manuscript readers. There’s Tom, a young environmental lawyer who collects Scrooge McDuck comics; Dan, who works with the girls and spouts socialist ideals but also cuts a mean rug; Holly, the girls’ third roommate who is very nice and very ditzy; Josh, a young criminal lawyer with some emotional demons; and Des, floor manager at The Club and serial womanizer, who feels it’s a caring gesture to break up with girls by pretending to discover that he’s actually gay so he doesn’t hurt their feelings by telling them they’re boring. The novel succeeds as the film succeeds, by painting a world of neurotic young adults trying to figure out love and work and music, but does so in a fresh way by making Jimmy the sole narrator and so events which I already saw dramatized in the film are given from a different perspective. Jimmy gets annoying at times, but that’s part of the charm, a very specifically Stillman sort of charm, which I admit takes a little getting used to.

4 – Democracy in America – Alexis de Tocqueville – 1835 & 1840 – translated by Harvey Mansfield and Delba Winthrop, 2000.
It’s a huge book, with a huge theme, written by a large-minded man who greatly admired the American Experiment and sought to detail its governmental successes and shortcomings. It took me over a month to get through (a very long time for me to read something), and that coincided with buying my house so it feels like it looms large alongside that other sizeable event. I think I’ll just direct you to my third homeownership post rather than rehash my thoughts here.

3 – Privilege – Ross Douthat – 2005.
It is very, very rare that a book comes along where I want to start a dialogue with the author. Largely that’s because with most of the books I read, the author is already dead – oh well. But among living authors it’s rare, and when I read Privilege, whose subtitle is “Harvard and the Education of the Ruling Class,” I seriously considering writing Ross Douthat a long email in response to his first chapter, telling them there was no obligation to continue the conversation, but here were my thoughts, from the perspective of someone educated at an almost-Ivy who now works on staff there, and someone largely in agreement or sympathy with his experiences and opinions about the college experience. If he was interested, I’d respond to further chapters. This plan was in my head for maybe two months; then the house-buying preparations took over, and I never did it. Sitting here thinking about it, the interest is coming back to me. We’ll see. In any case, as you might guess, I felt an affinity with the book, a sense you get when you read something and say in your head “yes, that’s just how it is, and that’s what’s good about it and that’s what’s not.” The intrigues among students and student organizations, with administration, over issues great like religion and small like grades, the hazardous and yet obliquely rewarding social stepping-stones and alumni connections, the default huge ambitions and default huge entitlements, love and sex and whatever elite, neurotic college students do with each other (which is lots of neither), professors by turns fawning and dismissively arrogant, educational ideals conspicuous by their absence. What saves the book from being a raw screed is first, its bemused humor, and second, the reality that this was Douthat’s undergraduate life, not some collection of long-faced statistics or some old Boomer lamenting “kids these days.” His stories ring true because they did happen to him. Undoubtedly it also helps that Douthat and I, were we at the same school, would have overlapped each other for two years, so perhaps I’m kinda squarely in the book’s demographic.

2 – The Plague – Albert Camus – 1947 – translated by Stuart Gilbert, 1948.
Camus has been on my list to read for quite a while, and eventually at one point in the past year I grabbed literally the first book of his I saw on my shelf (not reading an author doesn’t mean I don’t have a half-dozen of their books laying about) and started reading. The Plague is a straightforward story of an infection isolating the Algerian city of Oran in the present-day, revolving around a handful of characters and their reactions as the city and its citizens slowly succumb to turns of disbelief, terror, lawlessness, resignation, and depression. Though Camus was never comfortable with the idea of existentialism, the term describes the novel well, as does “the absurd,” the philosophical sense of which Camus did much to describe and promote. Taking place over the course of a little less than a year, the story describes the epidemic from start to finish, mainly concerning itself with Dr. Bernard Rieux, who pleads with medical authorities to recognize the problem, then slaves away to work on a cure – and eventually to comfort the dying as he can – as the epidemic grows. A few others find themselves drawn to Rieux’s efforts, including a city clerk spending years on writing one perfect sentence, a secretive suicide survivor who flourishes during the plague, a faithful Jesuit priest, a visiting journalist who continually plans to escape from the quarantine to return to his young wife, and a traveler and political activist who doesn’t believe in God but wants to understand if it is possible to be a saint. It’s a powerful cast of characters with a powerful backdrop, not for the weak of mind or stomach. Often I would find myself stopping my reading deliberately to let things that were being said or done sink in over a day or two before going back to the book. More Camus will be in my future.

