Sunday, March 02, 2008

The Wire Mondays: Season 5, Ep. 9, "Late Editions"

By Andrew Johnston



“Deserve got nuthin to do with it” -- Snoop

Is the best episode ever of the best TV drama ever QED the best single TV episode of all time? That’s not a philosophical conundrum I face where “Late Editions” is concerned, since my pick for the best series of all time is The Sopranos. Those who believe The Wire to be the finest series in the history of the medium, however, are going to spend a lot of time debating the question, since after two viewings it’s pretty clear that “Late Editions” is The Wire’s single best episode. I’m in a position to say this since I’ve been fortunate enough to see the series finale--which isn’t to say that The Wire’s final episode is a disappointment, just that it’s not as good as “Late Editions." Obviously, a lot of “Editions” serves to set up the finale, but the two episodes are not so tightly connected that “Editions” can’t be discussed separately, and without fear of spoiling the series finale.

As a big fan of George Pelecanos, I was thrilled to see his name attached to the teleplay credit for “Editions”; of the acclaimed crime novelist trio that has contributed scripts to The Wire (the others being Richard Price and Dennis Lehane), Pelecanos has always been my favorite, and his particular gift for dialogue is in evidence throughout the episode. We begin with Lester Freamon contemplating the clock code that Sydnor cracked last week, a code that quickly leads the younger cop to a spot in the boondocks where Marlo’s crew is about to take delivery on an enormous shipment of pure heroin. In the first of many great scenes that Lester scores--in a lot of ways, this is really his episode--he goes to Daniels and says he’s been investigating Marlo using resources from the Clay Davis case. I’m sure I’m not the only person who thought Lester was going to come 100% clean and reveal the truth about the serial killer, perhaps taking all the “credit” for the scam in order to spare McNulty. Instead, he leaves Daniels with the impression that he’s done nothing seriously inappropriate, and Daniels quickly signs off on the arrest of Marlo and his gang (Snoop, however, is able to avoid arrest because she’s at Levy’s office at the time of the sweep). Of all the great throwaway moments in the episode, one of my favorites is one of the most simple: The “uh-oh” tone of voice with which Pearlman asks “why?” when Daniels asks her if she’s sitting down before (off-camera) telling her that Marlo’s about to fall.

Marlo’s arrest is one of the few developments that doesn’t turn out to be too good to be true: No sooner does Dukie turn up than we see him being pressed into stealing scrap by the junkman who hired him last week (a literal junkman, as we learn at the very end). Daniels’ new job proves to be equally problematic when his balls are put in a vise by Carcetti’s chief of staff Michael Steintorf, who demands that he and Rawls cook the crime stats to produce a 10% drop in violent crime—or else. The situation makes Daniels the first of several characters who are faced with a choice between staying true to themselves or repeating the decisions that formed the fate of another. Daniels therefore stands at the brink of becoming the next Burrell, much as Michael, per Snoop’s final speech, is poised to inherit Omar’s mantle. Lester, generally a relatively sober fellow (though by no means a teetotaler), celebrates Marlo’s arrest by stepping into Bunk’s traditional role as McNulty’s drinking buddy.

Lester has always been the cop most inclined to see the big picture where the drug trade is concerned, so I was a little surprised by the suggestion that he had never before considered the role that Baltimore’s sketchier defense attorneys play in financing the business. The scene where Davis spells it all out for him, however, is classic. His blackmailing of Davis turns out to be the ultimate extension of his plan to use anti-Davis resources to take down Marlo, and it leads to the intriguing revelation that the courthouse leak is a level above Prop Joe: Levy bought the leaked documents before turning around and selling them to Joe. Still, the coolest part of the scene comes when Pelecanos goes into the realm of “fan service” by having Davis reminisce about how he scammed Stringer Bell.

I was dearly hoping for a return appearance by Bunny Colvin and Namond Brice before the end of the season, and their visit didn’t disappoint. Namond’s participation in a debate tournament, describing how little the U.S. is doing to combat the spread of HIV in Africa, shows that Bunny is as effective a foster father as one would expect him to be--and given the precariousness of Dukie’s position at the end of the episode, it’s damn nice to see that at least one of the kids from Season Four is unquestionably on the right path. Carcetti’s apology to Bunny for how he handled Hamsterdam didn’t seem quite in character for the mayor (or at least didn’t seem fully motivated), but so be it.

What I loved the most about the episode--and which motivated me above all to proclaim it the best Wire ever--are the episode’s two big speeches: Marlo’s monologue in jail and Bubbles’ speech from the podium at the NA meeting. Marlo has seldom so much has raised his voice in the past, so it was fascinating not just to watch him lose his cool but to see what could make him do so. Omar, it seems, had more insight into Marlo’s psyche than was apparent at the time--if Snoop hadn’t kept her boss from learning that Omar was calling him out, Marlo would have most likely fallen to him. Marlo’s seething anger at his name being taken in vain allows Jamie Hector--already a very intense actor--to display a fury we hadn’t seen before, and it’s mesmerizing. Bubbles’ speech was arresting for different reasons--essentially, it’s the climax of a character arc that began in his very first appearance, and it’s hard to imagine a better final outcome for him. It was genius of Pelecanos and Simon to keep Bubbles’ moment of doubt offscreen--even before he started to tell the story, it was clear he didn’t fall off the wagon that day, but that made me no less inclined to pump my fist in the air when he said that he didn’t get high when he couldn’t contact anyone else in the group.

The least progress toward a final resolution came on the Sun front, where Gus expanded his investigation of Templeton’s manufactured quotes and stories but little else happened. As a result, I’m going to keep most of my thoughts on the newspaper story line on ice until the finale airs, since so much of this episode's Sun action is pure set-up. And little enough happened with McNulty that I’m going to refrain from diving into his activities as well.

I’ll wrap things up by asking a question that left me stumped after both my viewings of the episode, and which also left our illustrious host and publisher scratching his head: Why does Herc tell Levy that the cops are running a wire on Marlo? Under the circumstances--with no evident leak in Marlo’s gang to serve as the source of the clock code, nor with there being any good reason for the police to even have Marlo’s number--doesn’t that come awfully close to self-incrimination?
______________________________________

Andrew Johnston is the television critic for Time Out New York.

187 comments:

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

I felt pretty sure that the exchange between Carcetti and Bunny Colvin was a very coded, subtext-ridden exchange -- the mayor asking Bunny not to bring up Hamsterdam because it would damage the mayor's chances to gain the governorship, and indicating that the reward for his silence will be a job at the state level. That's what I made of Carcetti's rather pointed look back at the camera crews mid-conversation.

Dunno about Herc, though. That whole business was weird. Is Herc an idiot?

Second lingering question: Right before the SWAT raid on the re-supply meeting, why did that one white cop lying in the weeds take his shirt off? I couldn't see any motivation for it except to prove he'd been to the gym. Is there some tactical thing I'm missing?

Over and above everything else, this episode established Lester Freamon as just about the baddest motherfucker every to wear a Baltimore PD badge. He owned the hour. I loved seeing his bow-legged loping stride as he walked around the lineup of Marlo and his arrested co-conspirators. The ep was full of moments that strong. It almost made me wish we could see a Lester spin-off.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

also: Nice "obituary" for Omar here. Hattip: Heaven and Here.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Final thought: Agreed that this might be the best single episode of the series, though the Ep in Season Three where Stringer Bell dies is up there as well.

Anonymous said...

The Wire continues its tradition of truly excellent penultimate episodes (if memory serves, Stringer Bell's death and that scene where Randy yelled at Carver in the hospital both ended the penultimate episodes of their respective seasons).

I think the cop taking off his shirt was just his attempt to get rid of tics and bugs that were biting him in the field.

Carmichael Harold said...

I found the episode to be heartbreaking, never more so than when Dukie started down the path that Bubbles has just, finally (hopefully) stepped off.

Though The Wire has always been about making obvious parallels using context and intercutting, I especially liked them showing Michael and Kima simultaneously taking down one of their mentors. I worry about what happens to Michael in the finale (though I'm hoping the inferences that he is becoming Omar means that he'll survive).

Matt, I second your wish for a Lester spin-off. After the scene tonight, I wouldn't mind at all if Clay Davis co-starred.

wstroby said...

A fitting send-off for Snoop, I thought, facing her fate with no apologies and no fear. And she got a great final line as well.

hng said...

Why did Herc say what he said to Levy? Because he didn't get enough acknowledgement from Carver, so he had to toot his own horn (in a roundabout way) to Levy. Herc is desperate for some kind of recognition and respect, is happy to see Marlo get taken down, and can't resist rubbing Levy's nose in how the Bawlmore PD outsmarted Marlo and Levy. As I think everyone knows, Herc isn't very bright.

Dozerman took his shirt off because the bugs were biting. How taking your shirt off keeps the bugs from biting is another question that remains unanswered.

And yeah, it really shouldn't take a blackmailed Clay Davis to inform Lester that it's slick lawyers who teach drug lords how to launder money. I thought every fifth-grader knew that much.

Crip said...

"Why does Herc tell Levy that the cops are running a wire on Marlo?"

Here's my theory...remember a few episodes ago when Levy realized Marlo was using cell phones again? He made the offhanded comment to Herc that business was about to pick up?? I think Levy was hoping that comment would prompt Herc to run to Carver with Marlo's number. Levy knows he won't get a big payday if Marlo's crew steers clear of the law. Otherwise, what purpose is Herc really serving on Levy's payroll?

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Crip: That scenario you suggest is positively Hitchcockian in its complexity, and with so many things that could have gone wrong. I think it's just one of those details that never quite got ironed out.

hng said...

Interesting theory, crip. But would a lawyer really want an employee who goes behind his back and snitches to the cops about their clients? Herc's purpose on Levy's payroll is to hangout with his old cop buddies and get info about what the cops are up to.

I have a bad feeling that the case against Marlo will be thrown out of court because of the illegal wiretap.

sphalen said...

Going with what HNG said about Herc's role of hanging out with his cop buddies and finding out inside information as part of his job as defense investigator, I believe Levy sent him over there to find out information regarding the "C.I." and how the bust came about because of what Marlo told him about there not being much possibility of a snitch. Earlier in the episode he mentions that Marlo runs a tighter ship than the police department, so he probably does have doubts that it's a legitimate CI after what Marlo told him. If you just think about it logically like a lawyer would, a snitch being used to tell them how his organization uses the phones just seems a lot less likely than them having a wiretap in the first place and figuring out the phones that way.

Herc also talks about how they used resources from the serial killer case which reinforces the theory that he went over there specifically to get information and bring it back to Levy.

Anonymous said...

Carcetti apologizes to Bunny about the SCHOOLS EXPERIMENT (which Namond was a part of and its clear Bunny considers pointing him out to the mayor as an example of what kind oof future could've been had by some of the other kids too)

Carcetti had nothing to do with Hamsterdam. He did stop funding/refuse to fund further Bunny's program in the schools. That scene had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Hamsterdam...

sphalen said...

Also, regarding the Crip comment that Levy wanted Herc to steal the number, I don't really think that would be the best way for Levy to maximize the amount of money Marlo could bring for his firm. As Clay Davis pointed out to Lester, Marlo is consistently going to be paying Levy in one way or another regardless of whether there is a trial or not. The long con is far more profitable than the short con.

Alice said...

Anon-
Carcetti specifically referenced Hamsterdam when apologizing to Bunny.
Carcetti was the one who came to Bunny when he "discovered" Hamsterdam and asked to see what it was about, and then did nothing to help when it all came out.
Carcetti knew nothing about Bunny's involvement in the school project, he was busy meeting with the governor when Bunny came in for the meeting.

james said...

I agree that is one of the best episodes of the entire series, and it's the first time in quite a while I felt a real payoff from so many plot lines. This was a very satisfying episode, and that's not a feeling I often have after watching the Wire. There are always strings attached or something to tether whatever progress is made. By the end of the episode, things seemed to be going so well that I started to feel like I was being played. What's the catch? Will the entire case against Marlo be thrown out because of the McNulty's illegal wiretap? Will Herc's stupidity ruin so much hard work in yet another season? Is Simon just setting us up to be disappointed? I honestly don't know, but nothing would surprise me in the finale.

A few other thoughts I had when watching.

- I also found the scene with Carcetti and Colvin very out of place. My original thoughts were that he was apologizing for Hamsterdam, but a couple of comments above seem to indicate it was the school program. If that's the case, how did Carcetti even know about it? He never attended the meeting about ongoing funding and Michael certainly didn't pass it along.

- I wonder how much of Kima's decision to reveal McNulty's plot had to do with the scene of her and Elijah a couple of episodes ago. Her meeting with Carver drew an interesting parallel between the two. Carver was unquestionably effected by what happened to Randy, and it's a large part of who he is this season. I wonder if Kima's thoughts as she recited the Baltimore version of Goodnight Moon lead to her realization that "the little things matter."

- Loved the mythologizing of Omar's death that was already taking place on the streets. The comments by one of Michael's crew (Spider?) about how the killer were three Pimlico Boys with semi-autos was classic.

- During the amazing farewell scene with Dukie and Michael, I kept wishing Dukie would think to seek out Prez and ask his help. I honestly don't see Dukie becoming an addict given his intellect and general disdain at how his family was because of it. He is capable of being more, and most of this season has been an ongoing quest to escape what he was born into. I leave hope that there may still be redemption in store for him.

- Loved Lester's brief mention that he's still involved with the ex-stripper from season 1. I had been wondering about that for a while.

- Still wondering if the courthouse leak is a character we've seen on screen. Who are the real suspects if it is? Pearlman? Bond? Phalan? None of those seem very likely.

Very much looking forward to the last episode. Despite the criticism, I think this season has been excellent.

ninety_nine said...

Regarding Herc -- remember how angry he and Carver were in seasons one and two. Carver matured. Herc, as it has been proven repeated, is and stayed dense and immature.

Ratting back to Levy might simply be his 'fuck you' to his old "bosses" (Freamon and McNulty), and to everyone who he feels slighted by for not standing tall when he got caught bending the rules. In a strict moral sense, very little of Herc's actions were malice by intent. His worst deed -- the Randy situation -- was due to incompetence, and so he's a long way from feeling culpability. He's probably thinking, 'all I did was lose a camera and I got fired'. Why should Freamon and McNulty get a pass for far worse?

