Bauer is back! And he's more f'ed up than ever. From his acid-scarred hand to his whipped back to the ugly faces he was making at the end of episode 4 as he leaned against the World's Smallest Tree, Jack Bauer looks like, I dunno, he's been tortured for two years or something. And yet, he shows no signs of malnutrition, muscle atrophy, or any significant psychological after-effects.
I know we're supposed to suspend our disbelief for this show, but the first four episodes really pushed the envelope on what I will/will not buy from the writers of 24. If that lady hadn't called the cops on Kal Penn (Achmed-- not AHmed, you insolent American), I would've thrown a brick through my tv. I'm already stuck with having to believe that Curtis is suddenly so dumb that he would risk his life for a little revenge and that Jack is peak physical condition despite two years of daily, intense torture.
Something else that really bugs me is the horrible casting/writing for the characters working at CTU. Where are my Audrey/Tony/Michelle/Edgar/Chase/That bitch who always fought with Michelle (the one with the curly hair)/George Mason/Rudy? Morris, Milo, Nadia, Chloe and Bill Buchanan are all we get? Seriously? There's been maybe 15 minutes of screen time devoted to CTU and all 15 were horrifically boring and stupid. Nadia has no character, Bill is just a glorified switchboard operator, and the Milo/Morris/Chloe trio has got to be the worst storyline in the show's 6 year history. A very inauspicious start on that front...
Things I did like: Fayed is badass. I might be more scared of him than of any 24 terrorist yet (although President Logan will always be the show's best villain, hands down. That Emmy should've been his!) And who could forget the seminal moment of Episode 1, the "Zombie neck buffet" moment when Jack chomps down on the jugular of some unsuspecting Arab and rips out his throat like a lion enjoying his morning zebra. I also like Wayne Palmer as president. He's not nearly as awesome as big brother David (may he rest in peace), but he's a hell of a lot better than Logan and as far as human beings go, Wayne is very realistic-- a smart, principled man who has to make some outrageously difficult decisions and in the process, has some success and also makes several mistakes. Nice going, 24.
I also really like the willingness of the writers to go ahead and finally detonate a nuclear bomb on the show. It seems like they've been toying with the idea for years and at last, we have some real disasters on our hands. They're smart enough to keep the show fresh by having some really serious terrorist attacks throughout the country. More innocent people have died in the first four episodes than in all of the last five seasons combined. By raising the stakes, the writers are keeping viewers from bolting to fresher shows (we'll see how many bolters we've got once Heroes returns against 24 this coming Monday. What a showdown!)
The issue I want to discuss most is the blatant perpetuation of stereotypes thus far on 24. Yes, there have always been Arab terrorists on the show, and yes, the show has always had other characters protest the unfair treatment of innocent Muslims. Certainly this season we're getting plenty of preaching about the fundamentals of America and whether freedom or safety are more important, and I appreciate the inclusion of these current societal issues into the show. However, let's take stock of the ludicrous portrayal of minorities thus far on the show:
1. Curtis- the one black CTU agent can't control his temper and is killed off the show. I couldn't even be upset by his death because it was so forced and unnatural. It felt like the creative team behind the show just wanted to kill someone off to make things interesting, so hey, why not the black guy? There's no horrific misfortune that kills him (like with Edgar), no surprise factor (David Palmer, Michelle), no heroic act (George Mason), and nothing at stake (Chapelle). It's just a meaningless random kill. Bad work, guys.
2. Ahmed- Kal Penn is Indian. He doesn't even look Arab; he's clearly an Indian. It also doesn't help that movie roles he's most known for (Van Wilder & Harold and Kumar Go To White Castle) have him playing an Indian. That the producers choose to ignore this fact is just silly.