1 – Brideshead Revisited – Evelyn Waugh – 1945.
Here’s our Evelyn again. (By the way, he’s a man and it’s pronounced eve’-linn.) Funny story with Brideshead. I was supposed to read it in college, during my sophomore fall. I had a newly hired English teacher for 20th Century Novel that semester, and like all newly hired English teachers, she was too ambitious with our syllabus, listing nine novels for twelve weeks, most of them thick and all of them complex. We read six and a half – poor Jean Rhys got some very incomplete treatment. Brideshead was to be the final novel and we just never got there, but I’d bought the book and intended to read it someday. It sat on my shelf for about 14 years but I read it this summer, oddly enough finishing the last chapters while sitting on a hillside before an Alison Krauss & Union Station concert (the concert’s setlist is written inside the back flap). Waugh’s prose is perhaps at the height of his powers, though less of the satire he was famous for in his earlier works remains, and what does is almost never overt, but rather a subtle, very dry humor which warms my insides like little else does.

Charles Ryder, a captain in the British Army during World War II, is sent with his regiment to occupy a sprawling English country house called Brideshead. He doesn’t tell his superiors he’s well-acquainted with the house and its former family, the Flytes. Most of the rest of the story takes place in flashback, starting with Ryder’s days at Oxford with Sebastian Flyte, a gregarious and dissolute young man who goes around with a teddy bear called Aloysius. Sebastian introduces Charles to others in the dissolute-and-wealthy set, and eventually brings him to Brideshead, hoping none of his family are there, as he doesn’t want Charles to meet them. Eventually Charles does: there’s delicate and kind Nanny Hawkins, pompous and bland older brother “Bridey,” smart but shrewish sister Julia, and younger sister Cordelia, a charming and naïve girl who, along with Bridey and their gently tyrannical mother, Lady Marchmain, are strict Roman Catholics. Lord Marchmain, who had converted because of his love for his wife, has since abandoned her and lives with a French noblewoman in Venice. As Charles is drawn further into the Flyte family, his relationship with Sebastian strains and eventually he leaves the circles of Brideshead. The book shifts to a number of years later, with Charles having made a minor reputation as a painter, unhappily married to a socially ambitious wife and distant from his young children, when events take him into contact with Flyte family again in surprising ways and again lead him to Brideshead.

It’s a novel which on the surface is one of manners, but from the perspective of an outsider, as the book’s narrator is Charles and stays in his perspective throughout. On a deeper level, Waugh is concerned with the nature of divine grace and its presence or absence in individual lives. There is the nostalgic glow of “old Oxford days” and the beauty of Italy, as well as the ennui of middle-aged life and the tumult of the gentle English countryside turned from pastoral estates and farmland to garrisoned army training zones and stockpiles. In a time of victory gardens and rationing, there is a quite visceral emphasis on food, its quantity and quality and the lush extravagance of being able to call for it and it appears, the easy elegance of dropping many pounds on a night filled with wine and champagne. And the ghastly morning which comes after. Being the Anglophile I am I found the story utterly fascinating, and Waugh’s expertise as a stylist and wordsmith is perhaps unsurpassed in modern English literature. After finishing the book I watched the 11-hour miniseries adaptation from ITV in 1981, which would have appeared on the yearly top 10 for TV except it’s not a TV show. The coincidence was highly amusing when I watched Downton Abbey a few months later; as I said in my review of that show, it’s gotten the highest ratings in Britain for a small-screen period drama since Brideshead in 1981.