HNG said...

"Herc also talks about how they used resources from the serial killer case which reinforces the theory that he went over there specifically to get information and bring it back to Levy."

I'm sure that's why Levy sent Herc over there, but I'm not sure that Herc was okay with those orders.

If you're right, then that would be yet another out-of-the-blue character reversal in a season full of them. Herc hates Marlo and wants him to go down. And I think he'd still feel some loyalty to and affection for his cop buddies, enough so that he'd balk at wrecking their case against Marlo. It also doesn't jibe with his earlier behavior, when he gave Marlo's cell-phone number to Carver...unless of course you accept crip's theory about that being Levy's plan all along.

But if it turns out the way you're suggesting, I'm gonna be even more pissed off about what Simon has done to the show this season. I'd prefer to think that Herc is just too stupid to censor himself in front of Levy than to think he's deliberately colluding with Levy in wrecking the case against Marlo.

hng said...

Also, I'm not sure this really constitutes evidence, but Herc saying too much to Levy is paralleled in this episode with blabbermouth Monk, who lets slip to Marlo that Omar was calling him out. Maybe it's part of a "loose lips" theme.

Sean said...

My take on Herc is that he has always wanted credit and respect for his deeds. During the exchange this epsidode with him and Carver, Herc could not get a confirmation that his good work, giving Carver Marlo's cell phone number lead to a wiretap and massive arrests. Once again, the BPD couldn't or wouldn't come through for him. Since Carver or no one else could give him credit, he went back to Levy and looked for validation from him, by helping Levy build a defense. Herc is between two worlds now, in my opinion, and ultimately, he wants a pat on the head, as always.

Oh, and I agree, this episode is fantastic. It seems to be a pattern with The Wire. The second to last episode is basically the climax of the season-long plot. The last episode is the resolution. Which is why these second to last episodes are the most satisfying. The Wire's like a novel, but its season long episodic-arc follows Aristotle's theory of the "well made play" exactly. Sorry if that was too artsy, but I like the way Simon does that, mirroring the Greeks in many different ways.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

HNG: "I'd prefer to think that Herc is just too stupid to censor himself in front of Levy than to think he's deliberately colluding with Levy in wrecking the case against Marlo."

Me, too.

Stephen Denney said...

What was the significance of the final scene where Daniels and the prosecutor (forgot her name) find the cell phone in the evidence room? Was this McNulty's phone? I hope he doesn't go to jail, and that the case against Marlo's gang doesn't collapse. Too bad the next show will be the finale.

Tom said...

"What was the significance of the final scene where Daniels and the prosecutor (forgot her name) find the cell phone in the evidence room? Was this McNulty's phone?"

Stephen,

The prosecutor's paperwork contains a phone number that was supposedly the serial killer called on. When she dials that number, on her phone, Marlo's phone -- seized earlier by the police -- is the one that rings.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Heaven and Here on #59.

"The decision to off Michael—or, as it turned out, his semi-affectionate offing of Snoop, which kind of felt like someone murdering his big sister/guidance counselor. The issue was that Mike didn’t follow orders, thought too independent, and just generally wasn’t cut out for soldiering. Telling that both Marlo and Chris didn’t, or really didn’t want to, believe that this marked him as the snitch. But you’ve got to assume that one of them ultimately gave the order, so I won’t dwell too much on what they think his true nature is...However, when Snoop lectures him in the car, you could take it two ways. Either it’s proof that Michael should’ve stayed in school, kept the anger inside, and tried to be a normal kid. “You were never one of us,” Snoop spits matter-of-factly. The question is, what was he never? Snoop, the consummate mindless soldier? Chris, who knows how and when to voice his opinion? Or a gangster in general? There’s still the possibility that, in making this move, Michael showed what we’ve suspected all along: That’s he destined to end up like Marlo, because he’s just too smart, shrewd and determined to work for anyone else. Hence that flipping of what Chris and Snoop taught him about how to scope out a potential hit. He took the field manual and used it for himself."

Andrew said...

Regarding Herc, here's how I see it. Herc knows nothing about the wiretap being illegal, so he doesn't think he's giving anything away by telling Levy that it's a wiretap. He doesn't believe that he's potentially freeing Marlo by simply telling Levy that the cops are using a wiretap. He clumsily tries to cover himself by saying that he has no idea how they got the number.

Dan Jardine said...

The scene of Michael scoping out the meet ahead of time is clearly intended as evidence that he has learned well and Chris and Snoop's knee--always arrive early.

It is also an interesting parallel to the maneuvers of Omar, who likewise spent a lot of time in the backseats of cars surveying the territory and gathering evidence.

I think it is entirely possible that Michael is intended to be the successor to the throne. But it is Omar's throne, not Marlow's.

Dan Jardine said...

Oh, and as for Herc, he's an absolute moron. He simply has no clue that telling Levy will result in the case against Marlow being tossed out of court.

Herc is easily my least favourite character on the show--even less likeable than Marlow, and that's saying something.

btw, big props for Jamie Hector in this episode. His explosive response to the news of Omar calling him out shows us just why Marlow became the king of the castle. Positively riveting and thoroughly intimidating when riled up, he is.

Anonymous said...

its strange to me that no one has mentioned the car scene where michael drops off bug at his aunts house. those kids were phenomenal in that scene- well they are phenomenal in all their scenes.

it broke my heart when michael sent bug off.

it was also heartbreaking when dukie tells the story about throwing the pee balloons at the terrace boys from season 4 and michael cant remember it. it was his loss of innocence....he completely forgot what it was like to be a kid.

dcdame said...

Matt asked: Right before the SWAT raid on the re-supply meeting, why did that one white cop lying in the weeds take his shirt off? I couldn't see any motivation for it except to prove he'd been to the gym. Is there some tactical thing I'm missing?

I figured it was to ratchet up our anxiety that the bad guys might spot the surveillance team because Dozerman (I think that's who it was) kept going above the grass horizon -- & if they were spotted, the bad guys might successfully flee or otherwise be better prepared to defend against the SWAT team. I know they weren't that close (hence the binoculars), but I still got antsy (no pun intended) that their cover would be blown.

HC said...

An optimistic read of the Herc-Levy comment is that Levy has the courthouse leak. Levy knows that there was no aboveboard Stanfield wiretap. If we're lucky, Levy lets that slip and goes down for the courthouse leak.

dave said...

I am guessing there is no hope that the Greeks will go down in all of this.

Randy said...

Long-time reader, first-time commenter. Only a couple of things to add:
- omigod, it's CASS FUCKING WINTHROP!!! (Or was I the only one who used to watch Another World with his mom back in the mid-80s?)
- a phrase I keep thinking of when I think of this great, unmatched, wondrous achievement is "A quantum of solace." I hate that phrase a Bond movie title, but I love the poetry of it, and I think it applies to The Wire. The show may be a devastating critique of the myriad problems that plague big cities, but we get the balance, the occasional 'happy endings' - Namond, Bubbs - that make the whole thing bearable. (In Leonard Cohen terms... "There is a crack in everything / that's how the light gets in.")

I can't believe there's only one episode left.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

dcdame: That's the most convincing explanation I've heard, though it still doesn't explain why the cop did it in the first place (taking off your shirt to guard against biting bugs?). It's a really tiny thing to fixate on, and I don't want to blow it out of proportion, though, so I'm going to accept that explanation and move on.

Randy: I'm stunned that nobody has quoted Leonard Cohen in these threads before now (or am I forgetting somebody)? Welcome.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Dan Jardine: "btw, big props for Jamie Hector in this episode. His explosive response to the news of Omar calling him out shows us just why Marlow became the king of the castle. Positively riveting and thoroughly intimidating when riled up, he is."

Yeah -- I also thought this scene drove home the fact that (as Andrew alludes in his recap) Chris and Snoop were, all things considered, good lieutenants. I've heard it said that the number one responsibility of any job is to make sure that the person one rung above you on the ladder doesn't have to deal with any shit that's going to divert them from their responsibilities. Serving as a filter, in other words. Chris and Snoop obviously decided early on that if Marlo got word that Omar was calling him a punk, it would push two of his panic buttons, homophobia and machismo, and basically make him worthless as a leader. They were right.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Also: Marlo's "My name is my name" is a brilliant line, worthy of the most poetic flights of language on "Deadwood."

Blackirish said...

I thought it was poignant that Snoop, the ultmate butch sociopath, when facing death finally reaches for her the one thing she always denied ...her femininity. Like any other girl she worries about how she appears. Her last words....

Snoop..."How's my hair look Mike?

Michael..."You look good girl"

Out.

Randy said...

“Deserve got nuthin to do with it” -- Snoop

This, of course, is also pretty much the same line that Clint Eastwood says to Gene Hackman right before killing him in "Unforgiven". When I saw that line at the opening, and that it was Snoop who said it, I thought there's no way they'd be THAT obvious to use the same line in the same context. And as the ep developed, and it became clear that Snopp was going to (try to) kill Mike... well, I'm just really glad that the show turned my expectations on their head: Snoop said it to Mike shortly before HE killed HER. Very nice turn-around.

Andrew said...

Also: Marlo's "My name is my name" is a brilliant line, worthy of the most poetic flights of language on "Deadwood."

It's also a rather brilliant callback a line spoken by Vondas in the season 2 finale. When asked what Nick Sobotka knows, he responds, "He knows my name, but my name is not my name." It's a good way of illustrating the fundamental difference between these two breeds of criminal.

Ben Livant said...

HNG Said: "And yeah, it really shouldn't take a blackmailed Clay Davis to inform Lester that it's slick lawyers who teach drug lords how to launder money. I thought every fifth-grader knew that much."

So what is the point of the scene? With respect to plot resolution, it would seem that the final episode will deliver another big bust, or at least set the wheels in motion for one, higher up the food chain. There has been a fair amount of attention here to Herc, treating Levy as secondary or merely instrumental to this focus. But Jesus, if ever there was a scumbag we'd all enjoy seeing impaled, it's Levy. (And hey, we go back with him to Season One, unlike scumbag Scott who just showed up this season.)

Turning from plot to theme, in my estimation the scene between Lester and Clay Davis resonates with meaning that might just be past the comprehension of every fifth-grader. Perhaps it is dramatically contrived to have Clay lecture Lester on the concentric rings of the drug business as they emanate out from the criminal dealers to the legal establishment. But Simon & Co. still want to lecture us at least one more time before the curtain falls. Hence, Clay recalling the real estate hustle he and others pulled on Stringer Bell back in Season Three is not just wrap-it-up writing to give every character a nod before the house lights come up. Stinger Bell remains THE essential figure in The Wire precisely because he was self-consciously attempting to make the main move from robbing people with a six-gun to robbing them with a fountain pen, thank you Woody Guthrie.

I was broken up by the breaking up of Michael, Dukie and Bug; and not because I was ever especially drawn to any of these three as individual characters. What I was always attracted to was the presentation of them collectively as a FAMILY. Contra the religious right-wing with it's supposedly Biblical interpretation of what constitutes a family, those three guys - boys, they're just boys - remind me of the kind of make-shift but genuine familial bonds John Steinbeck validates with such dignity in his literature. Carcetti at yet another photo-op, sound-bite session spins out the rhetoric about how drugs destroy communities and families. Michael, Dukie and Bug make it plain that some folks have to loose their family more than once.

And it would have been balance if Bubbles' - excuse me - Reginald's sister had seen fit to come to the meeting. But she didn't. That balance was not given. Yet we can hope. I have never been so stupid about make-up, I mean, theatrical cosmetics. Who knew Bubbles was so handsome? I don't hear much discussion here about his declaration in the church. But come on people. Didn't he look strong? Didn't he sound good? Don't you just believe he is going to make it?

Kima had to. She just had to. Just like Beadie had to stick it to McNulty on the domestic side, Kima had to stick it to him on the professional side. The Wire cannot be accused of provided a female perspective for the most part - what's the ratio of female to male characters overall? - never mind a feminist agenda. Still, it wasn't Bunk, right, it was Kima and I think that this is worth interpreting.

Lester Freamon rocks!

Then - Ben

straight outta silver spring said...

Ben,

were you aware that David Simon has said that Fran Boyd and Woody Guthrie are people that he considers to be heros?

Don't have a whole lot to add to this discussion so much as been said and I'm taking it all in, so much great stuff.

One thing I don't think has been mentioned. When Michael dropped Bug off at his aunt's he left Bug with a shoe box full of money and a promise that there will be more where that came from. This leads me to believe that Michael does not view himself as being out of the game, not yet or anytime soon.

Also, part of me thinks that too many people have too much at stake to ever let the truth get out about the fake serial killer. Carcetti's run for governor has been built in large part on the attention he is lavishing on the homeless because of the serial killer, and he looked awfully good telling (lying to) the press that they never gave up on those murders in the vacants. All of these things help his run. His Chief of Staff told Rawls and Daniels to "get creative", which is exactly what Jimmy did. Maybe Daniels will be inclined to go along with this? The problem is I cannot see Pearlman agreeing to prosecute a case that she clearly knows is built on an illegal foundation. In seasons past they are never able to bring the case in fully. Maybe this time when they don't play by the rules (and why should they the game is rigged) they end up getting the end result they want. I wouldn't mind Jimmy or Lester going down for what they did, as long as it doesn't let Marlo off the hook.

Between Andrew J. and Sepinwal, the write-ups and the commenters... Obviously, MZS, Ben, Dan, hng, andrew(from the comments, you are the man) and so many others, it's been incredible.

Anonymous said...

I think the Carcetti and Bunny scene was just Carcetti's conscience caughting with him (he has those from time to time). Carcetti has no real connection to Hamsterdam, so Matt explanation doesn't work, what Bunny could say about it to hurt Carcetti? That after learning about it he went to Bunny to get his side of the story first? Carcetti was very confortable spining the numbers to the press when he sees no other than Major Bunny Colvin, the man whose Hamsterdam project helped to launch Carcetti's mayorial bid, he felt genuinely bad at the time about going to press (D'Agostino had to point out to him that Hamsterdam was done anyway), so he abandons the press and goes talking to Bunny. It felt to me as maybe the one honest moment Carcetti got the whole season.