3. The 2 terrorists in the detainment facility-- Regina King spends 20 minutes spouting off on how innocent Muslims are being profiled and detained, and yet the only 2 prisoners we meet in the facility ACTUALLY ARE terrorists?! Come on! Are you kidding me? How can the writers include these speeches about how profiling is wrong and then have the profilers turn out to be totally right? The same thing happens with Ahmed. Stan the neighbor accuses Ahmed of being a terrorist, the nice neighbors protect him, and then it turns out, he IS a terrorist! The advertisers and suits behind Fox are sending a terrible message to viewers, subliminally teaching us that of course we should profile-- if you think an Arab looking guy is a terrorist, he is! Is this what Fox wants the American public to think? Shame on you, Fox.
For its ridiculous racist portrayals, its hidden government messages in support of racial profiling, its lack of interesting supporting characters, its forced kill of one of my favorite characters and so-so plot thus far, I give the first four episodes a collective B-.
Favorite scene: Jack as a killer zombie from the pits of Hell!
Favorite line: "They've been erased. And don't bother trying to recall them; I used a shredding program." - Sandra Palmer
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Jonah,
Nice analysis--one thing I would disagree with. I don't think the show has been perpetuating racist sterotypes as much as trying to make the point that the line between right and wrong is tough to judge in these scenarios. Everyone who tries to do the right thing and not judge people, the father, the head of the Islamic alliance (who inexplicably can't speak Arabic) is punished/wrong, but everyone who tries to do the wrong thing (the bus driver in the first scene who won't let the arab guy on the bus, the white rubes who try to kill Kumar) end up seemingly right. In that regard, it doesn't seem particularly racist rather indicative of the fact that it's basically impossible to tell who is good and who is bad in this type of environment.
I agree with what you say-- but don't you think that it sets up a Pavlovian relationship whereby if you trust Muslims, you are killed or betrayed, and if you don't trust them, you are right in doing so? Who then would ever want to trust a Muslim? This is the idea that I believe the show is promoting, whether consciously or not. Thanks for your input!
I don't think it's saying anything about Muslims per se. The show deals with the reality that in modern society most terrorists are Muslims, but it's careful to make the point that not most Muslims are terrorists. This nuance is what gives the show it's fodder for Muslim related story lines and is particularly why it attempts to demonstrate that behaviors based on generalizations are impossible in a world like this. Trying to act according to any broad set of beliefs is foolish and will produce nothing.
Also, regarding Curtis, I think that it had nothing to do with portraying a black man as having a temper. To me, it was shades of Jack killing Nina Myers and the immediate feeling Jack had afterwards was not vindication or satisfaction, rather a subconscious wish that someone had done the same thing to him when he killed Nina. I think Curtis was portrayed as someone who acted reasonably--when your war buddies have been beheaded by someone, you're not supposed to want to immediately partner with the guy.
This story line is about the subversion of rational thought and expected behavior caused by the necessities of war, not about someone losing their temper. Jack has been brought by down by the number of compromises he has to make (and the number of "right" decisions) and the fact that he had to kill one of the people in the show's history with the most integrity is meant to indicate that point. In my mind, it is meant to glorify the moral character of Curtis, not racially stereotype him.
But how is glorifying Curtis when Jack has to kill him? Jack is our hero, not Curtis, and so as an audience, we're going to support Jack in everything he does. If he killed Curtis, than he was right to do so. Thus, Curtis must be in the wrong. Whatever Curtis' motives were, whether it was a lost temper or an unshakable grudge, they are portrayed as being WRONG, so much so that he is killed off the show for his actions.
Curtis has always been one of my favorite characters because he acts intelligently and rationally. Moments ago, he was 100% ready to sacrifice Jack's life for the greater good, but he's not willing to work with Assad? It just doesn't hold up. It feels so forced and out of character for someone who has always been so levelheaded in the face of extreme adversity. I suppose that's what irked me most.
after they casually killed off TONY, a costar who teamed with jack during the best seasons of the show, i lost all respect for 24. they killed tony the week after they killed edgar, and you didn't even know he was dead. he got stabbed in the chest with a huge needle, then boop boop boop and the show is over. then next week its all oh tony died. my top 3 most influential 24 characters:
1. jack bauer
2. david palmer
3. tony almeida
9,482. milo
Post a Comment