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

Top 10 TV Shows of 2011

It was a good year for TV. Full disclosure: I think every year is a good year for TV. Likely because I keep falling deeper into the rabbit hole of British television with its shorter seasons (technically called series, not seasons) I watched 38 seasons of various TV series this year. (For the sake of consistency I refer to all shows using the American words and definitions.) And yet, even with more British TV happening, I ended up delaying continuing to watch favorites like Hustle, Foyle's War, Yes Prime Minister, and Primeval. Meaning there's some new British shows on the radar. Plus, the big question on everyone's mind: since Mad Men ended up taking a year off, what show captured the #1 spot in its absence? Let's dive in and see. I got props on the links-to-performances thing from my Top Albums post, so we'll do the same here.

show & season - year originally broadcast - network - episodes & run time

10 - Happy Endings, season 1 - 2011 - ABC - 13 eps., ~22 min. each.
I'll be honest, the half-hour situation comedy format isn't my thing. I never got into Friends or Seinfeld. Cheers, Frasier, The Cosby Show, and Mad About You were fine enough, though I get bored with them after a few episodes. The Simpsons, Family Guy, and Futurama are more interesting to me because of how animation can aid in farce, but the stories themselves are ho-hum. I do tend to sometimes like sitcoms which sit in the middle somewhere between a traditional sitcom and satire, like The Larry Sanders Show, sitcom and drama like Sports Night, or sitcoms with larger-than-life personalities like NewsRadio or The Big Bang Theory or 30 Rock. (And still on my list to watch someday are things like Modern Family, Arrested Development, Parks & Recreation, and Community.) It's just that usually it takes me an effort to commit to watching a season of a sitcom, whereas a drama, historical, or genre-oriented show is a very easy fit.

Happy Endings is something which I may need to create a new category for. It starts as a Friends rip-off, about six people who met in college and haven't gotten to know anyone else since even though they're now in their late 20s. When Alex leaves Dave at the altar, their collective, balanced group theatens to unravel, and by the end of the pilot there's an uneasy truce between Alex and Dave so their friends don't have to choose sides. After about 4 episodes that setup essentially evaporates as any kind of drama and the rest of the show is, strange as this may sound, all six characters figuring out how to be funny in the early 21st Century when you're in your 20s and are trying to grow up in a world that doesn't care if you do (and when you have strong temptations in yourself not to, either). How much should pop culture factor into humor? How much should the classically juvenile genres of sex and scat be involved? Where's crossing the line into mocking your friends or you ex-fiance, and where's crossing that line and being hilarious? When is a catchphrase or meme overused? When does blaming your parents grow stale? When do you get to be old enough to mock the next generation? None of the characters ever think about any of this, of course, but are constantly critiquing and evaluating their own and each others' jokes and retorts and they'll often go on tangents about it all. When being meta is taken as a generational trait, you simply get characters who live inside these questions, and Happy Endings is a sitcom slyly devoted to exploring the current definitions of comedy. Here's a nice 2-minute illustration. And for an ironically fitting final comment, I will note that I watched the entire season of the show through ABC's free iPad app.

9 - Corner Gas, season 1 - 2004 - CTV - 13 eps., ~22 min. each.
Friends from grad school, who actually are the opposite of me and watch lots of sitcoms, told me I must try this Canadian show written by and starring Brent Butt, who must have decided to become a comedian after he learned his last name. Since I humbly accept that Canadians are funnier than Americans though not overtly so, I gave it a shot and was pleasantly entertained, which is Canadian for it totally rocked, dude. Very much a straight-up situation comedy in the wacky personalities field (the Canadian/British version of the American larger-than-life personalities field), Corner Gas centers on a combination gas station/coffee shop in Dog River, Saskatchewan between two truck routes. Life is slow, so the natives have grown sarcastic to cope. Brent Butt plays Brent Leroy (notice the changed last name), who runs the gas station and deals with his parents, Oscar and Emma. Wanda Dollard runs the convenience store inside the station, new girl in town Lacey Burrows owns the coffee shop, and the entire police force (Davis and Karen) come in constantly for coffee, while Brent's unemployed childhood friend Hank loiters around the gas station. The episodes are almost always standalones, with the traditional A-B-C plotlines which often interweave in some way, based more on character quirks than in forwarding any actual plot. It's low-key but quite fun, something I shared with my gently aging parents and they enjoyed a lot. The show has officially put its episodes up on YouTube; here's the first 10 minutes of the first episode: watch as much as you dare!