Anonymous said...

Does anyone else thinks Marlo's "Kill first, ask if someome is snitching later?" might be his downfall? He sends Snoop to kill Michael, but Michael kills her. The same Snoop that early Marlo made it clear to Levy was the only person not in jail that actually had the info that Lester claimed had coming from a CI. The cover up of the McNulty mess might just finger dead Snoop as the CI. Final blow to Marlo: after three seasons of killing whoever gave him the smallest suspicion of becoming a snitch he tells Levy that he is 100% sure that he can trust Snoop.

hng said...

DAN: "So what is the point of the scene? [...] Perhaps it is dramatically contrived to have Clay lecture Lester on the concentric rings of the drug business as they emanate out from the criminal dealers to the legal establishment. But Simon & Co. still want to lecture us at least one more time before the curtain falls."

I think you just answered your own question: It's one more chance to lecture the audience and one more chance to bring up Stringer Bell in passing. Lester certainly didn't learn anything he didn't know before (or should have known, anyway).

I'd like to see Levy fall, but I've got a gut feeling he won't.

ANDREW: " Herc knows nothing about the wiretap being illegal, so he doesn't think he's giving anything away by telling Levy that it's a wiretap."

I'm sure that's right, but it just underscores Herc's stupidity. He should have taken the hint from Carver and kept mum. But Herc's breathtaking cluelessness, his desperate need for recognition, and his irresistile urge to gloat will once again screw things up.

hng said...

ANON: "Does anyone else thinks Marlo's "Kill first, ask if someome is snitching later?" might be his downfall?"

Could be. It fits in with a longstanding Wire theme: Don't keep shitting on your workers or eventually there'll be a comeuppance.

hot breakfast said...

I agree that Lester probably didn't learn a whole heck of a lot that he didn't suspect already when talking to Davis. But, without the word from Clay he wouldn't have the deeper understanding he has now and he wouldn't have something that he might be able to leverage Levy with.

ALL DUE RESPECT to Andrew Johnston, I've loved your work here, you insights and the comments your writing has brought out. However, I must mention that it felt a little bit like a slap in the face to this dedicated Wire fan when you admit in the first paragraph of your write-up of what you believe is the greatest episode ever of The Wire, that you think The Sopranos was the better show. I know I'm being petty but that stung a little bit.

hng said...

HOT BREAKFAST: "But without the word from Clay he wouldn't have the deeper understanding he has now and he wouldn't have something that he might be able to leverage Levy with."

I'm not quite sure what Lester has to leverage against Levy. Some innuendo muttered by Davis isn't enough to get a warrant for Levy's files, is it?

I think the purpose of that scene was to afford Simon & Co. another opportunity to inveigh against sleazy lawyers and to mention Stringer Bell (since Stringer can't really make an appearance in the final-season round-up).

But I totally agree with you about the superiority of The Wire over The Sopranos.

Ben Livant said...

HNG: But I LIKE it that Simon & Co. lecture us again because I agree with the lecture. (By the way, don't blame "Dan" for my opinions. He isn't me. He only plays me on television.)

Meanwhile, forgot to mention how neat is was - and it would have had to have happened this way - that McNulty did not personally participate in the bust. It never dawned on me that - of course! - he could not be there for it. So, the scene with Lester drunk and happy and Jimmy sober and not rang very true, what with McNulty being denied the actual satisfaction. At the same time, Lester is not stuck with the bogus homeless serial killer and Jimmy most certainly is.

Then - Ben

Ben Livant said...

Straight Outta Silver Springs: No I was not. So good for me and thank you.

Then - Ben

hng said...

Sorry, "Ben". I always get you two confused. I wonder why.

A. McCann said...

Andrew J. I'm so glad you pointed out George Pelecanos' role in this episode.

He has alway written the penultimate episode for each Wire season and I whole-heartedly encourage anyone to start reading his fiction.

You'll notice so much of his touch on the Wire from his books. The scene between Snoop and Michael and the set-up is all Pelecanos. The characters and the audience know the outcome, but it's still heart pounding intense as you go through the scene with them. Like Lester said, it's the journey.

I really liked the fact that Cheese (Method Man) was blasting a (fellow Wu Tang) Ghostface song when he entered the warehouse. Just another in a long line of visual/audio inside jokes the creators pile into each episode, including the triumvirate of crime writers AJ mentioned all having their books being read by a Wire character.

Good call to the poster who mentioned an escape clause for McNulty's mess could be pinning the CI label on Snoop, but part of me wonders, especially after seeing how she went out, if anyone would ever believe she was anything other than a pure solider of the game.

Finally, my two cents on why the Wire is superior to the Sopranos is because I near tears during Bubble's er- Reginald's speech and instinctively clapped along with the group when he finished. That payoff moment along with the deep emotional pains in my stomach and heart as Wallace, Sobotka, Stringer (all from Pelecanos' scripted episodes), Bodie, and Omar died are why this show is unequaled. No other show has gotten me as emotionally involved with it's characters' lives than the Wire. Plain and simple.

hng said...

"Finally, my two cents on why the Wire is superior to the Sopranos is because I near tears during Bubble's er- Reginald's speech and instinctively clapped along with the group when he finished."

Me, too. Bubbles breaks my heart. He's the one character I really want to see achieve some kind of redemption. If Simon doesn't give it to him, I'm gonna be FURIOUS!

Anonymous said...

Great comments everyone... although I believe Snoop's final line was: "How does my hair look, MANG (not Mike)?"

kant69 said...

Wait, what?

How is it possible that Andrew has seen the season finale? It wasn't included on the dvd screener and it won't be shown on On Demand next week?

I thought HBO was keeping the finale close to its chest, but apparently not.

Sucks that most of us have to wait two weeks though to see the finale - with a bit of luck, it will somehow leak online anyway.

Crip said...

"why did that one white cop lying in the weeds take his shirt off?"

I noticed during my second viewing was that Dozerman was working the camera during that stakeout. But he puts the camera down after one photo to fool around with his shirt.
Seems like they have plenty to support their case, but if photographic evidence was needed, Dozerman may be on the hook...

Anonymous said...

With regards to the jail scene, which, by the way I loved: I cannot shake off is this echo of a similar situation in season 3 when Avon gets out of jail. Slim, Avon & String are sitting in a car when Avon first realizes that Marlo took his corners and String kept that info away from him. Slim says what is going on, just as Monk did and String tries to downplay it, just as Chris did. What ensued shortly after that was Avon’s relentless fight to regain “his name” which, in turn, drove a fatal wedge between him and String. I mean, if Avon gave his boy up for the sake of his name and his reputation, I am petrified to think what Marlo is capable of doing for the same goal. Is the similarity intentional or coincidental?
I am not saying that Chris is Stringer; I just have this unclear thought that is bugging me. Maybe some of you intelligent and insightful people could help me out.

Nomi Lubin said...

Ben: "Contra the religious right-wing with it's supposedly Biblical interpretation of what constitutes a family . . ."

OK. I know I'm likely to be alone here in defending, God forbid, religious conserviatives, but someone's got to do it:

Ben, man. You don't give it a break, do you? Only a moron would not know that Michael, Dukie and Bug are family.

Before I'm crushed by your mighty pen I'll squeeze in a few thoughts.

I agree with hng and others about Herc's motivation for blabbering to Levy. Crip, I think you might be overplaying this one.

About seeing Bunny and Namond, I'm of two minds. I wanted to see them too. And given my anger at the darkness last week, I feel a little funny saying this, but it felt pasted-in to me, a little forced.

BUT, I may simply not know the rhythms of the show well enough. I sometimes don't watch the episodes more than once, nor have I gone back to earlier seasons; I miss nuances and I think I miss the kinds of rhythms that weave in and out of episodes and seasons. So, I'd love it if someone explained to me how to see that scene as a more organic part of the whole.

To a lesser extent, I feel a bit this way with Bubbles triumph. That, of course, I wanted even more. I should just be overwhelmed with gratefulness that he made it . . . but did it not feel a little pat? Please, tell me I'm all wrong.

Michael as the new Omar (definitely Omar and not Marlo) and Dukie as the next Bubbles . . . ouch. That hurts. Was that a little contrived as well? Maybe, but . . . oh, those kids did reach me individually and I could cry thinking about them.

Marlo's monologue was incredible. And yes, the line "my name is my name" is indeed a truly poetic flight of language. (Matt) And the echo of Vondas' "He knows my name, but my name is not my name," is magic. Thank you, Andrew, I never would have remembered that.

Kathy said...

My comment on ShirtGate - though it seems counter-intuitive to take off your shirt in response to bug bites, I thought he took it off in order to see if there were any ticks attached to him.

I concede I may be too optimistic in viewing Dukie's situation but I don't think we're supposed to believe he's necessarily doomed to becoming a junkie. As mild-mannered as he comes across, Dukie has a strong sense of self-preservation. He would not have survived this long without that. We've seen so many old faces come back this season, I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that Dukie reaches out to Prez in the finale. Barring that, he may latch on to the junk dealer to survive until he comes up with something better. I guess I just don't see Dukie giving up on himself, at least not yet.

I can't figure out what's going out with Herc either. I'm hoping it becomes clearer in the finale.

Part of me wants to see McNulty hung out to dry for his actions but I don't think that's going to happen. A scandal of this magnitude would destroy Rawls and Daniels and the department, not to mention Carcetti's political future and as angry as they are going to be, covering it up is the only option.

Andrew Johnston said...

Hot Breakfast--

I'm sorry if stating my preference for The Sopranos stings, but rest assured that I consider the shows to be so close to each other in quality that the margin is razor-thin. It's sort of like how it is with the Velvet Underground and the Rolling Stones, my two favorite bands of all time...I give the VU the edge for reasons that involve personal preferences, but I also have a really deep, personal connection to the Stones' music and have probably spent just as many hours listening to them over the course of my life. More than anything else, though, I was trying for a snappy lede that would let me quickly delve into my argument.

Simon Hsu said...
This post has been removed by the author.
Simon Hsu said...

I haven't much to add; the high points - the drug bust, Marlo's "name" speech, Namond's success, Snoop's death, Bubble's incredible sharing, Bug/Dukie/Mike's split - have all been covered nicely.

I don't think I've ever let out a greater sigh of relief than when I saw Mike scoping out Riggs & Calhoun in advance. How possible was it that the writers would counter the high of Freamon's bust with Mike's death? In retrospect however, the dissolution of the Bug-Dukie-Mike family was far more devastating than the would-be shock of Michael simply getting popped. Seeing them split paths was one of the downers in an episode pleasantly filled with uplifting aspects.

Call me a simpleton, but removing your shirt simply makes it easier to scratch your itches and check for ticks, no? I guess you could call that a tactical move.

I thought it clever that the punchline for the evacuation joke ("you evacuate buildings, not people") in episode 1 (2?) was revealed in this one.

Nomi Lubin said...

Kathy: "I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that Dukie reaches out to Prez in the finale."

Ahhh, dare I dream? I don't know. The poetic fatalism of the two implied paths -- Michael's and Dukie's -- is pretty compelling. Well, I go into every episode of The Wire trying (and failing) not to hope. So, I guess the next one will be no exception.

I agree about ShirtGate(ha).

Dan Jardine said...

Nomi, you really are a hopeless romantic, aren't you? I can relate: I'm in recovery myself. One day at a time.

But no wonder The Wire gets under your skin like a six-legged tic.

Ben Livant said...

Nomi: I am crushed that you anticipate being crushed by my - gulp! - mighty pen. My phallic insecurity is only surpassed by my ideological concern. Considering the Woody Gutherie reference I made earlier, I would rather you mock me for waving a six-gun around.

You say: "Only a moron would not know that Michael, Dukie and Bug are family." While I generally do not equate offensive ideas with innate stupidity, on this occasion I will defend myself by saying that the religious right-wing, supposedly Biblical interpretation of what constitutes a family is moronic. Hence, my point.

Meanwhile, I will plead guilty as charged to not giving it a break, although I suspect you and I have somewhat different notions about what "it" is. You are, of course, entitled to be displeased with my politicized thematic preoccupations. Yet, I feel you sell The Wire a tad short in this regard. This is to clarify that I did not doubt the obviousness of Michael, Dukie and Bug being a family. On the contrary, my intention was to give Simon & Co. credit for precisely this obviousness; uh-huh, contra the religious right-wing... you know... like what I said before... type thing... (SFX: Ben coughing, his powerful writing implement flaccid in his hand).

RE: Shirtgate: I agree with DcDame:

"I figured it was to ratchet up our anxiety that the bad guys might spot the surveillance team because Dozerman (I think that's who it was) kept going above the grass horizon..."

In short, stage business for suspense with no deeper meaning. Hello Nomi, check me out, giving it a break. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. (And a pen is just a pen).

Then - Ben

james said...

I'm surprised to see so many comments about Dozerman's shirt removal, but why should that stop me from adding one more? In terms of the plot, he removed his shirt to help scratch/inspect for other insects. Thematically, I think this was added partly as comic relief (I chuckled) and partly as a way of putting the bust into perspective. McNulty has risked his career and possible freedom for this moment, Lester has devoted hundreds of hours of his life, yet the only thing important to Dozerman before this supposedly triumphant moment is the bugs crawling on his back. It actually reminded of something Herc and Carver would have done back in seasons 1 and 2.

2090gh said...

I agree - a great episode - my only quibble - the scenes at the paper - why do we have cardboard villains at the paper (all the top honchos) when the heroes and villains in the rest of the wire are such a mix of good, evil, stupidity,intelligence, etc. How did they rise so high on the food chain if they are so appallingly stupid?

Anonymous said...

ANDREW,

can you please tell us how you've managed to see the season finale already?

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Anon: HBO made the finale available to critics. I don't know how many critics, or which ones. Andrew and I have both seen it. To preserve surprises, we will neither discuss it nor show it around.

Jack said...

@ A. McCann:
Good call to the poster who mentioned an escape clause for McNulty's mess could be pinning the CI label on Snoop, but part of me wonders, especially after seeing how she went out, if anyone would ever believe she was anything other than a pure solider of the game.

