The first season of Treme ended on Sunday. No, this will not be a verbose entry on the first season of the show. After the finale ended, Alan Sepinwall of hitfix.com posted an interview he conducted with the series co-creator David Simon. This was my first experience with a David Simon interview. Sepinwall noted that Simon was his usual unapologetic self.
I soon learned that, indeed, David Simon is very unapologetic. Of course, after reading the interview, I immediately began drawing comparisons in my head between a David Simon interview and a Cuselof (that's Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse) interview because many, many, many fans only became MADDER at Damon and Carlton after an interview. A certain section of fans didn't enjoy the sardonic and coy manner in which they answered questions. They felt Cuselof made fun of fans, the devoted and diehard fanbase and yada yada. I know, it's the internet and people will complain. I also swear there is a point to all this.
David Simon does not draw the ire of his fans from what I gathered after brief research. He appears to be untouchable after The Wire. In the course of his interview with Alan Sepinwall, he made no excuses whatsoever and defended the first season of Treme one hundred and fifty percent. His main argument throughout the interview is this: don't criticize my show until you've seen the entire story/season. It is a fair argument and something worth considering in this new social media era in which I just made sure the people of facebook knew that I was elated by the 91st minute goal scored by Landon Donovan. Message boards dissect each and every episode of a season. This is not new. In fact, I'd argue this dissection has existed since the internet became main stream in the late-90s. I digress.
Simon was unhappy with the complaints about Treme. People complained that plots did not exist episode by episode, that nothing happened on a week-to-week basis. Those complaints are risky to make when the show is historical fiction. Simon even says, and I'm paraphrasing, that his show has to tell the factual stories of post-Katria New Orleans and the same creative freedoms do not exist for his group of writers or he'll accuse the people of America not giving a bleep about post-Katria New Orleans and wonders why he thinks that has changed in the last five years. The other thing he said in defense of the overall structure and narrative style of Treme is, and I'm paraphrasing: he's uninterested in the typical television trope of something dire happening in every episode of a season. He said his show is not Breaking Bad or Glee or CSI and, most importantly, it's not The Wire.
I'm uninterested in criticizing Treme. The first season had its flaws but I don't regret the time I spent watching it. I had a few problems with the fact Simon seemed incapable of admitting a certain character or story arc did not work but I'll deal. I'm interested in what David Simon said about watching television, the week-by-week individual analysis of an episode that is part on the story of the season. What's the best way to watch television?
There are many ways to enjoy a television show. Some people love to write about each episode in exhausting details and some do not. In doing so, does that hinder one's enjoyment of the story the season told? I don't think so.
Joss Whedon is one of the best minds in television. He created and ran four shows. He understands what works and what doesn't. Of course, his only experience has been on network television. This discussion becomes complicated when one brings in cable television like HBO, AMC, and Showtime. Cable television is a whole different animal. More control exists on Cable. A showrunner, the executive producers and the studio do not have to worry the issues network television faces. I digress. Joss is a big picture guy with his television shows. He knows what the story is for the season and as that story is told episode-by-episode, other stories are told in individual episodes. The famous question all of his former writers tell an interview in interviews in this, about the process of breaking and writing an individual episode, is this: why are we telling this story? A great episode of a television show is supposed to tell a great story. It must also advance the plot and maintain the momentum of a season, and a great episode usually draws immediate reaction.
I can understand David Simon's frustration with fans judging episodes without the full season; however, with Treme, many fans didn't see where the show was going. But I don't think reviewing or talking about individual episodes of a television season hinders a person's enjoyment or appreciation of the season and the story that season has been telling. Television's a different medium than books. I don't think comparing the two mediums make sense.
However, there's another side to this. I'll refer to the final season of LOST. The writers didn't reveal what the Sideways were until the final minutes of the series. It's a gutsy move and they drew plenty of criticism for the final season. Again, on the record, I think season six is great. I digress. During the season, people were trying to make sense of the Sideways and all that. With the season over, I look at the sixth season of LOST and the reveal puts the season in a different light. It did not ruin the season for me. I now possess more knowledge and a better insight into what actually was the purpose of the individual Sideways stories. For example, Sawyer's Sideways in Recon did not thrill me; however, knowing that he leaves the Island and that the Sideways is a place these characters created to find each other, to let go and move, I now see Sawyer's sideways as the totality of his life and his story. I think, after leaving the Island, Sawyer became a cop along with Miles. All of the differences we fans noted between the Island and the Sideways doesn't matter now because there were no differences. We were seeing a glimpse of Sawyer had done with his life after the Island. DL & CC encouraged this type of discourse too. It was nearly impossible, in hindsight, to review the individual episodes without the knowledge of the Sideways but it was still a worthwhile and fun experience and, even DL and CC said this, one didn't need the purpose of the Sideways to appreciate the stories they were telling like the excellent "Dr. Linus."
Likewise, Simon and Overmyer kept something in their backpocket until the final thirty minutes of the finale which gave the season a different kind of feel and added more to the individual arcs of these characters.They could've started the show where they basically ended it but that same criticism can be delivered to LOST. The thing is, with both, it worked.
It's interesting to think about. Actually, I'm probably thinking way too much about. It's all about perspective though. There are numerous factors to consider when thinking about and reviewing a season of television but this exists for every form of criticism. We fans will always be outsiders. Woody Allen remarked, after having a rough time with coloring prints of his film and a rough time in the editing room and working for months on one movie, that all this work is being done just so some person can give it two out of four stars. But, again, we're only privy to the final cut of books, music, movies and television and we pay hard-earned cash and invest time in these things so we're allowed to review and criticize something.
I am now rambling and will stop. Anywho, the Socceroos are about to battle Serbia in Group D and Ghana and Germany are about to play. I am rooting for the Socceroos to somehow make it out of Group D because I picked them to finish second in my ESPN bracket. And, since I know you are all wondering, I picked Uruguay to win the World Cup.
Listen to my online radio show: http://blogtalkradio.com/fiveminutesoffame
THE YOUTUBE CLIP OF THE WEEK
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-YdLaLbU9c
No comments:
Post a Comment