8 - Leverage, season 3 - 2010 - TNT - 16 eps., ~42 min. each.
Leverage hangs on through season 3 to stay on the top 10, though it drops several places. This is for two reasons: the quality of other shows I've seen during 2011, and also because of one conceit used for season 3 which I felt could have been done better. At the start, Nate and the team are forcibly recruited by a mysterious woman who gives them a dossier on master-criminal Damien Moreau, and tells them to infiltrate his organization and take him down, or she and those she works for will kill them. A powerful setup, right? The show then spends most of the next 10 episodes, the bulk of the season, involved in one-off jobs for clients with (save for two) no connection to Moreau. Then, the last five episodes form an arc involving the team getting closer and closer to Moreau; this last arc is extremely well done and cemented the show achieving the top 10 again, but it was frustrating to wait so long to have any movement on the season's arc. It makes me wonder if the arc was actually a late idea in planning the season, and they'd simply had several one-off episodes already plotted. And don't get me wrong, the one-offs are still quite good. In fact, Leverage is learning an old lesson from Columbo: when you need a villain, get a well-known actor. Tom Skerritt, Richard Chamberlain, Clancy Brown, Bruce Davison, Wil Wheaton, Dave Foley, Bill Engvall, Kari Wuhrer, and Spencer Garrett all have great small roles, many of them as villains, and Goran Visnjic appears as Damien Moreau. The cons are fun, they always go wrong, and the team scrambles to make them end up right. It's a formulaic show, but the characters are deep enough to make it interesting, plus it's just such a fun ride. Leverage also puts full episodes on YouTube; here's the first one from season 3. Watch at least the first 4:40 to get a good sense of the characters.

7 - Downton Abbey, season 1 - 2010 - ITV - 7 eps., 1 & 7 ~60 min., 2-6 ~45 min.
Hailed as the new "Upstairs, Downstairs" and garnering the most popularity and highest ratings in Britain for a period drama since 1981's production of "Brideshead Revisited," Downton Abbey ticks off several boxes on my list of favorite things in a TV show: huge ensemble cast (16 actors listed in the main credits); highly literate writing (by Julian Fellowes, screenwriter of Gosford Park, actor, director, and peer in the House of Lords); gorgeously realized world (shot on location at Highclere Castle in Hampshire - exteriors - interiors); interesting time period (1912-14, just before WWI); character-based and historical drama.

Downton is occupied by Robert, the Earl of Grantham and his American wife, Cora, their three daughters, and many servants. When the Earl's brother and nephew are both drowned in the sinking of the Titanic, the wedding between said nephew and Mary, the eldest daughter, can't happen. Unless Mary weds the next-closest male relative, a middle-class distant cousin named Matthew who works (!) for a living, an entail codified into the estate by Robert's late father means all the land, house, title, and money will go to Matthew and out of the Earl's family entirely. Matthew, kind but completely against adopting the lifestyle of a nobleman, is attracted to Mary, but Mary can't stand him; likewise, Mary's grandmother, the Dowager Countess (played to perfection by Maggie Smith) clashes with Matthew's mother, Isobel. The Countess and Cora try to break the entail; Robert tries to convince Matthew to take over the estate; Mary tries to fend off various other suitors who show up wanting to claim her and family's title and fortune. Meanwhile, below stairs, a new valet hand-picked by the Earl, and a new chauffeur with Socialist politics, upsets the balance of the household to the grief of the head butler; Cora's maid and one of the footmen conspire against their fellow servants and the family; and another maid gets unexpected help in trying to secure a new position from the youngest daughter of the house, who is secretly interested in women's sufferage.

If this all sounds like a vaguely arcane circuitous soap opera, it should, and encompasses the best of what period drama can offer. Most interestingly, it's a long-form, installment-based drama series not based on a prior literary work, giving a contemporary complexity to the storytelling which is subtle and fresh. These characters are not, by and large, of the thee-and-thou set often imagined by modernist British writers, but carefully articulated people who, although they know and play the roles set for them by their society and station, are motivated by the most human of emotions and convictions and interact with one another like all workplace families ever have. The show is extravagant, beautifully written and amazingly well-acted by the entire ensemble, the kind of special treat in television which comes around so rarely. Shown on PBS here in the States, here's a short clip of the first dinner with Matthew and his mother with the entire family, and a glimpse at the end of the kitchen and a few of the servants.