The thing is, "how she went out" was a pretty obvious assassination. It would be very easy for the police to say "she was our informant, and it looks like someone found out about it, because she was gunned down in her car, like, the day after we arrested damn near everyone in the organization but her." Just my 2 cents.

Andrew Johnston said...

By the way, the Slate guys are all wrong when they claim that Isaiah Whitlock Jr. introduced his "sheeeeeeit" in 25th Hour (my favorite Spike Lee movie ever, so I certainly don't mean to denigrate it): 25th Hour was a holiday-season release in 2002, but The Wire premiered in the summer of that year, and Clay Davis made numerous appearances during the first season (though I can't cite offhand which episode contained the first "Sheeeeeeit").

Sean said...

Anon said: Carcetti had nothing to do with stopping Hamstardam in Season 3. I'm certain that's incorrect. Then councilman Carcetti forced Royce's hand to shut down Hamsterdam all but against his will. Carcetti's campaign manager told Carcetti to run with that information, that Hamsterdam was continuing, to go public with it, come out against it in the press, and burn the incumbent mayor. He sat on the info first, allowing Bunny to show him around. But ultimately, his political aspirations lead him to burn Bunny's project, and Bunny, simply because Mayor Royce was not acting to shut it down and attempting to work with it/live with it as a health/community strategy. Ironically, I don't think Carcetti ever knew Bunny was involved with the Corner kids program in season 4, effectively shutting Bunny Colvin down twice. "I guess there's nothing that can be done." Taken so many ways. One of which, could mean Colvin's hope for progress working within any system. ...getting crushed by post-industrial institutions

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Andrew J. : "I can't cite offhand which episode contained the first "Sheeeeeeit""

I'll bet that somebody reading this thread knows the answer.

Nomi Lubin said...

Dan: "No wonder The Wire gets under your skin like a six-legged tic."

Yes! In fact, I just had to take my shirt off . . .

dronkmunk said...

Its was in season 4, don't know the episode. I am pretty sure they lifted that from spike lee.

dronkmunk said...

..Or possibly the 25th Hour novel, but something tells me that was Spike's touch.

Andrew said...

Clay Davis's part in season 1 was actually quite small. He only appeared in two or three episodes. His only major scene came in the second to last episode where he gets pissed off at Daniels over his driver (Day-Day) being pulled over. If I had to guess, that would probably be the scene where his first "sheeeit" came, but I'd have to check to be sure.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

If Andrew J., Barry Maupin or Alan Sepinwall are reading this, we need a definitive "sheeee-it" ruling. Anybody game?

Dan Jardine said...

Nomi, you are shameless. Of course, I can't get enough. I guess recovery isn't going so well tonight.

Simon Hsu said...

Matt sed: we need a definitive "sheeee-it" ruling. Anybody game?

I've got this covered. Davis' only major season 1 appearance is cited by Andrew (author 3 posts up), a meeting with Burrell & Daniels. A lot of 'fuck's said but no 'shit's - not even with one "i".

Clay's in two season 2 episodes: Sabotka (Frank) speaks to him briefly in episode 3, then he disappears until the season's final montage, posing with a golden shovel at Andy Krawczyk's newest property development. No sign of the catchphrase.

His appearance picks up in season 3, but after skimming imdb's listed S3 episodes for Whitlock Jr., Davis is mostly having fun scamming Stringer. In fact, all his scenes - minus one w/ Avon - are with String. His favorite word this season is "faucet".

This confirms my original suspicion: Clay Davis' first SHEEEEIIITT, is during his season 4 debut, where Sydnor serves the senator his subpoena. A slightly modified version is available here.

I rest my case.

Filipe said...

Davis first sheeeeit was in either The Cost or Cleaning up (episodes 10 or 12 on the 1st season) in a scene were he is complaining to Burrell about Lester.

Simon Hsu said...

The Cost was the only episode I couldn't spot Davis in, and I skimmed through it twice. If he says it before "Soft Eyes" in season 4, that's the only possibility but I doubt it.

It was in Cleaning Up when he complains to Burrell about the investigation, but the most he says is something like "you gotta put his (Daniel's) ass on a footpost so far out that he's gonna see the philly cops coming at him."

kant69 said...

ANDREW

can you please tell us how you were able to see the season finale weeks in advance of everyone else?

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

kant69: You've asked this question repeatedly, and it's already been answered. Move on to another topic.

Anonymous said...

It also can't help that bother me that you guys have seen this. Why wouldn't HBO pay a bit more respect to a series finale? Imagine if Tony's end was treated similarly.

So, yeah, hopefully this leaks soon.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

TV critics often get to see things before everybody else, just like movie critics, music critics and so on. Andrew and I are professional journalists and have been for going on two decades, so yes, we've seen it. My former colleague Alan Sepinwall has seen it as well. I'm sure there are many other critics -- print, TV or online -- that have seen it, as well as editors who aren't critics, and quite a few people in the TV or film business.

And FYI, the "Sopranos" finale wasn't sent out on DVD, but it was screened the afternoon of its premiere on HBO, hours before the rest of the country saw it, for a select group of TV newspaper and magazine critics so that they could turn around reviews before everybody else, including most of their colleagues. (I was not in that group.)

TV shows and movies are screened in advance of their public premieres and always have been screened in advance, to give critics time to write more considered reviews, give feature writers time to do informed interviews with producers, directors, writers or actors, and give editors time to ask for column inches or airtime for coverage that would otherwise be earmarked for something else that was screened in advance.

Instances where a movie, season finale or series finale are not screened in advance for anyone in the media at all are very rare.

If the finale of "The Wire" was not screened in advance for critics, the finale of the series, a great show that nevertheless has a much smaller audience than "The Sopranos," "Lost" or the like, would receive much less coverage than it's going to get as a result of being screened in advance.

I don't understand why advance screening of a TV program should be an issue in this particular case, or at whom, exactly, the ill will is being directed. And if discussion of this issue begins to displace discussion of the content of the series, I'll shut down the thread.

John said...

Of any of the characters, Michael is the only one who truly straddles the two worlds of the show, and could exist and be quite successful in either of them.

The Wire is filled with people who, to quote Snoop, are not "one of us," who fancy themselves smarter than, apart from or above the system and act accordingly, before the system triumphs in one way or another. McNulty, Bunny, Stringer. Even Omar, who truly stands apart from the system, is at his best while gaming it and ultimately falls within it.

But Michael isn't really like that. He made a choice - the only one he felt he could have made to protect Bug, to join Marlo. But clearly he never bought into the life of a drug lieutenant, and thought various aspects of it were stupid and/or pointless, as evidenced by his skepticism of Marlo's orders. At the same time, he clearly has learned enough to rise to the top of the business if he chooses to go in that direction. Or, because he is so intelligent and resourceful, he could check out of the system altogether and start fresh if he wanted to. I haven't seen the last episode, so I could be full of it. But in this sense he is anomalous on the show -- someone whose rectitude and talents may allow him to transcend the compromises and crushing fates that most of the other characters suffer.

james said...

What did everyone think of the line where Dukie mentions "it's a show about serial killer who kill other serial killers." I'm pretty sure he is referring to Dexter, but what is the underlying significance of him mentioning that? Is it supposed to be ironic that the concept surprises/amazes him when he himself is living with a serial killer (Michael) who kills other serial killers (Snoop)? Or is there some other meaning? Or is this just a wink at any Dexter fans?

hng said...

JAMES: That's a pretty good explanation of the line. It might also be poking fun at serial-killer stories in general, their lurid hokiness, their irrelevance when contrasted with the kind of "unspectacular" mass murder being committed every day by "normal" thugs.

MATT: It would be a shame to shut down the thread because of some guy's weird fixation on advance screenings. Why not just not approve those posts instead?

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

hng: All I'm saying is, let's keep the focus on the show. Like we're doing right here.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

james: I saw the "Dexter" line as a joke about how absurd and unreal "Dexter" is compared to the real-world problems these kids face every day.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

John: "The Wire is filled with people who, to quote Snoop, are not "one of us," who fancy themselves smarter than, apart from or above the system and act accordingly, before the system triumphs in one way or another. McNulty, Bunny, Stringer. Even Omar, who truly stands apart from the system, is at his best while gaming it and ultimately falls within it."

That's one of the few major characteristics that "The Wire" has in common with the films of Martin Scorsese, who often tells the story of people with outsider mentalities who try to be a part of an organization that wouldn't normally have someone like them as a member, and perhaps even change that organization to suit their own needs, only to be crushed in the end as the institution re-asserts its character and its prerogatives.

Algernon said...

I thought the Dexter line was brilliant. This whole season has hammered home how our society prefers to focus on serial killer stories and CSI shows rather than society's real problems. (See McNulty's line in the previous episode: "We don't get many serial killers, mostly drug murders. About 300 a year.") The "serial killer story" is pat, has clear good guys and bad guys, and is a form of escapism -- so it's one of those stories our society likes. Dukie's watching one of those stories we like in his last moment before reality intervenes.

Anonymous said...

The exchange with Lester and Davis illustrated to me that for all the "war" on drugs rhetoric that politicos, media, and police spout in the end the drug business is ultimately a shakedown scheme that lawyers, politicians and shady business people use for its cash. I thought I heard Davis say they get 50% of what the trade brings in this way.

Therefore, it is the Bubs of the world that fuel the lifestyles of those who are smart enough and ruthless enough to skim on the ignorance of the ones who temporarily rule the violent drug trade. It is all connected. That was the point I think Simon was making with this scene.

Andrew Johnston said...

Matt--That's a great reading of the "Dexter" reference, as well as a great reading of the Scorcese oeuvre (a reading that can be applied to lots of Scorsese films it wouldn't seem to fit at first--The Last Temptation of Christ, The Aviator and The King of Comedy among them).

I'd be really surprised if Davis really didn't drop a "Sheeeeeit" before season four--at the very least, he must have used it once in S3, no? Those two seasons always blur together for me because I saw them consecutively, but I don't think it seemed like a new device in S4.

I'm pretty sure Isaiah Whitlock Jr. is in a Dunkin Donuts ad that just started running, though it's not immediately evident that it's him as he doesn't have a mustache, he only has one brief line and the lighting makes his complexion seem a shade less dark than on The Wire. In other extracurricular news, I'm hopeful that Andre Royo will have a bigger part on Terminator: The Sarah Conner Chronicles next time than he did last week. The season finale is loaded with HBO regulars, including Dean Winters and Garret Dillahunt (both of whom have appeared three or four times).

Doje said...

"...my only quibble - the scenes at the paper - why do we have cardboard villains at the paper (all the top honchos) when the heroes and villains in the rest of the wire are such a mix of good, evil, stupidity,intelligence, etc. How did they rise so high on the food chain if they are so appallingly stupid?"

The newspaper bosses appear to be good at what they do, that is, selling product (at least as much as possible within the realm of a 'dying medium'), at whatever cost. The top drug bosses act the same way. The major difference that I see here is that newspapermen, without perceived integrity, appear stupid, even while successfully peddling their product. On the streets, the game is to make as much money as possible (the new generation doesn't seem to have the same "code" of respect as their predecessors) without worrying about integrity.

And of course it also appears Simon loves blasting his old "simpleton" bosses whenever possible.

Nomi Lubin said...

Not sure it's that the newspaper "villains" appear stupid, but they sure do seem to lack the compelling complexity we've gotten from other people in positions of power.

Since we know a bit of Simon's biography, it feels like a no brainer to say that he's just straight out mocking them, making them deliberately two dimensional. Not sure if that's fair or not; the choice could have come out of the decision to make certain elements of this season more exaggerated, more caricatured, more overtly comical. Though, I have to say it feels like more than that; with other parts of the story that could be described as over the top, we don't lose as much of that riveting complexity. In any event, the portrayal of the bosses at the paper remains disappointing to me.

hng said...

"It is all connected. That was the point I think Simon was making with this scene."

No doubt. But I think people were puzzled by its relevance to the plot. Except for Davis's revelation that Levy had a mole in the prosecutor's office, there was no new info given to Lester--and the mole revelation wasn't the info that Lester was originally fishing for (it wasn't even on his radar). There was no good reason for Lester to think that Davis would have specific, detailed knowledge of how the drug dealers laundered their money. After all, Davis doesn't see that money until after it's been laundered, and no politician is going to delve into the precise route that money wends its way through before it gets into his campaign chest. And Lester certainly shouldn't need to be told that drug dealers who launder money have lawyers and accountants who specialize in doing just that.

b-bo said...

cheese sums up the whole series in the preview for ep 9:

ain't no nostalgia to this shit here. There's just the street, the game, and what happened here today.

man I'm excited. Is ep 10 going to be up on on-demand on monday?

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

b-bo: "Is ep 10 going to be up on on-demand on monday?"

Last I heard, HBO was holding it back until the following Sunday.

Mark said...

What I took from the Carcetti/Bunny scene:

Seeing as how they were at a school function, Bunny probably saw Carcetti approach & expected a talk about the failed school project. When Carcetti (sincerely, in my view) proceeded to apologize for burning him on Hamsterdam, Bunny was crushed to realize that the mayor didn't even know about the school thing in the first place. Thus the pained look & the resigned, "There's nothing you can do."

I didn't really make much of the look at the cameras, other than to remind Carcetti of where he was & what his political obligations were, i.e. not talking honestly of his regrets to Bunny Colvin.

Anonymous said...

Not sure it's that the newspaper "villains" appear stupid, but they sure do seem to lack the compelling complexity we've gotten from other people in positions of power.

I don't know about that. Burrell was pretty much a straight-up bad guy for the first two seasons. He didn't start to get any depth until Season 3, when we began to see the pressure he was under.

I suspect if Ed Burns had gone around giving interviews about how awful the top brass in the BPD were, we'd have been making the same complaints about Burrell and Rawls that we are about Klebanow and Whiting.

kant69 said...

The best thing about this episode is that as everything finally comes together, it also begins to unravel.

I'm not sure how this can end other than vested interests protecting their piece of the lie.

My only hope is that Marlo goes down as a sexual pervert killing homeless men.

What's in a name when you're playing a rigged game?

barbara74 said...

In the last scene where Michael and Dukie are together, another person suggested that Michael had already forgotten his childhood. I think Michael knew exactly what Dukie was talking about, but he just couldn't bear the pain of reminiscing as he was leaving his childhood friend behind. It was just easier to answer no.

