By Alan Sepinwall
And so it's come to this: David Simon is prepared to bribe people to watch the new season of The Wire.
Okay, so maybe not a lot of people (mostly TV critics), or a lot of money ($130 per person), but if that's what it takes to keep his baby alive, he's ready.
After being MIA since the third season finished in December of '04, Simon's sweeping saga of drugs, crime and bureaucracy in Baltimore returns with a season three DVD set on Tuesday and the season four premiere on September 10. But after HBO boss Chris Albrecht suggested that renewal for a fifth and final season - which Simon had in mind when he left certain season four story threads unresolved - will depend largely on critical reaction to the new episodes, Simon wanted to go the payola route.
"I wish I'd said 'I'll send you $130 bucks to watch all 13 episodes,'" Simon lamented to me shortly after a "Wire" press conference with the Television Critics Association last month. "It probably would have violated every (newspaper) ethics policy. But I wish I'd said it. You know, 'If you watch all 13 episodes and don't like them, I'll send you $130, which is $10 per episode. I know $10 for an hour of your time isn't a lot, but we're The Wire and our resources are limited.'"
Having devoured all 13 hours even before sitting down with Simon, I can say I have no need of a refund. If anything, I feel like I should be paying more than my HBO subscription rate for this show. It is the best drama in HBO history - all due respect to The Sopranos and Deadwood, The Wire is deeper, tighter and more ambitious - and one of the finest works ever produced for American television.
____________________________________________________
To read the rest of Alan Sepinwall's Star-Ledger article on the fourth season of The Wire, click here.
Sunday, August 06, 2006
The Wire: Money for something
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
29 comments:
"If Chris Albrecht really cared...." I abandoned that premise back in July, but good luck convincing him.
"The Wire" is endlessly fascinating and addictive, and I never watch it without wanting to leap inside the screen, grap someone by the shirtfront and yell, "You idiot! Can't you see what you're doing to these people?"
I'd rather not read any details about the new season myself, but I really wish all the critical attention would get the show a bigger audience. As much as I like Deadwood, or Veronica Mars, or The Sopranos, they don't even touch The Wire, in terms of greatness, in terms of having something valuable to say about life in 21st century America. Great, amazing, rich, intricate, powerful storytelling with a purpose.
I'm also thankful to David Simon for introducing me to a great crime writer. The other two novelists, I could honestly take or leave, but George Pelacanos's books are on a par with the show.
I was referring to George Pelecanos. Sorry for the spelling error. Right as Rain is a good place to start. They're set in DC, not Baltimore, but if you like The Wire, you will probably appreciate his books.
"...they don't even touch The Wire, in terms of greatness, in terms of having something valuable to say about life in 21st century America."
Josh, what you said.
Last season is going to be awfully hard to top. So many moments echo still: Stringer and Avon's rooftop talk about their childhood back-in-the-day, even as both have already decided to betray one another; two weary cops, Bunny and McNulty, pitching their beercans upon the station rooftop. Next shot is of that very rooftop covered with the beer cans of many other cops. That image speaks volumes; author Richard Price, as a prison educator, introducing "The Great Gatsby" to a class of felons, and how "Gatsby" will echo in Stringer's story; Stringer introducing parlimentary procedures to his crew of young thugs, attempting to discipline those knuckleheads; after Stringer's death, McNulty and co., gain access to his luxurious apartment. The expression on McNulty's face when he descries that Stringer's reading material includes Adam Smith's "The Wealth Of Nations". I could go on and on...This show is deep.
And, listen, I want "The Greek" to be caught up with. He needs to be dealt with, severely.
All you guys who haven't already, start reading George Pelacanos now.
KJ, the Gatsby scene was in season two (D'Angelo analyzes it shortly before he's killed).
As for The Greek and company, well... I've already said too much.
I feel guilty for not liking or respecting The Wire more, but it feels too much like work. Specifically, the kind of work that one had to pretend to enjoy in high school. I'd like to be able to say that Deadwood or something else better captures the ineffable something about race and the collapse of the American project, but I don't really think that's the case. I just don't think The Wire is as powerful or rich as it is said to be.
As for Pelecanos, there are only so many times a writer can tell me how cool he is before I get tired of it. An idiosyncratic reaction, acknowledgedly.