6 - Doctor Who, season 1 - 2005 - BBC - 13 eps., ~45 min each.
Okay, I really don't have a good defense for not having explored Doctor Who before, either the relaunched series or any of the original run. My rather crappy defense is this, the opening titles used in 1973, which was my first exposure to the series in a re-run on PBS when I was around 5 or 6 years old. It scared me half to death (especially the music, which now I find awesome), I had nightmares about it, and I cordially stayed away from all things Who until this year, when the clamoring of many voices here at Bluebell and elsewhere convinced me I needed to give at least the re-launched series a try. Purists apparently don't countenance the BBC's referring to the 2005-present series as seasons 1, 2, 3 etc. but rather as seasons 27, 28, 29 etc. because the show originally ran from 1963-1989. Regardless of whether the current show is grouped with the former, it's still the longest-running and arguably the most popular science fiction show ever.

And, after getting through the first two episodes, which were used mostly to introduce the characters and display how weird and cool the Doctor is, I was more impressed than I'd expected to be. Of course, any attempt at explaining most of the episodes would sound patently silly. Though many of them are quite good on their own, what I most liked was that they gradually form into an arc for the entire season, as secondary characters and villains reappear and become more important, various mysteries are revealed gradually and often by clues placed in earlier episodes, and by the end of the season there's a wide storyworld established, with frequent leaps into both the future and past, alternate realities, the whole shebang. Christopher Eccleston is quite good as the Ninth Doctor; Billie Piper as his new companion, Rose, is excellent. Both old and new characters are quite well written: eternal baddies the Daleks reappear in excellent ways (and apparently they can climb stairs now); the addition of Captain Jack Harkness (who eventually gets his own spin-off show, Torchwood, after season 2) is a brilliant invention, as he's in many ways a match for the Doctor in charm, cunning, and outrageous gadgetry.

All that said, Doctor Who is simply a very weird show. Plots involve everything from aliens secretly invading Britain to start World War III to ghostly apparitions of the recently dead haunting Charles Dickens to the Doctor and Rose having to travel 200,000 years into the future to stop a monster from holding human evolution back by controlling all journalism. As I say, explaining anything would sound ludicrous. However, even amid all the kooky stories and melodrama, the show is at its best in two episodes called "The Empty Child" and "The Doctor Dances" where the Doctor and Rose go back to London during the Blitz and discover a strange young boy wearing a gas mask, calling repeatedly for his mother. Horrified to learn that anyone the boy touches gets sick and then "grows" a gas mask onto their own face and adopts the boy's attitude and behavior, they set out to solve why this is happening and how it's tied into a ship transported from the future by a mysterious con man. That such a story could actually make me tear up at its resolution made me remember again how the most far-out science fiction could be so humanly real. I'm excited to continue catching up on this odd, wonderful show.

5 - Party Down, season 2 - 2010 - Starz - 10 eps., ~30 min. each.
Party Down is completely unlike Downton Abbey in every way (except for having an ensemble cast) and yet it also ticks off a number of boxes for me, albeit very different ones. It's about Hollywood, the most narcissistic of American institutions outside academia, and it's a dark comedy, at times so darkly comic that it must be what happens when the abyss looks back at you, and laughs. It has characters who are mostly stereotypes and, like good Hollywood stereotypes, are mostly clueless about that. It's got one straight-man (Henry, played by the delightfully grounded Adam Scott) surrounded by farce, so there's this beautifully realized arranging-deck-chairs-on-the-Titanic aspect. Henry has an erstwhile love interest (Casey, played by the deadpan, droll Lizzy Caplan, who really is much more talented than Zooey Deschanel even though they look like twins) who would be great for him, except she's married and has enough relationship drama in her life already, thanks very much. Henry, known for a beer commercial he did which gained him lots of fame and destroyed his fledgling acting career, has rejoined the staff of Party Down, a catering company run by his friend and former employee Ron Donald (Ken Marino), who dreams of one day owning a Soup'R Crackers, a franchise-chain store offering fancy custom soups. (One wonders why such an eatery would be a good idea in sunny California.) Ron is every insecure middle manager you've ever met: a stickler for protocol and terrified of his boss but also desperate to be liked, and so both inconsistent and incompetent.