Nomi Lubin said...

Anonymous:

I don't know about that. Burrell was pretty much a straight-up bad guy for the first two seasons. He didn't start to get any depth until Season 3, when we began to see the pressure he was under.

I suspect if Ed Burns had gone around giving interviews about how awful the top brass in the BPD were, we'd have been making the same complaints about Burrell and Rawls that we are about Klebanow and Whiting.


Mmm, maybe. But I don't really think so. Not so much talking about whether someone's a straight up bad guy or not. Burrell, even before we got to see the pressures he was under, had, to me, more texture than these newspaper fellows.

And, though I can't swear by this, I feel pretty strongly that I'd be let down by the portrayal of Klebanow and Whiting even without knowing Simon's particular involvement with the paper.

hng said...

I knew very little about Simon's longstanding feud with Marrimow when I started watching season five (I didn't even read the Slate commentaries until last week), but I too felt the newspaper storyline was one-dimensional and started to grow tired of it. I'm glad it's been put on the back burner these last two episodes. But my main criticisms of this season concern other matters.

Anonymous said...

Where is the "compelling complexity" in the following characters?

- Marlo Stansfield - cold-blooded murderous sociopath

- Kenard - demon spawn sociopath cat & omar killer

- Clay Davis - evil & corrupt parasite

- Levy - evil & corrupt parasite

- Office Walker - steals & brutalizes children

- Officer Collichio - beats citizens

- Naymond's mother - fire-breathing dragon lady

I could go on and on... but I'll stop there.

It's quite the exaggeration to claim that those two newspapers guys are somehow the ONLY one-dimensional characters on this show. Those two guys have appeared for a total of 5 minutes on screen. The whiny histrionics from the journalists is ridiculous and entirely narcissist.

hng said...

"It's quite the exaggeration to claim that those two newspapers guys are somehow the ONLY one-dimensional characters on this show."

If you'll re-read my post, you'll notice I said that the newspaper STORYLINE was one-dimensional. Everyone in it is one-dimensional: Gus, Whiting, Klebenow, Scott, Alma. Not a single complex or interesting character in the bunch. Each of them stands for a particular virtue or vice and nothing more. No internal conflict in any of these characters, as there was with Frank or Nick in the dockworkers storyline. There's not even a single morally complex or interesting situation. Who's actually in favor of journalists fabricating stories?

And there's no narcissism on my part. I'm not a journalist, I don't personally know any journalists, I don't think I've ever met any journalists. For all I know, Simon's depiction of the newsroom is totally accurate. But I still don't find it (as written) very compelling dramatically. It's just a very simple morality play. It serves mainly to advance the serial-killer plot and echo a few themes made elsewhere on the show.

It's not the worst thing about this season, but neither is it the most interesting.

BEC said...

I agree with Anonymous 2:48. We see the newspaper management through the eyes of Gus. They don't have their own story - much like Nerese, Cheese, Snoop, Levy, etc.

If there was a next season, perhaps we would get more character development.

I think people like Whiting and Klebanow exist in reality. Just like there are bad cops - there are bad editors and bosses.

Lizzy said...

In reference to "ShirtGate"...I think it to be a corresponding visual to later in the episode when Gus talks about how he's about to "scratch an itch". There's no way it was in there for no reason, and while it does kick up the suspense, David Simon always works on a much deeper level. Its foreshadowing all the itches (Lester/Marlo, Gus/Templeton, Rawls/McNulty,) that we're about to see get scratched.

I also agree that Herc's just an idiot looking for praise, Jamie Hector was incredible, and that Carcetti is going to cover the whole thing up to protect his gov. run.

Andrew said...

I agree that the two editors are rather thinly developed, but that is nothing new to the show. I think they've done a great job of developing the newspaper storyline's two central characters, Gus and Scott. Scott is ambitious and a pathological liar. It was great touch to show him actually go out and get a great story on his own and still be unable to resist the tempation to sexy up the story a tad. Gus is a good journalist, but still capable of making mistake. He also has a habit of being overly pissy and confrontational at times. These two characterizations have elevated the storyline.

hng said...

"If there was a next season, perhaps we would get more character development."

The dockworkers storyline lasted only one season, yet there was plenty of complexity and character development among several of its characters. I thought Frank was one of the most conflicted and tragic characters in the entire series.

I don't doubt that fatuous jagoffs like Whiting and doofus buttlickers like Klebonow exist in real life. I just wish that there was at least one truly complex, conflicted character in the newspaper storyline. I guess Gus is as close as we'll get to that, but that's not saying much. His internal "conflict" is knowing he's right about Scott but trying to prove it without pissing off his bosses too much. His "tragedy" is that he doesn't have the power to act immediately on his infallible instincts. It'll do, I guess, but I hope they wrap up that storyline quickly and concentrate on more compelling stuff.

hng said...

"In reference to "ShirtGate"...I think it to be a corresponding visual to later in the episode when Gus talks about how he's about to "scratch an itch"."

Not only that, but a law enforcement agent is driven crazy by a blood-sucking parasite. Anyone count how many legs Levy's got?

straight outta silver spring said...

Whiting and Klebenaw are total assholes, but as someone, maybe in these comments, has pointed out they are very good at their job. But we've been shown to not like they way they do their job (for good reason, no doubt). The decline of this institution has been the focus of this season, same with all the previous seasons. Templeton is also a horse's ass, but the vast majority of the newsroom characters appear to be hardworking and honorable indiviuals. Just go to The Wire cast and crew page on HBO.com and take another look at all those guys and gals. Gus, Alma, Fletcher, Zorzi, Spry, Phelps, Price, Luxenberg, Corbett, and the bought out Twigg. True, we haven't gotten to know many of them very well - I guess realtive to other seasons, but I think that Simon has shown us how much respect he has for the people in the newsroom who are doing the best they can do despite the institution's systemic failings.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

straight outta silver spring: "Just go to The Wire cast and crew page on HBO.com and take another look at all those guys and gals. Gus, Alma, Fletcher, Zorzi, Spry, Phelps, Price, Luxenberg, Corbett, and the bought out Twigg. True, we haven't gotten to know many of them very well - I guess realtive to other seasons, but I think that Simon has shown us how much respect he has for the people in the newsroom who are doing the best they can do despite the institution's systemic failings."

Well said. Twigg was the perfect example of that -- he was so committed to the ideals of his profession, and to the idea of doing as good a job as he could no matter what the circumstances (the definition of professionalism), that he kept going the extra mile even though technically he wasn't an employee any more. If he were a cop he'd be working with Lester and Kima.

I thought Simon and the rest of the writing staff did a good job of sketching all these characters in bold but not cartoonish strokes. Both the writers and the editors depicted in this season have real-world equivalents, and I don't think they were two-dimensional at all. There are newsroom types, just as there are cop types and teacher types. Stereotypes are stereotypes for a reason -- they come from reality. I thought the show built on the newsroom types very well, maybe better, and with less fuss, than any newspaper plot I've seen in TV or movies, except for Ken Finkleman's extraordinary Canadian TV series "The Newsroom."

I acknowledge, however, that this might be partly due to the fact that I spent a lot of years in newspapers and don't need much exposure to any of these characters in order to figure out what sorts of journalists and people they are. Maybe Simon made the mistake of presuming too much inside knowledge on the part of "civilians," so to speak. But it all worked for me.

Patrick said...

The difference between the newspaper bosses and all the characters listed above is that most of those characters are really interesting to watch, while the newspaper bosses are just boring. Clay Davis may not be the most deeply drawn character, but he's entertaining every time he's on screen.

Also, in the case of people like Namond's mom or Colicchio, they're there primarily to create emotional conundrums for the other characters, and to show what kind of messed up people the system produces. Now, you could argue the same is true about the newspaper bosses, but there's no emotional pull in the story. The reason Namond's mom works as a character is because she makes us really feel for Namond, and I don't see any way Whiting could make us feel that way in relation to the other characters.

Ultimately, it's all about the emotional pull of the story. If you care about what's happening, it's easy to forgive problems, but in a story that's not as engaging, like the newspaper, the problems are a lot more noticeable.

Nomi Lubin said...

Anonymous: Where is the "compelling complexity" in the following characters?

I don't know, it's just there?

OK, I'll do better: Most of the other more "one note" characters still seem to have a certain sense of self-knowledge, of irony lurking right behind their eyes. The newspaper dudes are just doofuses.

This is only half related, but I have to say, as far as Jamie Hector's portrayal of Marlo, it always felt only adequate to me, never fully satisfying. That is, until this episode. His moment in the jail was stunning. Of course, the contrast didn't hurt, but I'm not meaning to imply that he was too quiet previously. It's not about noise or quiet. I just never quite felt his full presence before.

Patrick said...

Maybe Simon made the mistake of presuming too much inside knowledge on the part of "civilians," so to speak. But it all worked for me.

Well, it seems like it's people in the news media who have been most critical of the storyline. For me, the issue isn't that it's not realistic, or that it's hard to follow, it's that I just don't care about the characters and their story anywhere near as much as I care about the other people on the show.

It's always going to be tough bringing new characters into a show five seasons in, and I think the combination of the many plots already in the show and the ten episode order meant there wasn't time to get to know these people. And, I think the whole fabricating reporter thing obscured the real issues in the story, the lack of resources for newspapers and their inability to cover stories not due to reporter failure, but simply due to the failures of the system. That's touched on somewhat early on, but lately we've only been following Scott and his saga of lies.

I appreciate the thematic ties to the McNulty storyline, and the Iraq War and all that, but it's like if the whole first season of the show revolved around a mole in the police department, undermining the investigation. It might be exciting, but does it really tell us anything about why police struggle on a day to day basis. That's something that belongs on 24, not The Wire.

straight outta silver spring said...

Matt,

Thanks for the response. I don't mean to embarrasss you but I hold your opinion in such high esteem that when I read your thoughts on the newsroom it makes me feel that much better about this season as a whole. There seems to be so much criticism everywhere about the newsroom that it makes me feel wrong for just, if nothing else, enjoying the fact that I've learned more about the newspapering business from watching this season then anything I've seen before. It makes me want to view other interpretations, like "The Newsroom" which you mentioned.

Anonymous said...

A lot of the interesting quirks in the characters are put there by the actors themselves., ie., Clay Davis and his trademark "Sheeeeeeiiiit". Isiah Whitlock does such a great job putting life into his role. Michael Kostroff is also wonderful as the snakey parasite lawyer.

I think the actors in the newsroom were poorly cast. The guy who plays Scott Templeton is just bland and boring. He adds no depth to his role. The lady who plays Alma is also monotonous. The two "villainous" editors could have been really fun roles (like Levy or Clay), but, once again, the actors are doing a tedious job just reciting their lines. The one bright spot has been Clark Johnson. I wonder he is often misperceived as "saintly" because he's the only decent actor in the newspaper cast?
It's a shame he doesn't have anyone to play off of in the newsroom. His scenes with Nerese Campbell (also villainously one-note) are great. They have great chemistry.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Straight outta silver spring: "When I read your thoughts on the newsroom it makes me feel that much better about this season as a whole."

I wouldn't put too much stock in an opinion that's in the extreme minority and which, by my own admission, is highly subjective and probably biased in some weird way.

That said, I'm happy somebody agrees with me. It makes me feel slightly less crazy.

On that note:

Anon: "I think the actors in the newsroom were poorly cast. The guy who plays Scott Templeton is just bland and boring. He adds no depth to his role. The lady who plays Alma is also monotonous. The two "villainous" editors could have been really fun roles (like Levy or Clay), but, once again, the actors are doing a tedious job just reciting their lines."

I disagree on all counts. Templeton is exactly the sort of unctuous, self-righteous, ass-kissing creative-writing-program reject who would get embroiled in shit like this; his very blandness, his seeming lack of an inner life, both makes his behavior more plausible and makes it more believable that he'd get it past somebody like Gus (who went a long time seeing Templeton as a just-OK reporter with a knack for the sort of purplish prose that modern editors dig).

The editors seem like bland middle-management types, more interested in gaming the awards circuit than supporting valuable local reporting. That too seems accurate to me.

What I'm saying is, Simon's getting a hell of a lot of things right here, considering that he's taken a license to compress and exaggerate in the interest of making his larger points.

People like Gus and Trigg and Alma are (psychologically if not economically) the last remnants of the idea that journalism is a skill or trade, not simply a career track. They're examples of the most esteemed label that can be affixed to a print reporter: a newspaperman. Not a journalist or a reporter, but a newspaperman -- as in, somebody who's committed to the whole idea of the press as public sounding board and watchdog, and tries to live it every day while having fun, and taking the job seriously but not themselves.

The difference between them and people like their editors and Templeton is the difference between news and product. They're interested in facts, details, the texture of daily life, with or without a flashy hook. That's the opposite of product.

I know that probably sounds a bit romanticized, but I've known more than a few people who deserved the label "newspaperman," some of whom contribute to this blog. I won't name them here because it might embarrass them, but they know who they are.

hng said...

"A lot of the interesting quirks in the characters are put there by the actors themselves. [...] I think the actors in the newsroom were poorly cast. The guy who plays Scott Templeton is just bland and boring. He adds no depth to his role."

Yes, that's definitely part of the problem. Colvin, for instance, resonated far more than he might have because he was played by the terrific actor Robert Wisdom. I like Clark Johnson a lot, as both an actor and a director, and he does what he can with his thinly written part. You're right, though: he doesn't have anyone to play off of.

But even they had cloned a dozen Robert Wisdoms and cast them as the newsroom characters, I still think that whole storyline would have felt a little thin.

Nomi Lubin said...

I don't think it's the acting. I think it's the writing.

Sometimes this feels so petty. If a newsroom were depicted like this on almost any other show, it would be considered incredibly nuanced.

High bar syndrome.

dronkmunk said...