I just don't think The Wire is as powerful or rich as it is said to be.
Well, you're missing something because it's the best-realized show on television. The craft and care is even more evident on re-watch, as you see, among the great sweeping arcs, these little moments that reveal characters in unexpected ways, all of which will come into play at some point. There's damned few missteps, and they've even managed to avoid turning Omar into a ubiquitous and near-omniscient Fonzie, unlike most tv writers when faced with a character this charismatic and dark (and I'm looking at you, Joss Whedon).
They've also seemed to manage the literary skill of homage. Besides the allusion to Gatsby in S2, they also embedded Wild Bunch quotes throughout the season, fitting in a story about desperate men struggling to maintain their way of life in the face of inexorably changing times.
The best thing about The Wire, though, is the way it captures how the institutions meant to maintain democracy provide only the veneer of neutrality and fairness. Every character in the show is trapped by a particular institution and is working to manipulate it to his or her own purposes. This is the flip side of Deadwood's optimism, where the citizens are struggling to create the institutions that prove they are civilized and capable of self-governing. On The Wire, civilization means self-entrapment and slow death from above.
Alan, mea culpa. I guess that's what happens with a show this good- the prefect intertwining of characters and their relationships forms a more elastic world in the mind. It really is that good.
This seems as good a place as any to remind readers that the House will be doing a "Wire Week" Sept. 4-10, with a new piece on the show every day. Following the "Deadweek" model, there will be longer essays and character sketches. Any regular commenter who is interested in contributing somethng should email me at reeling@aol.com and we'll hash it out.
I'll semi-support my fellow anonymous four posts above. I enjoy the show. I've seen all three seasons, and I understand the messages and parallels that are woven into it (though I'm not as eloquent about my understanding as some here). It's also amazingly well-crafted.
But, I just don't care emotionally very much for any of the characters, or their stories. And that's not the fault of any of the actors. It's an intangible kind of connection, that either happens for me or it doesn't.
It happened with Deadwood (and also, Joss Whedon's shows, whatever writing missteps there may have been). I love those unique, colorful characters and am constantly moved by them on a gut level. That's what makes me come back. The plots, the statements on civilization, on society, are like a giant helping of icing, that deepens the experience.
The Wire has a lot to say, and it says it well, but without that emotional connection to the people whose lives we're watching, I can't love it to the point many here do.
Well, I suppose I'm glad that those who don't appreciate the show feel guilty about it. I mean, it's intricate and complex and it demands one's full attention, and it doesn't offer closure or catharsis, or heroes and villains. I suppose in that regard, it's not what many people expect or even want from TV. And then there are those Baltimore accents. I probably sound like I'm being condescending. But I'm resisting the urge to say that if you don't care about these (fictional) people's lives, you're part of the problem. Because it would be ludicrous to say that, even if on some level I believe it.
Alan, yes, you have already said too much, you bastard.
I'm just kidding, kind of.
Joss Whedon is working in a different arena, I suppose. And he does what he does about as well as anyone.
To the previous poster:
You know, it's funny, but I feel just the opposite way from you about The Wire. I, too, have enjoyed the other shows you've mentioned, but The Wire's emphasis not on the individual players but on the grinding machinery -- of the drug trade, the police trade, the dock trade, and now the school trade (with the political machine always in the background) -- has been really bracing. Sure, the characters are not as colorful as elsewhere -- but that's because no character can stand above or outside the instutions that confine them.
The Wire has succeeded more than any other show on television in demonstrating how people are constrained by but manage to navigate in the social institutions in which they're embedded. I realize that sounds a bit bloodless, but I find myself sympathetic to its vision. There is no Al Swearengen to stare down a George Hearst; there is no Mal Reynolds to bring the Reavers home -- instead, at the end of the day, one bad guy gets put away, sort of. And that's all the victory the characters get (and it costs one of them a trip out to sea). And the characters have to learn to live with that, to make do with partial victories and unclear progress. In The Wire no one overcomes -- they just learn to get by. And no other show on television demonstrates just how much personal strength it takes just to get by, particularly (but not only) if you're a poor, working stiff.