Rounding out the catering "team" are Roman (Martin Starr), a snobby aspiring screenwriter who loves horror movies and sci-fi and has never had a girlfriend, Kyle (Ryan Hansen), a surfer dude type actor who is dumb as dirt, and in season 1, Constance (Jane Lynch in her pre-Glee gig, which is why she's not in season 2) who should be killed for being so blissfully, ignorantly peppy. She has this great line in the pilot as she's coaching Kyle before an audition: "Kyle, you really have to commit to that moment. You know what Gene Hackman said to me when we were filming Lucky Lady? He said 'You should be committed.'" It's basically an encapsulation of her character. In season 2 her shoes are filled by Megan Mullally as Lydia, who's basically Constance but with a more maternal angle. Everyone's almost entirely self-interested, which sounds bad but actually turns out to be pretty funny, especially because pretty much everyone else at each of their catering events are the same way. It's a tidy setup, with each episode being a different catering gig at a different place with different guests. And the show was, like Carnivale, Yes Minister, and Primeval, something I enjoyed enough that I watched season 2 right after watching season 1. Both are great, but the second season is slightly better, because the first five episodes deal with (in order): rock stars, preschoolers, orgies, death, and Steve Guttenberg. You can see the natural progression there, of course. Here's a short clip from the "death" episode.

4 - The Wire, season 3 - 2004 - HBO - 12 eps., ~55 min. each.
Two years ago season 1 of The Wire achieved the #4 spot; last year, season 2 was mostly a disappointment and didn't crack the top ten. But season 3 is a return to form. The writers rightly realized that the Barksdale crew is the real source of drama and continuing interest for the story, and return it to the limelight, along with developing a strong side-story into the political structure of Baltimore and introducing new characters who are trying to decide if they can politically compete against the mayor in the next election. How they intertwine with the police department is a study in intricate self-interest and political play, and is perhaps the best plot strand in the season overall, though the motivating force for the season comes from another strong idea: a police major approaching retirement and under dictate to cut crime in his sector forms a novel and completely illegal approach, convincing the drug traffickers through various means to deal from three specific abandoned streets in the sector, promising free reign from police interference if they do so. The idea starts to work, with crime in every other neighborhood dropping dramatically while the three "free zones" run rampant and require intense police monitoring to prevent in-fighting (and also to keep them secret until the major can report long-term statistics to his bosses). Meanwhile, the special unit led by Cedric Daniels continues to pursue the Barksdale gang and its current head, Stringer Bell, who is trying to distance himself from the gang and become a legitimate businessman before kingpin Avon Barksdale is released from prison. Plot threads interweave and several from the first two seasons reappear in very satisfying and realistic ways, and the show at its best provides both a compelling realist narrative of crime as well as thoughtful ideological commentary on the law and justice. I'm very glad I stuck with the show after a plodding second season and look forward to continuing through seasons 4 and 5. Here's the official trailer promoting season 3.

3 - Game of Thrones, season 1 - 2011 - HBO - 10 eps., ~60 min. each.
I was passingly curious about Game of Thrones initially, having never read any George R.R. Martin, but I ended up doing something I don't usually do. I was housesitting for friends over a long weekend, and they subscribe to HBO, and the show's season had just ended. HBO was showcasing all episodes in HD for its subscribers, so I impulsively decided to watch the whole thing in 3 days. It was well-worth breaking my usual TV watching habits for. Yet another large ensemble show, this is perhaps the only one on the list this year which could also be described as epic in scope and execution. Eddard Stark, lord of the northern province of Winterfell and old friend and fellow soldier with Robert Baratheon, King of the Seven Kingdoms, is visited by the royal family and retinue so Robert can ask Eddard to come south, to the capital city of King's Landing, to be the King's Hand (a rather Chief of Staff-y position). However, the king is not really asking. As Eddard and his two daughters go south with the king, his wife Catelyn and his sons deal with unexpected treachery in Winterfell, and his bastard son Jon travels even further north, to The Wall, a giant ice blockade against wildings and in times past, the White Walkers, whom some claim have returned. Meanwhile, across the ocean, the children of the king Robert and Eddard overcame years earlier plot to unite with fierce horse-lords the Dothraki and return to claim the Seven Kingdoms for their own.