No, it's the acting. The acting has not been bad this year, per se, but where is the flair? Give me some people that I want to watch. I think the newsroom storyline, acting, and writing have all been superb, but somehow the parts just aren't coming together for me. I was re-watching the scene when Gus is looking out the window with the other reporters, and was waiting for the great line: "What kind of people stand around watching a fire?" which is such a great metaphor for the wire itself and its audience. But thats another post. I ended up zoning out and missing the line. It's just so dry. Stringer Bell had kind of a wooden personality, let's face it, but what made him fascinating was the way that he used his mind. The newsroom characters are bright people, and I understand that most of the lack of moisture in those scenes can be attributed to mirroring an actual newsroom, but c'mon. Here we are now. Entertain us.

hng said...

"High bar syndrome."

It's David Simon's own damn fault. If only seasons one through four had been crappy, he wouldn't be taking all this flak now. That'll learn him.

Next time, David, make a consistently mediocre show.

John said...

The case of the two top editors is interesting because unlike anybody else on the show, they are elitists. Unlike their fellow hacks and bureaucrats in the police or City Hall, they are not part of Baltimore at all; they simply want to sponge off its dysfunction in order to win Pulitzers. And they fail both as bureaucrats and as newspapermen, since they have no clue what is really going on in the city they cover, or in their own newsroom. (For this reason, I strongly disagree that they are portrayed as being good at their jobs - a clueless journalist, like a fabulist journalist, is by definition not a journalist at all.)

It's also a more wholesale indictment than we see of other, similar characters. The editors have no redeeming features whatsoever, like Lt. "Marimow" last season. Nor are they interesting to watch, which is the real problem. You know pretty much exactly what's going to happen when they come on camera.

Their purpose as characters seems polemical: besides serving to settle Simon’s scores against Carroll/Marimow, they represent something broader about American political/media elites and their blithe disengagement from all the problems the show explores. And also perhaps the audience of viewers and critics praising the "Dickensian aspect" of the show while the real Baltimore (and New Orleans, Detroit, et al) burns.

Joe said...

Is there any chance that the Bunny-Carcetti meeting might portend something for the season finale. Bunny was McNulty's mentor, and he is clearly owed something by Carcetti, in both their minds. Could he intervene for McNulty and help mitigate the punishment?

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Joe: I hope your question was not directed toward Andrew or me. If so, terribly sorry: we agreed we wouldn't say a word about the finale until it airs.

John: I take your point about the lack of redemptive features in the editors; they're not as complicated as other unsympathetic characters that appeared during the five season run of this series. But this is a more satirical/darkly comedic season, and within that context, I think Simon's entitled to paint in somewhat broader strokes -- particularly seeing as how he saved the media for last, and is essentially saying, "If the media did its job better, the whole of society would run better, because its day-to-day triumphs and failures would be chronicled regularly by people invested in what happens."

Andrew said...

The more I see of Whiting and Klebanow, the more I'm convinced that these characters were primarily intended to be comedic from the start (i.e. Valchek). The scene this week where they're discussing how to win a Pulitzer was a hoot. I like the way that they've turned the "Dickensian aspect" into a running gag.

hng said...

"But this is a more satirical/darkly comedic season, and within that context, I think Simon's entitled to paint in somewhat broader strokes"

Of course he's entitled to do whatever he wants with his show. But for whatever reasons it doesn't seem to be working for a great many Wireheads. It might--just might--be a misfire on Simon's part.

I personally think that if you're going to go all Dr. Strangelove, then go full tilt boogie and accept the consequences. But what I'm seeing is neither fish nor fowl (at least regarding the newsroom and the serial killer storylines), not quite bizarro enough to feel Kubrickian or Swiftian, not quite rich and complex enough in its characterizations to feel like the old Wire.

James said...

The more obvious reason seems to be forgotten; that three hours of the final season were hacked off by HBO decree.

There's where the complexity went; on the other side of a profit and loss account.

Which, ironically validates Simon to a large degree.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

hng: "I personally think that if you're going to go all Dr. Strangelove, then go full tilt boogie and accept the consequences."

That might have been fun, but if you think longtime fans were irritated and bewildered by the change of tone as is, just imagine the reaction if Simon had really cranked up the absurdity and basically turned it into sort of a blue-collar version of "Bonfire of the Vanities" (the book, not the movie). There'd be people with torches and pitchforks surrounding HBO headquarters.

I think he went about as far as he could have gone without prompting accusations of making a show that is "The Wire" in name only.

All of this is not to say that I think this season is perfect -- not by a long shot. But given the constraints this bunch was under, and the pressure to wrap things up in a satisfying, say-all-you-could-have-said way, I'm liking what I see. A lot.

Any season after the first season of a show is basically a sequel. The first obligation of the sequel is to be the same yet different, which is harder than it sounds. Make it too much the same or too different and you lose a lot of the core fans.

I don't think Simon has lost anybody. And I suspect this will be sort of like Season Two of "The Sopranos," which wasn't as coherent and perfect as Season One, but which has its own rhythm and internal logic and plays better the second time, without the week of waiting in between chapters.

hng said...

"if you think longtime fans were irritated and bewildered by the change of tone as is, just imagine the reaction if Simon had really cranked up the absurdity and basically turned it into sort of a blue-collar version of "Bonfire of the Vanities""

Oh definitely, and I'd probably be the biggest complainer of all. I'm just speculating on why so many people say that the newsroom storyline feels flat, and I think it feels flat because it's semi-farcical. Farce, almost by definition, contains only one-dimensional characters. But because Simon has also kept it semi-dramatic (and because other parts of the show are still largely dramatic in tone and structure), the newsroom storyline gets caught in a dead zone between the two genres--dramatic in tone, farcical in structure.

Or maybe not. What do I know?

"[Season Five] has its own rhythm and internal logic and plays better the second time, without the week of waiting in between chapters."

Several months from now I'll probably watch the whole season again in three-hour chunks on consecutive days, to see if it plays better that way.

Anonymous said...

I like the media aspect but they should have focused on TV news instead of paper. It's much more accessible and inclusive. They could have used Kima's ex-partner, Cheryl, as a hook and introduced her boss and co-workers at the TV station.

It seems most of the characters watch the TV news - even the corner kids - but the newspaper is an irrelevant entity. Not that many people read newspapers anymore (especially if most of them dropped out of school at grade 8) but everyone watches television, even gangsters and police officers.

Those academic elites who sit around in their offices typing on their computers and using words like "tumescent" are too disconnected to the word of The Wire. They exist in their secluded cubby holes of privilege.

Also, these snobs are just not interesting. That's why you see lots of cop, lawyer, blue collar worker and angsty teenager shows on TV, but nobody wants to watch a show about rich old white men who love listening to their own vocabulary. That's boring!

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Anon: "I like the media aspect but they should have focused on TV news instead of paper. It's much more accessible and inclusive."

Absolutely. And local TV news' sins of flashiness and oversimplication are arguably much more debilitating to society than the local newspaper's, because most of the time TV news operations are not trying to paint a complete picture, or even a semi-complete picture; when every story has to clock in at a minute or less, it's just not possible to do anything but summarize and show some striking images. It's all fires, shootings and "Could this vacuum cleaner kill you?"

Brian said...

Amazing episode, aside from Carcetti's out-of-the-blue apology to Colvin (a rare Wire moment that felt totally shoehorned-in and done out of obligation, inorganically) but I gotta share the sentiment that the newsroom storyline just isn't adding up to much. I'm reminded of Jonathan Rosenbaum's review of the film SHATTERED GLASS (which covered very similar ground, in under 2 hours no less): "I wish the filmmakers had widened their focus to address the kinds of journalistic corruption that go beyond simple fibbing." That just about nails it--there's so much worth going after when it comes to the media that Simon's myopic focus on a slimy fabulist and his noble editor seems almost trivial, especially compared to the Big Ideas that the rest of the series is busy tackling.

Patrick said...

I didn't find the Colvin scene out of the blue at all. You could argue it's one of the most significant scenes in the whole show because it shows that everyone does have the potential to achieve, and if the social system wasn't so messed up, there's no reason all these kids couldn't achieve like Namond does. It was deliberately placed next to those scenes of Dukie losing his family to show how people wind up on the streets, addicted to drugs. It's not Dukie's fault, if he had the familial structure that Namond does, maybe he would achieve just as much, but society isn't set up to help him, and he winds up on the streets.

And, I'd agree that the essence of the scene is the fact that Carcetti is spitting these pointless statistics about student achievement while it's clear that the system isn't working, and he ignored the one man who had an idea that could actually work to help the kids. Carcetti doesn't even mention Colvin's school plan, that's what strings him the most.

Maybe it wasn't that important to this season's stories, but for the series as a whole, it's critical. And, despite what Simon says, this is a show about characters, and it's such a joy to see Colvin and Namond again.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

In a show filled with visionary characters of various sorts, Bunny is the one who could have done the most good for the city.

Three Bills said...

First comment I've posted. Great conversation, thanks to all.

Regarding "ShirtGate"...

I agree that it ratchets up dramatic anticipation. However, if we're going to say that the Wire folks are the brilliant literary artists that they are, then I offer this as a bit of foreshadowing.

After all, what is a tick? It is a parasitic nuisance that burrows deep and does damage before you even realize you have it attached to you.

Like McNulty draining resources from BPD...

Like the crooked reporter draining resources from the Sun...

Like the court mole who is draining information and selling it to Levy...

Like Clay Davis, draining any system he can get his hands on...

Like the rats, weasels and turncoats Marlo is frantically searching for...

Just a thought.

Brian said...

I said the *apology* felt shoehorned, NOT the preceding scene with Namond, which I loved. I was glad to see both him and Colvin again, don't get me wrong; the end of the scene just didn't ring true for me.

Anonymous said...

I've always found the saintly Bunny Colvin too much of a "Mary Sue" character on this show. Namond's storyline was especially contrived and unbelievable. Basically Bunny just adopted Weebay's son out of the blue. Such a pat and convenient fairy tale ending. It's hard to swallow after the punishing "realism" of Duquan's story. Even the reformed Cutty fails to give that kid a modicum of useful advice. But Saint Bunny? He "saves" Namond out of the goodness of his heart. Something that Cutty, Prez, and Carver fail to do time and again for the other kids. I rolled my eyes when I saw Bunny and Namond again. Their storyline belongs on "7th Heaven" - not The Wire.

Patrick said...

Being 'real' doesn't have to mean that only bad things happen. As I saw it, the point of the Colvin storyline was to show that the system makes it impossible for people to help kids, even if they want to. Carver puts himself out there for Randy and can't adopt him even though he wants to. But, Colvin goes around the system, talks to Wee-Bey, and is able to help Namond.

I think season four does a great job of setting up why Colvin chooses to help Namond, after all he's been through, should Colvin just leave him with his mother, who he's clearly seen is totally destructive for this kid? He could, that'd be possible, but I think it's just as 'real' for him to choose to do something to help the kid. He hasn't been able to change the system, but he can change one kid's life.

If only bad things happen on the show, that becomes it own kind of unreality. And, the fact that it is possible for good things to happen makes the bad feel even worse.

Nomi Lubin said...

After watching the episode a couple more times, there's something I keep thinking about -- Snoop's reaction -- or, rather, lack of reaction -- to facing a gun that's about to blast a bullet through her head. She displays absolutely no fear. More than displays, really: She has no fear, even to the point of being able to make an ironic but lighthearted joke.

At first I though, wow, she's cold-blooded, but even the most cold-blooded killers usually show some kind of fear when they know they're about to be killed, at least in the movies they do. As powerful as the whole scene was, and satisfying to the extent that Michael outsmarts her/them, her reaction felt distractingly implausible.

But by the second viewing, I wondered if it wasn't another moment akin to Omar's jumping from the window and being nowhere to be found, another kind of darkly comical almost cartoonish moment. I don't know; maybe, if I have to wonder like this, I'm on the wrong track. No one had to wonder about Omar's Spiderman moment; it was clear instantly that his near mythic status was being toyed with and it worked perfectly on every level.

Would like to know what other people think.

Anonymous said...

I'd prefer they show the positive things is a more realistic manner. There are plenty of kids in the "ghetto" who do not become drug addicts, dealers or hit men. They do not get magically adopted by a saintly ex-Police Chief who "saves" them with his "deus ex machina" acts of kindness. These kids struggle with poverty, dysfunctional families, etc., yet they manage to survive and sometimes even excel due to strength, tenacity and guidance.

I think they could have done this with Duquan's story. They could have shown him using his intelligence and academic aptitude to escape his dire circumstances. They could have shown him make use of various community resources and youth programs (perhaps the Deacon could have advised Cutty on where to direct the youth).

Unfortunately, the writers took the lazy way out.

Geoff said...

What community resources? How can you use your intelligence to escape if you have no idea of where to look for escape?

No amount of intelligence can help someone escape from a box locked from the outside, and Dukie had no one available to open that box from the outside. The writers weren't lazy, they were accurate.

Nomi Lubin said...

A few kids do get adopted and saved by saints.

hng said...

"No one had to wonder about Omar's Spiderman moment; it was clear instantly that his near mythic status was being toyed with and it worked perfectly on every level."

Well, Omar's Spiderman moment didn't work for me. On the other hand, Snoop's calm fatalism during her last moments felt plausible to me. She must have known that she'd end up dying like that sooner or later. Maybe she even felt a bit of perverse pride in having schooled Michael so well and appreciated the irony of the situation. One thing we always knew: Snoop was never a wimp.

Hayden Childs said...

So one Anonymous poster thinks Namond's salvation by Bunny Colvin is too fantastic, and the next thinks Dukie's lack of options is lazy writing. Just keeping score at home here.

Anyway, no comments on Dozerman's shirtlessness or the cruel world that allows critics to see episodes in advance of us plebes. I'm with Andrew in thinking that this was the best Wire episode ever, and I do think The Wire is the best tv show I've ever seen, better than The Sopranos (and slightly better than Deadwood). I know the question was meant in jest, but I don't know if this means that this was the best episode of any tv show ever. As much as I like lists, it seems weird to shoehorn the greatest art into a hierarchy outside of context. It's like trying to choose the best chorus of a song or the most effective use of the B7 chord or something.

Anonymous said...

All I want to say is that I want to tie a red ribbon around HBO's wrist and bite it on the thigh. Because I have been counting the hours all week (and particularly, ALL DAY TODAY) until midnight tonight when I would be able to see the series finale. But no. I can understand holding back the finale until broadcast, but they should have TOLD ME that it'd be two weeks. They shouldn't enter into the on demand week-ahead scheme and then take it back without notice.
-m

Drew said...