As an example, contrast Alma's backsliding into drugs this season in Deadwood and Christopher's backsliding into drugs this season in The Sopranos to Andre Royo's superior performance as Bubs in The Wire -- who (in season one, I believe) fails to overcome his addiction simply for the want of two hundred dollars. No great personal tragedy precedes his fall; no character even observes it. There's just a moment where McNulty fails to provide the money Bubs needs. A simple, short, devastating throwaway scene.
Anyway, I'm rambling and it's late. Just wanted to offer an alternative opinion.
Anon
All you anons need to email me about writing something for "Wire Week." Seriously.
To Josh (from the anonymous directly above)--
I'm resisting the urge to be offended (even if you're just kidding, mostly).
I'm not looking for heroes and villians and catharsis and closure with "The Wire." If I was, I wouldn't watch it at all. I find the workings and gears of the institutions fascinating, and it sheds a light on a very complex problem.
All I'm saying is, the TV dramas I consider truly great, the characters get under my skin and yank emotional reactions out of me, no more no less. But through three seasons, watching the show has been a very cerebral affair.
Deadwood started out that way for me too. I was appreciating the writing of the language instead of connecting to the feelings behind the words. Eventually, that changed.
When I say I don't care, it's within the confines of the TV show. I'm sure other people get out of "The Wire" what I don't, but for this one person? That's just the way it is, and I don't appreciate being made to think there's something wrong with me.
Anonymous, maybe there's nothing wrong with you, but with the rest of us.
On first blush, however, from where I sit, I'm left wondering if your heart is made of stone. You've obviously watched The Wire closely enough to catch Bubs' fall back into the life in S1, so you're aware of the little wrenching moments that The Wire does so well. So how can you not care about Bunk? Or Stringer? Or D'Angelo or Wallace or Frank fucking Sobatka (easily the most tragic hero of the small screen) walking to his death at the end of S2?
I mean, I guess I can sorta understand. The characters of the major crimes unit are fairly static, always fucking up in exactly the same way. But the characters from the other side, the truly desperate characters, have arcs that elicit (in me, at least) a powerful, aching, highly charged emotional response.
Sure, it's not a comedy and nothing's ever going to be alright on The Wire. This is tragedy of the first order, and that's pretty much the point of the show: everything that we strive for within the system will never work out well, and what does go right will not do so for any good reasons. That's bleak, and maybe you don't want to invest yourself in characters this doomed. Maybe the difference is that you don't have a taste for tragedy, at least for tragedy this raw. That's an acquired taste.
The reason I like The Wire so much IS the emotional attachment I have to the characters (along the Baltimore accents and the sloppy crab-eating scenes). Maybe it helps to watch an entire seaon in only four or five sittings instead of every week for several months. Among all the big emotional moments in the first two seasons (Netflix is delivering me Season 3 as I write this), the most devastating was that Wallace subplot in season one. I had never cried while watching a TV show before Wallace's death- and it was as much for the killers as it was for the victim.
Maybe. I wish I knew. I want to cry, I want to feel that deeply. I have with other shows and films, but very, very rarely.
I came close a couple times. Watching McNulty hurt after Kima got shot in S1 was one instance.
Bubs was also one. As was Sobotka. But for whatever reason, it just didn't push me over the edge to the place I wanted to go.
Believe me, every time the show comes around on On Demand, I watch it all over again. I just always seem to be one step away from total absorption into "The Wire's" world.
I blame the critics. Sepinwall is right on with this: There's always a danger in describing "The Wire" as I just have -- it sounds like your mother telling you how important it is to eat your broccoli. And I won't deny that watching the show can be work; as I said, there are so many characters and story lines to keep track of that you may occasionally feel the need for a spreadsheet. . Yeah, there is a big danger. I don't how many reviews I read in that vein over the years, and it really put me off watching the show. When I finally got around to it this year I was amazed - The Wire is not work at all, it's entertaining, suspenseful, intermittently hilarious and completely engaging. How can the critics have been so off-base for so long with their damning praise? Clearly it is a show that works better as concentrated consumption on DVD rather than being spread over 13 weeks or more, but if anything that is even more true of Deadwood or Veronica Mars and neither of those shows have suffered the "it makes you work" tag.
I really love The Wire; it is one of the few TV series in North American history to take a shot at deconstructing the mythology of capitalism and showing us the effects of such a system of material accumulation on society's underclass. Simon and Burns know these people, speak their language, feel their pain. They also see through the hypocrisy (and violence) inherent in the system, with season three being the series' apogee in terms of intelligence, character development and all-around dramatic awesomeness.