Game of Thrones is an adaptation of the first of seven books in the Song of Ice and Fire series, written by Martin and adapted very faithfully by David Benioff and D.B. Weiss, with the idea being that each book becomes one season of the show. Condensing over 800 pages and countless characters, plus a whole medieval world, into 10 hours of television is a herculean task, but the result is an engaging, emotional, far-reaching story with well-drawn and acted characters in a wonderfully realized, atmospheric world. In other words: epic. The Stark, Baratheon, and Lannister clans (the latter the kin of Queen Cersei) are the focus of the season as well as the brother and sister of the old king, across the ocean. With so many characters, a localized show like Downton Abbey runs the risk of confusing who is who; in Game of Thrones, the number of characters plus their relationships plus the wide-ranging geography involved risks utter chaos. Cleverly and helpfully, the opening credits detail all geography covered in each episode, and the set designers, art directors, and costumers create memorable and different looks, sets, and color schemes for each major place and its inhabitants. The writing is serious and mature, not just in the typical HBO-showing-skin way, and the cast is uniformly excellent, especially Sean Bean as Eddard, Michelle Fairley as Catelyn, Kit Harington as Jon, Lena Headley as Cersei, Aiden Gillen as Petyr, and Peter Dinklage, who won an Emmy for Best Supporting Actor as Tyrion Lannister.

Despite being an American production with American writers, the show is based in Northern Ireland and most of its cast and crew are British, Irish, and Continental European. The melding of all these cultures and attitudes in service of Martin's created, sort-of Anglo-Saxon, sort-of Francophone medieval world also adds a subtle depth of expression and believability to the Seven Kingdoms, as there are little touches, especially in artifacts and set designs, from many different historical cultures of the West. It gives the impression of a more gritty, "realistic" fantasy world than something like Tolkien; the narrative structure and dialogue of the show also reflects less of a "high fantasy" realm and more of a historical one. While the supernatural is not absent, "magic" seems to be, separating the world from other fantasy/history crosses like the Aurthurian legends. It's a careful and effective invention on Martin's part, and explored well by Benioff and Weiss. Season 2 premieres in April of next year, and I can't wait. For now, here's one of the official introductory trailers for season 1.

2 - The Hour, season 1 - 2011 - BBC - 6 eps., ~60 min. each.
The Hour was one of those shows I read three lines about and instantly knew it was for me. It offers a fictionalized story of a crucial period in British television's own history, when in the 1950s the BBC started to move away from, essentially, people with good radio voices simply reading the facts of the news over the air, into a more active, journalistic style including interviews, in-studio presentations, and commentary by newsmen and writers. Set in 1956 against the backdrop of the Suez Canal Crisis and a government desperate to shape this burgeoning approach to media to their benefit, the show follows the professional and romantic entanglements of Freddie Lyon, an ambitious young reporter unwillingly drawn into a cat-and-mouse game surrounding the death of the only daughter of a peer in the House of Lords, his best friend and boss Bel Rowley, who's been allowed to create a "test show" to see if this new kind of news program could work, and Hector Madden, a handsome anchor with family political connections chosen to be the face of the new broadcast simply titled "The Hour." As politics becomes personal and vice-versa, the three make a tenuous alliance (tenuous as both Freddy and Hector are attracted to Bel) as both G-men and spies begin tracking their movements.

In 2009 I complemented the BBC drama State of Play by saying it was television for grown-ups, and The Hour follows in that tradition, as well as being a spot-on period piece which borrows liberally from the Mad Men aesthetic of hyper-accuracy in all things great and small. The verisimilitude pays off well, though in a completely different way from Mad Men because this is essentially a spy story housed within a historical political drama rather than a search for individualism and identity housed within a cultural critique. Cultural critique is not absent, but is underplayed in the interest of the characters' personalities coming to the fore, in a smart move from creator/writer Abi Morgan. Ben Whishaw, Romola Garai, and Dominic West are excellent as the three leads, and of especial note is how Garai and so Bel has chemistry with both of them, in very different ways. The love triangle aspect is probably the least inventive part of the plot, but due to the writing and acting is saved from being an albatross around the story's neck. An intelligent show, it is ultimately modest in its aims and fulfills them amazingly well. Though not necessarily intended to be a continuing series, a second season was commissioned and is in the works, a delightful capstone to a truly enjoyable, fascinating story. Here's a clip from early in the first episode, showing Freddy and the usual way of doing the news, plus Bel after she's been given the producer job.