Thanks to all who host and post, as I have come to learn a great many things about a show I personally revere above all others. As to the Carcetti/Colvin seen, I must admit it made me uncomfortable, and may even have been a bit of a contrivance, but nonetheless rammed home the Quixotic nature of Bunny Colvin, and reinforced Carcetti's evolution into true suit. I must ask that people remember that Carcetti never even heard of the school experiment, which is clearly not anywhere near the same league as Hamsterdam politically. The parallels and contrasts between the four boys, echo many aspects of life, including its random, fateless nature. I would see Namond's adoption in correlation to Dookie's current status as a condemnation of society's tendency to give the squeaky wheel the grease. It seems that every time I'm displeased with a storyline something more comes, so it won't be for a while that I'll begin to get a grasp on this season's ranking in my all-time category, but I wish people would let up on the bashing of this year. In comparison with the rest of the schlock broadcast these days, why should you criticize Picasso for a cube you don't like, when it has become abundantly clear that you probably just don't get it. Finally, I loved Snoop's exit. She was never a player in the game, only a soldier, and when the time came, she met her end nobly, having seen too many people meet their own with much less aplomb. God help us all, cause there's only an hour and a half of great TV left.

Anonymous said...

On the origins of Senator Davis's sheeeeeeeeit, from an interview with Isiah Whitlock Jr:


It's one of those things, I had an uncle who passed away, God bless his soul, but he used to do that a lot, my uncle Leon. It was the way he did it and it was when he did it that would always make you laugh. But he would sometimes end sentences and sometimes, you know, you'd wake up and you'd say, "Hey, Uncle Leon, how did you sleep?"

He's go, "Sheeeeeit, man, I hit that pillow and ..."

Or, you'd say, "How is dinner?"

"Sheeeeeit, that food was good."

So he would always sort of talk like that. And so, the first time I did it, I think was in Spike Lee's film The 25th Hour. I did it there and I did it in She Hate Me. But then, when I got on to The Wire, I saw a couple of opportunities where I could do it, and I did. And they started writing it in, so I would pick my spots and lay one out there. But I think I might let it go with The Wire. I don't know though, you might hear it every now and then though."

Read the whole thing at http://www.hobotrashcan.com/interviews/isiahwhitlockjr.php

hng said...

"I wish people would let up on the bashing of this year. [...] it has become abundantly clear that you probably just don't get it."

Yes, there's only one correct opinion. To get it is to love it uncritically. Not to love it uncritically means you just don't get it. Thanks for putting us doubters in our place.

Ziggy said...

In all the bashing of the newspaper story I think one thing is getting mostly overlooked, which is that a young reporter from the Sun, with Gus’ guidance, is looking to tell Bubbles’ story. Meaning everybody chasing the big prize, the Pulitzer or “drugs on the table” as the case may be, are at it mostly for their own glory but within the dysfunctional institution it is still possible for small, good things to happen. The story is handled so gracefully and thoughtfully and with so much quiet dignity, we tend to overlook that things like the simple and beautiful salvation of Bubbles is the real climax of the show, not the fate of Marlo, who will most certainly be replaced the day he goes to jail.

Rolo Tomassi said...

Can't believe I only stumbled upon this site now... with just one episode to go - reading through these comments this Monday morning has been pure heaven for this Wire junkie.

Can't think of what to add just now, except for this: was the final Mike-Snoop scene making deliberate reference to The Godfather, as Mike (Michael) asked to use the bathroom in order to get his gun? (Of course he had the gun on him, but I still thought there was a bit of homage-making at work.)

Anybody else have that vibe, or was it pure coincidence...?

hng said...

"the final Mike-Snoop scene making deliberate reference to The Godfather, as Mike (Michael) asked to use the bathroom in order to get his gun? (Of course he had the gun on him, but I still thought there was a bit of homage-making at work.) Anybody else have that vibe, or was it pure coincidence...?"

Good call, rolo. I didn't notice it before, but now that you mention it, I think you may be right.

Hayden Childs said...

I thought someone had mentioned it upthread, but now I realize it was elsewhere: the disconnect between Snoop thinking she was in Unforgiven when in fact she was in The Godfather.

bobby digital said...

shirtgate - dont know if this has been mentioned but shirtgate bore similarities to meadow trying to park at the end of the sopranos. like someone said here, to ratchet up the anxiety b/c you might be lead to believe someone might spot dozerman in the weeds

Day-day said...

Shhhiiittt answered by Isiah Whitlock

http://www.hobotrashcan.com/interviews/isiahwhitlockjr.php

hng said...

Purposes of Shirtgate:

To create tension and suspense

To provide comic relief

To introduce driven-crazy-by-parasites theme


I can't believe we're spending so much time on a throwaway scene.

Mike O' said...

How did Marlo's phone number get on any official police paperwork? Didn't McNulty and Freamon put a bogus phone number on the wire tap request form? This is really bugging me.

Andrew said...

How did Marlo's phone number get on any official police paperwork? Didn't McNulty and Freamon put a bogus phone number on the wire tap request form? This is really bugging me.

I'm no expert, but I think you have to have the actual number on the wiretap warrant in order for the wiretap equipment to work. You need compliance with the phone company or something. I'm reasonably sure of this.

Mike O' said...

But I thought that is why Freamon did the re-wiring in the tech room - to get around that issue?

Hayden Childs said...

Yeah, Lester & McNulty made explicit reference to putting Marlo's phone number on the paperwork back when they were concocting their scheme. That was why McNulty had the Sun suppress that Templeton's call came from a pay phone.

Anonymous said...

Posted in Heaven and Here's comments section are two more articles furthering the Simon/Marimow/Carroll conversation as well as how it relates to this season. A bit more "substantive" that previous (Slate) articles on the matter. It bares considering that The Newsroom is the first institution The Wire has dealt with where the ethical and moral impact (in terms of storytelling) is so much more vague and, uh, post-modern. In such a professional world you're so much more likely to find normal bureaucrats without out-sized personalities. It's become a business after all, at least that's Simon's point. But in terms of furthering my own lazy argument "But It Really Happened!" you'll be interested to read Simon's essay in Esquire for a reference to the major storyline of the Newsroom.

http://www.cjr.org/cover_story/secrets_of_the_city.php?page=all

http://www.esquire.com/print-this/essay/david-simon-0308

Anonymous said...

I wonder if the character was given the name "Michael" for that very reason.

I can't help but compare Michael Lee to Michael Corleone from The Godfather trilogy. They are both characters who are surrounded by a dark world that they don't want to be a part of but circumstances force them into it. And once they've descended into that world, they both realize that they are extremely proficient at being able to navigate through it and can thrive.

At various times, Dukie & Namond have played "Fredo".

I don't see the big deal about "Shirt-gate". It was a gratuitous shot of an attractive guy meant to appease all the women and gay men in the audience.

Nomi Lubin said...

Have to take back my earlier wavering about Bubbles's triumph. Shame on me.

Watching a second time, it doesn't feel at all contrived or forced.

I think, though, part of what's happened for me is a distracting kind of tallying in my own mind -- who's making it, who's not. Why does this one get to survive, but not someone else? I don't know. I suppose the semi-arbitrariness of it all just will never sit well with me. Within those parameters, I am left appreciating pieces, sometimes large pieces, but never quite the whole.

Drew writes that the show echos "many aspects of life, including its random, fateless nature." I guess if you do not believe that the nature of life is random and fateless, you're never going to be able to embrace The Wire.

Oh, good point by Ziggy about the reporter following Bubbles, quietly finding an authentic story.

Jeff said...

(Kinda long, but this question keeps coming up over and over again, so here goes...)

The wiretap documents that go to the phone company have to have the actual number you want on them - so that they can set up the tap. Keep in mind that Lester and McNulty want a real tap on a real phone -- Marlo's cell phone. The phone company sets up the tap on that number and give you a line into their central switch so that you can listen in on that number. That line goes into the police wiring closet, and then (if not disturbed), from there to the computer(s) tracking the tap.
However, that line was disturbed from the get-go -- by Lester.

Think of the wiring closet as an old-fashioned switchboard - you plug one incoming line (from Marlo courtesy of Verizon) into an outgoing line (to Detective Vernon, sitting patiently in front of the monitoring computers at headquarters.) But Lester unplugged Vernon and plugged himself (in the old offices) in. So he was the one monitoring the actual tap on Marlo, and Vernon was sitting around with his proverbial thumb up his proverbial ass, falling asleep while monitoring an unplugged line. Remember that when Lester does this (tucks the unplugged cable into a bundle of cables), McNulty doubts that they'll get away with it - but Lester says no one will come in to find it, and wouldn't know what it meant if they did.

When Lester and McNulty fake the serial killer call, they plug Vernon into a special 'black box' which can make it look like a call is coming in from any number you enter. They use the number on the cell phone that Sydnor is holding, down on Pier 5. And they've previously cloned a SIM card for this phone to make it identical to Marlo's. So although Vernon is actually called by McNulty's phone, it looks to him as if he is being called by the phone that's listed on the paperwork, and is in reality the phone that Sydnor holds.

The cops put a quick GPS trace on that phone number, locate the phone at Pier 5, and rush all hands there. But Sydnor has turned off the phone and/or put it in a shielded bag, so it disappears off the GPS 'radar'. Serial killer appears to vanish.

Lester then unplugs the magic box, plugs himself back into Marlo, and Vernon goes back to wasting time on the taxpayers' dime.

But remember that Marlo's actual phone number is on the court papers since that's how the tap is set up in the first place -- so last night, when Pearlman and Daniels dial that number, Marlo's phone (on the shelf in front of them) rings. They know that Marlo is not the freaky homeless sex maniac killer (he's a lot of bad things, but not that), and they know that the only phone ever actually authorized for monitoring was Marlo's -- so they then know for sure that the serial killer call from Pier 5 was somehow spoofed (since Marlo would never have made it himself), and thus have proof to back up Kima's confession that the whole thing is a hoax.

author said...

Carcetti and Colvin look over at the press not because he doesn't want Colvin to talk about Hamsterdam or his school experiment, but because the show is reminding us what a snake Carcetti has become. He gives this big talk about how he wants to help real people with real solutions, but when the mechanism for reform comes around, he uses it to argue that they can't just abandoned parts of the streets to the drug trade or segregate some children in schools to alternative eduction. No matter if these are effective, true reform changes the status quo and the status quo is built to squash reform by says that change will do more harm than good.

That is the tragedy that the Wire is trying to portray. The game is the game, whether that game is city hall, the street corner, or the cubical in the homicide department. No matter how hard Freeman, McNulty, Omar, or Marlo try to change their respective games they will get burned.

I know everyone seems to hate Herc, but he had a line in season 3 that summed up what the Wire the resistance to reform is all about.

"You mess with the environment, some species get fucked out of their habitat."

If true change were to occur such as decriminalizing the drug trade then millions of people would be out of work. The drug trade does not just employ the boys on the corner, but also the politician waving their fists in the air, the lawyers, the judges, the journalists, the police, the jail guardsmen, and the drug rehab doctors.

Herc was speaking only about the hoppers loosing their jobs in Hampsterdam, but his line has truth for all institutions. You mess with the environment and some institutions will not be needed. That is why they will resist change as much as they can and the institutions will propagate failure to stay alive.

http://houstonhomicide.blogspot.com

straight outta silver spring said...

Jeff,

Thank you! You are the man!

Nomi Lubin said...

Jeff, are you Lester?

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

Peter Suderman of The American Scene takes issue with me and Andrew suggesting that this might be the best "Wire" episode overall.

Tina said...

I'd say there are several Wire episodes I'd rank higher than this one -- the extraordinary three that ended season one, with the aftermath of Kima's shooting, Wallace's death, D'Angelo's heartbreaking speech about giving up the empire just to get clean, and of course how it all plays out. But I'd also put out the penultimate episode of season two; Frank Sobotka talking to the task force, wanting everything to be okay for his family, then the long shot walk to his death.

But it's all opinion around a very fine line -- this has been a great series and I fear we will not see the likes of it again anytime soon.

Dan Jardine said...

No doubt, author, no doubt. The War on Drugs is a multi-billion dollar industry that has a far more wide-rangind effect on society than the equally fatuous War on Terror. And, as Carver cleverly pointed out lo so many seasons ago, this ain't really a war, cuz wars end. This is a nightmare from which the dreamer cannot awake.

Simon Hsu said...

Related: Alan Sepinwall has unearthed the origin of Clay Davis' catchphrase. The first instance of "Sheeeit" occurred before the 4th season (I was wrong), in the "Homecoming" episode of Season 3

Anonymous said...

inverness ---


I’ve got a feeling a lot of people are going to be disappointed in the finale. Kind of like a Humpty-Dumpty fell off a wall and all the king’s men and all the king’s horses etc., etc.

At any rate …

I’d hoped for a more thorough look at how the Scott Templetons’ in the news business get so twisted around. Certainly David Simon could have pulled that off if HBO had given him four or five more episodes. It may be that our media conglomerates just aren’t ready to see how a Jason Blair or, for that matter, a Judith “Ms. Run-a-muck” Miller can shoehorn themselves into the process. (It appears Howell Raines won’t address the issues.) I believe Simon has the courage to show that, but not the executive suite. Shattered Glass was ok, but I thought that script needed 4-5 more rewrites before filming commenced. Ah, well.

I believe the mainstream media really expected Simon separate the ice cream from the b.s. How else to explain so many big guns, like Chuck Bowden, firing away as the Wired season began. In hindsight, wasn’t that pretty obnoxious. Back then, I don’t doubt some our more lionized news editors, executive or otherwise, got stopped in their respective hallways by fawning who-evers’: “Oh that mean David Simon. He just doesn’t understand the pressures you deal with.” Oh yeah.

Having worked as a crime reporter in a major city for a loooong time I must praise all the actors who played homicide cops and special ops cops. Man, they were so right on. I sorry can’t recall his name, but the guy who played Bunk Moreland was just terrific. I could easily see him among the cops working a homicide scene. I hope to see him pop up in other major films.