Now, I too have seen season four, and will respect everyone's wish to stay mum on specifics, but I will say that (a) it is something of a let down give the greatness of season three, but that (b)I liked it a lot despite this. There is a familiarity to one of the major plot lines that only really works itself around to something approaching unpredicability as the season reached its climax. One of my favourite characters is rarely seen this season, and aspects of this specific storyline (not the entire season) felt like something of a giant tease to get us to tune in for season five. I admit that this kinda bugged me.
That said, it's still a damn fine series; one of the very best on the good ol' tube. If HBO nukes The Wire on the heels of Deadwood, well, that tells me more than I need to know about it's commitment to quality television.
Oh, to all you hatas out there, Bubbles is the series heart and soul in my opinion. Love that scrappy little fucker.
Praise like "it is one of the few TV series in North American history to take a shot at deconstructing the mythology of capitalism and showing us the effects of such a system of material accumulation on society's underclass" is one of the things that make The Wire seem like work, but at the same time make me feel guilty for not liking the work.
Am I less sympathetic to the plight of the urban underclass than I should be, as a standard-issue guilty white liberal? Am I deaf to the appeal of yet another deconstruction of the mythology of capitalism? Am I racist, or at best selfish, for not liking this particular white media depiction of long-suffering African-Americans? Am I a snob for not being impressed by the "drug dealers going to economics classes" scenes?
Apparently...
Sorry my capsule comment makes The Wire sound like homework rather than entertainment, but should the architects of the series feel guilty themselves for requiring some intellectual investment on behalf of the audience? I'm just enough of a snob to believe that this makes The Wire worthy of praise, not complaint.
And seriously, if everyone was in concurrence about the merits of the series, I'd have serious doubts about it myself. Can any tv series manage to be all things to all people? Debate is healthy, so don't feel guilty about your position. Do steal yourself to defend it, however.
You might even wanna STEEL yourself. Sigh.
Dan,
Too late! Stop, thief!
Anonymous,
I will attribute the hostile tone of my earlier comments to a "bad mood." I don't feel I can make assumptions about someone's character based on whether or not they like a particular TV show. At least, I hope I've outgrown that kind of thinking. Unless it's The O'Reilly Factor. Or According to Jim.
In any case, I apologize, and I'm glad to see that you still watch the show, even if you don't get as emotionally involved in it as I do.
Just so there's no misunderstanding, I 'm the anonymous who talked about a lack of emotional involvement, and addressed Josh. The "anonymous" comment above the two posts of dan jardine, is not me.
This is getting confusing...
There. That should help. And I appreciate the apology, Josh. No hard feelings.
Just another post to say that I'm surprised that anyone's biggest problem with the show concerns depth of character development. D'Angelo, Stringer, Bubs, the Sobotkas, Omar etc. are the characters most often cited by fans. These are not unfamiliar archetypes though. They are brilliantly crafted, more so than anything that's come before, but a character I rarely hear brought up is Prez.
Prez is a collossal fuck-up. The first half of season 1, where all the major characters are painted with a shiny coat of grey, Prez is just the idot cop who fires his gun when he doesn't mean to and beats on project kids. So as a viewer you see him as such, until you find out he's not really stupid, he just makes stupid choices. You think maybe he's redeemed, but he isn't. He continues to fuck up whenever he's not on the wire.
These varied and unexpexted turns of character development are unlike anything I've seen in television or film. He's compelling, simultaneously sympathetic and unsympathetic (true of nearly every character outside the bureaucrats), he's a real character of a type not seen in popular culture. As a result each point of development is unexpected but still follows logically from the character.
As much as I love Prez, especially his relationship/mentorship to Lester, I'm both surprised and delighted that he has become a secondary character in the last two and a half seasons. I've only watched the first 4 episodes of season 3, but I'm amazed by how much Prez has disappeared into the background of the show, yet still remained such an interesting character (in fact, he becomes more interesting as he becomes more anonymous and bureaucratic). I always tell people that they'll love The Wire if they love Balzac, and its for this very reason: the richness of Simon's minor characters.
Don't worry, Prez lovers, the man is back with a vengeance in season four.
Post a Comment