1 - Sherlock, season 1 - 2010 - BBC - 3 eps., ~90 min. each.
As I've said before on the blog, I know my Sherlock Holmes. Loved the stories and read all 60 in junior high, revisiting them several times since, loved the Rathbone/Bruce movies and radio dramas, loved the Grenada series from the 1980s starrting Jeremy Brett, love the two (so far) contemporary movies with Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law, even tried my hand at writing a Holmes story in college. And now I can add being over the moon at the new Sherlock series, helmed by brilliant scribes Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss, performed by the wonderful Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman. Moffat and Gatiss are fanboys writing half the time for other fanboys, half the time just to tell complex mysteries and how the world's only consulting detective solves them. Unlike the current American movies, Sherlock updates the duo to present-day London: Holmes, with his anti-social tendencies, finds it much easier to text than to talk to people; Watson is a veteran of the war in Afghanistan and suffers from PTSD. They meet the same way they met in the original novel "A Study in Scarlet," as Watson encounters an old medical school friend who introduces the two, as they're both hard up and looking to share digs with someone. Of course, since it's the 21st Century, their new landlady simply assumes they're a gay couple.

It's a joy watching how Moffat and Gatiss deal with the little things from the books, things only a devotee would notice. For example, Conan Doyle contradicts himself in different stories by giving Watson's war wound location as the leg or the shoulder; Moffat and Gatiss work it out by it actually being the shoulder while Watson's PTSD manifests itself as a phantom wound in his leg. In another perfect fanboy moment, a murder victim has been able to scratch out the letters "rache" with her fingernail before she died. In the original story, the same is written on the wall in blood after a murder. It's a German word which means "revenge" and in the episode the police coroner claims that's what it is and means. Holmes immediately dismisses him as stupid and says the victim was trying to write the name "rachel" and couldn't finish, which turns out to be right.

The energy that Cumberbatch and Freeman bring to their roles is undeniable, and balanced perfectly between each other; it helps too that Moffat and Gatiss have envisioned this Holmes and Watson as young men in their late 20s, just starting to make their way in the world. Despite the difference in ages, they have all correctly taken their cues from the original stories, as well as from the Brett/Hardwicke productions, which were mostly faithful to the texts. Though fun, the idea of Holmes as an action hero, as imagined from a few lines of text in the original stories where Holmes is good at boxing and expanded into the Downey Jr. version, isn't appropriate. The writers and Cumberbatch understand that Holmes' key weapon is not brawn but brain, and that his key weakness is not his pride but rather his lack of empathy: in perhaps the best line of the first episode, the police coroner, who like most of the cops can't stand Holmes, argues for arresting him because he is in possession of a murder victim's suitcase. "We found it in the hands of our favorite psychopath," he says, and Holmes whips around to reply in anger, "I'm not a psychopath, Anderson, I'm a high-functioning sociopath. Do your research." Watson, as a medical doctor, is no stranger to the dark side of society but has kept his humanity regardless, and it's in this way he's a necessary counterpoint to Holmes. Freeman's Watson is quietly intelligent, observant, and loyal in a way Holmes needs more than he realizes. The first season introduces Holmes' nemesis as well; the 21st Century version of James Moriarty is still a mathematician and professor, a child prodigy, a bit of a dandy, and quite insane.

The look and feel of the show complement the updated characters. Text messages are displayed to the viewer as they happen rather than trying to incorporate camera shots of phones or characters reading texts aloud, which is a surprisingly seamless and effective innovation. 221B Baker Street is next-door to a sandwich shop. Mrs. Hudson has to continually remind the two that she's their landlady, not their housekeeper. There's no deerstalker hat or pipes or tobacco slipper; Holmes wears a plain black long coat, and when he needs "stimulation" he slaps a few nicotine patches onto himself. Detective Inspector Lestrade is still around, with the show taking him as a capable if unimaginative man who, against his better judgment, lets Holmes snoop around his cases. Perhaps most drastic in terms of updates, and yet it makes perfect sense, is that Holmes and Watson don't call each other Holmes and Watson, but Sherlock and John, like every other set of flatmates does. The format is in an interesting one as well, with only three episodes but each at 90 minutes, like three movies. The only other show I can think of employing the same format is Foyle's War, and both share the basic idea of presenting slow-burning mysteries alongside character exploration and development. While I'd gladly take more episodes of Sherlock, the longer running time is richly used and lets the writers establish a great rhythm for the series. Season 2 will be broadcast in Britain in January, and in the States on PBS in May. For now, here's one of the official trailers for season 1, as well as a short but weighty interaction between Holmes and Watson.