I was riveted to the scene where Michael, Dukie, and Bug say their good-byes. Very powerful emotions worked through a very constricted scene. Each has his own understanding of necessity and plays it out. It just took my breath away when Michael uttered, “I don’t remember.” Whew!

Though I’ve only contributed once before this blog has been terrific. Andrew Johnston’s precisely sculpted reviews always added to my understanding and of course, Matt, our host, certainly knows how to spice up the conversation.

There have been many stand-out individual episodes and #59 is right at the top. What we may be left with though is our guesswork on what might have filled out another 4-5 episodes in this season.

Over and out.

david e. ford, jr said...

there is little doubt in my mind that the fifth season of the wire is by far the most interesting and ultimately satisfying of them all. moreover, there is little question that the penultimate episode, as it were, was the strongest of any of the season's episodes. though i have not had the opportunity to view the series finale, it is no surprise that it is less compelling than its immediate predecessor. i like to think of a season ending episode of the wire to an encounter with an ex-girlfriend with whom you have remained on friendly terms for the several months since your breakup and during which you have had no sexual relations at all. the anticipation that your long dry spell will suddenly come to an end is sort of unsatisfactorily concluded as you end up making out with your former lover, she sort of clumsily fondles your member and you prematurely attain climax. sure, you sort of get what wanted, but certainly not in the way you wanted it.

dellwhistler211 said...

*Long Post Ahead - Beware*

This is my first time visiting this blog and I must say that it (as well as others I've found) is great to read. So many insights, so much to bring back to viewing the ep...Anyway, I see that there's a lot of disappointment with the newsroom storyline. I somewhat agreed with what has been said in the first few eps of this season, but overall I've become more invested in what happens (although it still doesn't hold a candle to everything else in the show). I found the following in another blog and I thought I'd share it with you guys. It brings a better understanding to what is Simon is trying to say with the newsroom storyline. I hope this helps; it did for me.

Until today, I found the media story pretty weak. It's been pretty much the only disappointing thing ever on The Wire, the rest of which I've found pretty much perfect. But now I think I get it.

I attended two live presentations by David Simon today at the University of Southern California, and he explained that the media theme of this season wasn't about whether they're getting the stories they report on right. Rather, it was about all the stories they're not reporting on at all. Then the following jelled in my mind:

Simon is showing that it doesn't matter how--whether in total fabrication a la Scott or in the real work that everyone else at The Sun seems to be doing--the media doesn't report the right stories, i.e., the ones they leave out. Scott strengthens that point by being so non-subtle. The key is that he is still merely a distraction. Obviously he gets it wrong. But so does everyone else, the rest of whom are generally playing by the books. Even Gus gets it wrong when he doesn't pick up on the importance of Joe, Hungry, or Omar, and when he tells Alma they'll run the story on the fire instead of Omar's murder in the 8th or 9th episode. Gus seems so saintly, but he still gets the story wrong. And then he goes hunting Scott like that's what's important. But Scott is merely a distraction from the more subtle, more mundane, more run-of-the-mill, more everyday, but much more important story that the entire newspaper gets it wrong even when, unlike Scott, they're trying to do it right. By contrast with Scott's overtness, the real story about the media is thrown into the shadows just like the real stories that the media should be writing about. But they misfocus us on the sensational crap that sells, just like Simon has us misfocus on Scott. Just as the media focuses our attention on the wrong stories while giving us little on what they should, Simon focuses our attention on Scott instead of the story he should be telling about the more run-of-the-mill failings in today's newsrooms. In the real media and in Simon's depiction, the important stuff is the stories that aren't told, and Simon paralleled that theme by telling us tons about Scott and comparatively little about the more mundane but more important failings in his fictional newsroom.

I still might have preferred to see more on the mundane everyday failings of the media, but at least now I see what Simon was trying to do. And I think it's a damned clever and successful approach. Even if it could have been done differently and perhaps better, it was still done well. I didn't think that until I figured all this stuff out (with Simon's help), but now I'm convinced. I guess I should always have complete faith in this show, the best thing that's ever been on television. Oh yeah, too late for that, it ends next week.

Hayden Childs said...

David Simon answers the most important issue on everyone's mind: what's with Randy and Cheese having the same last name?

Regardless, Simon has no regrets. He even made a point of exonerating HBO for "The Wire's" shorter run this season by explaining that if they truly needed more time to wrap up their story (which initially included the revelation that Randy is indeed Cheese Wagstaff's son), HBO would have provided it. But he feels the tighter story is stronger for it.

Link

Patrick said...

I can see what Simon was going for, but that defense feels like the old it's not bad, it's a comment on badness, and therefore good. Maybe something will change in the last episode, but I don't think we needed this whole thing with Scott to get the point that they're ignoring the stories that form the bulk of the series. It's the equivalent of having the police side of the show be entirely about people like Rawls, Herc and Colicchio, it might be real, and it would certainly show why the department fails to change things, but would it be much fun to watch?

Most of the other stories on the show are about an idealist coming into conflict with the existing system, and gradually either getting beaten down by it or rejected it. I'm not saying they should stick to that formula exclusively, but I think it would have been more effective to focus on someone like Alma, and show us why she is unable to cover the important things, rather than just taking that as a given and doing this entire story that's about what the characters are not doing.

I still think the newspaper storyline had its moments, but I think they could have made that point with less screen time, and spent more time focusing on the other characters.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

To listen to a podcast in which Alan Sepinwall, Andrew Johnston and I debate the relative merits of "The Wire," "The Sopranos" and "Deadwood," click here.

Hayden Childs said...

Blogger ate my long post responding to Patrick. Since no one will ever read it, let me say that it was the most brilliant thing I've ever written, full of a greatness that I would describe as Dickensian in retrospect. I wept while writing it, and I weep while remembering it. Oh well.

In short: I agree about the newspaper story, Patrick. It's not the debacle that some think it is, but I think it could have better dramatized the real problems plaguing newspapers.

hot breakfast said...

Andrew J.,

Just listened to the podcast. I think you might have mentioned me as the pissed off Wire fan at the very end of the conversation.

First off, I should probably apologize because I made that comment almost immediately after watching the episode and my emotions may have been a little raw.

I tried to word my comment carefully and respectfully. Again, I apologize if I failed to do this.

Really what I was trying to say at the time was not that it wasn't OKAY to like The Sopranos better then The Wire, but rather that it hurt a little bit that you would include that line in your write up for so many of us die hard Wire fans to have to swallow. Again, I acknowledge that I was a still a bit emotional from just finishing the episode for the first time - I came sraight over here to read and post my comments.

And, for the record, The Sopranos is my 2nd favorite show - Deadwood being a very close 3rd.

Thank you for everything.

(I'm going to post this in the pod cast thread too - just incase you miss this here, hope that's okay)

Crip said...

Here's a 50 minute conversation between two Wire fans who also happen to be sportswriters. (no spoilers...they only discuss through ep. 9.)

The B.S. Report: 3/4
Jason Whitlock joins Bill to discuss the end of HBO's "The Wire." How come it didn't have the mass appeal of "The Sopranos?"

ESPN: The B.S. Report with Bill Simmons

Wrongshore said...

I think Patrick zeros in on how the newsroom story departs from the formula and why that makes it simpler and slightly disappointing. I would add that Simon's critique of institutions shows how the institution offers incentives that thwart its own mission; they also show characters mastering those incentives and compromising the mission (Rawls, Carcetti's path), trying to redefine the mission to suit their own purposes (Freamon), or trying to fulfill it in ways that will crush them (Frank Sobotka, Bunny twice over!). There are other gradations of it, but missing from the newsroom is a character how is trying to do good and being crushed for their efforts, either within or without. Gus is similar, but he doesn't really have to compromise, he just has to be disappointed. A Herc-Carver pairing in the newsroom would have fleshed it out: we would see people navigating those incentives and those compromises. Instead, we have the bullshit at the top (Rawls and Burrell, but less sympathetic) providing the wrong incentives (winning prizes, equivalent to lowering crime stats), someone gaming the system cynically (Templeton), but no one really being crushed by trying to do it right and figuring out how.

It's also worth reiterating what Patrick pointed out: Templetons aren't the newsroom problem, they're the result. Cut your expensive, senior workhorses and push for prizes (Dickensian! When has another artist so scorned the vocabulary used to praise him?) and voila! Templeton.

Matt Zoller Seitz said...

A side note: As many of you are doubtless aware, the finale of "The Wire" has leaked online, and naturally that means that all over the internet, petty little assholes with nothing better to do but ruin other people's fun are going to "Wire" discussion boards and posting bogus "predictions" about the finale that are actually spoilers based on their viewing of the leaked DVD.

I won't say where I've read these bogus "predictions," but I will say that if you haven't seen the finale, you should skip over any comment that purports to predict anything.

In fact, I'd recommend that anyone reading this who runs his or her own "Wire"-related blog not post any comments of any sort that purport to "predict" the outcome, on the off-chance that the poster is one of the aforementioned assholes.

Along those lines: If you're a visitor to this site who is contemplating making a "prediction" of any kind, bogus or legit, don't bother, because I or the other editors will reject it. No more predictions as of now; save that shit for the post-game wrapup that starts at The House Next Door Sunday, March 9 at 10:30 Eastern, and not a second earlier.

Pardon the interruption.

barbara74 said...

I have to go back a few episodes to the argument over whether Omar could "fly." In the NPR interview mentioned earlier, David Simon says that storyline was based on a real person who jumped from the fifth floor during a shootout, survived the fall, and got away from the pursuing killers.

Hayden Childs said...

If I'm not mistaken, Omar's jump was based on a real-life escape from a firefight by Donnie Andrews, who is not just the basis of Omar's character, but who is also the actor who played "Donnie." Donnie, as you may remember, is the guy who went into Monk's apartment with Omar and got shot.

Link to Michael K Williams interview where he confirms this.

I just wanted to mention that the Slate guys have topped themselves with stupidity in their Q&A.

Direct quote: "Most Wire fans treat Season 2 with disdain."

Another: "Dominic West can, on occasion, act."

Another: "There are Bubbles-lovers and there are Bubbles-haters. I'm sorry to say I fall in the later group. I have always found his plots a little cheap and emotional manipulative."

When a questioner calls Jeff Goldberg on having an axe to grind with David Simon (I agree with that commenter that Goldberg in particular has been stating unnecessarily harsh opinions about the show from the beginning of the season), he pshaws it off by saying he's called Simon a genius. Yeah, maybe you did, Goldberg, but you sure as hell haven't approached this season on the level.

hng said...

And I remember an incident where a skydiver's parachute malfunctioned and the skydiver plunged chuteless over 1,000 ft. and miraculously survived the fall. But if I saw the same thing in a movie, I'd laugh and stop taking the movie seriously. For some strange reason, fiction needs to be more plausible than fact.

The Slate commentary has been mostly irrelevant and gossipy. I've been pretty critical of Season Five myself, but even I thought Goldberg was grinding an axe mighty hard.

Nomi Lubin said...

Hayden: . . . Donnie Andrews, who is not just the basis of Omar's character, but who is also the actor who played "Donnie." Donnie, as you may remember, is the guy who went into Monk's apartment with Omar and got shot.

Wow, I didn't know this. I mean, I knew that Omar's character was partly based on a real person, and that that person had a part in the show, but I didn't know who he played. I can't get over how some of these non-actors can just get up and act. People say oh, they're just playing themselves. Huh? Try getting in front of a camera and "playing yourself."

Like Snoop -- I can never ever get over her.

hng: And I remember an incident where a skydiver's parachute malfunctioned and the skydiver plunged chuteless over 1,000 ft. and miraculously survived the fall. But if I saw the same thing in a movie, I'd laugh and stop taking the movie seriously. For some strange reason, fiction needs to be more plausible than fact.

Ha. Yeah, that's true, isn't it?

Wax Banks said...

Simon, Burns, and their fellow writers have acted in good faith for five seasons and I was happy to assume that Omar's 'Spider-Man shit' was based on a real event. According to David Simon's interview with the (staggeringly dull and lifeless) Terry Gross on 'Fresh Air' this week, the main real-life model for Omar (Donnie Andrews, who did play Donnie on the show), jumped out a window about five stories to get out of a firefight. Added bonus: jumped off some damn high bridge to get out of a tight spot as well. Said he wasn't really thinking about what he was doing: but it was 'that or the bullets.'

The great, angry David Mills ('Undercover Black Man') is streaming the relevant interview excerpt on his site.

There's a hell of a story yet to be written about journalists' (and ex-journalists') narcissistic reactions to Season Five, and the radical shift in media coverage of David Simon and The Wire now that the news media are his primary target for the season. It's convenient to focus on the fabricator Templeton, but the fact that he lies is a minor sin in the grand scheme of things; the vile prize-chasing editors are obviously bad for the profession, but their shortcomings aren't coterminous with the journalism industry's either. Indeed one of the weirdest moments of the year was Zorzi's snarky response to Carcetti's dope-on-the-table grandstanding: it's nice that Zorzi is so attuned to the cynical politicking of that moment, but the investigation that (nearly?) brought down Marlo has been portrayed by Simon et al. as more serious than the usual street-rips-and-band-aids approach that preceded it. He was being cynical about the political posturing and not the investigation, yes, but the flat-of-affect affectation of the newspapermen makes it difficult to highlight the good being done in the community as well. Five years of chasing bad guys and our one journo respondent shakes his head and chuckles? It's not just the drug war that's fucked up here.

Then again the Stansfield wiretap is also, in the show's scheme, a band-aid, but murder police doing their job are not to be dismissed; Marlo's a demon without question.

Maybe I'm overstating here out of pique, but the defensiveness and breast-beating from members of the press, and the fixation on the depth of the newsroom characterization, hides the fact that journos' use of an institutional shield to justify uninvolvement in community, symbolized by Templeton the liar but extending as well to Alma in a way, is as much a problem as any fabricator. The willingness to accede to interest-group pressure, or to pursue a partisan political program - two sides of the same coin. The inability of the national press to insist convincingly on its own relevance is a bigger story by far than Templeton's or Marinow's.

Every journalist not living up to Gus's admirable precepts (starting with: Be with people) is named in Simon's indictment. I wonder where film/TV reviewers fall in his schema.