Complex Characters vs Complex Storytelling
There’s a lot of chat online these days about spy shows in general and Alias’ place among them in particular. I admit that of all the new shows this fall television season, the ones that I look forward to watching most each week are spy shows: Nikita and Undercovers. But these shows, while obviously brand new, are already proving to be simply light and fluffy entertainment, rather than heavily serialized storytelling. And there’s nothing wrong with that! Lord knows I need a break after BSG and Lost. And I still have the Venture Bros. for my weekly dose of mind-blowing madness and complexity and awesome fucked-upedness.
The reason why Alias ranks among the top of this round of current and recent shows, including ones I do not watch like Chuck and Covert Affairs, is the characters and the actors that play them. I agree with every comment I’ve read talking about how Jennifer Garner put every single ounce of her being into the role of Sydney Bristow. From the pilot to the finale, she was Syd. I didn’t need voice overs or ham-fisted telling-not-showing to illustrate what was going on inside her head. And the rest of the cast was equally stellar. Just the fact that I can’t imagine anyone else as Jack Bristow other than Victor Garber, or Ron Rifkin’s Arvin Sloane, or, well, the list goes on. The commitment of the actors brought the somewhat shoddy or over-the-top scripts up to a level that’s been hard to reach.
That’s also one of the reasons I was hesitant to watch the show. The devotion by its fans was somewhat of a turn-off. Especially since on the outside, it looked to me like a La Femme Nikita rip-off and that I couldn’t abide. Because for me, La Femme Nikita is the top of the heap when it comes to rating the spy shows. I’ve never seen anything like it before or since. The closest was 24, and that was like parts of LFN but not all of it. I was as devoted to the characters but more than that, I was thoroughly engrossed by the mythology. To me it was the complicated politics that sucked me in and held me captive, not the inter-personal relationships. Oh, they were there, but they were a secondary bonus. That’s why I’m one of the minority fans that loved the final season. I loved the reveals of moles and plants and secrets that had been there all along. Objectively I can see that it was somewhat retconning. But I loved the shock of it anyway.
This made me think on the old Farscape vs Babylon 5 divide. I’m not sure why I always cycle back to that. I thoroughly enjoyed Farsacpe. I appreciate the characters and their relationships and all the growth and development that they did as individuals. I loved that the actors were so invested in their characters and you could tell how much thought they put into playing them. It wasn’t just a job. But the show isn’t as much of an obsession for me as Babylon 5. Because I’m still more interested in the vast historical saga that was the tale of The One that was, The One that is, and The One who will be. And yes, I still bawl when Sheridan leaves Delenn for the last time. And yes, I adore every single moment of the epic G’Kar and Londo Molari, well, romance isn’t quite the right word but there must be something close that’s not just “bromance”. But again, the story arc trumps the characters for me and I find the characterizations are in service to the story, rather than the other way around.
And I guess I’m always going to be like that. Because no matter how many times I reread Harry Potter, dissect Harry Potter, daydream about the “deleted scenes” of Harry Potter, nitpick the Harry Potter movies, look for clues in early Harry Potter that show what is to come in later Harry Potter, and just plain love the shit out of the entire world, characters, and details of Harry Potter, I still like Lord of the Rings more.
The reason why Alias ranks among the top of this round of current and recent shows, including ones I do not watch like Chuck and Covert Affairs, is the characters and the actors that play them. I agree with every comment I’ve read talking about how Jennifer Garner put every single ounce of her being into the role of Sydney Bristow. From the pilot to the finale, she was Syd. I didn’t need voice overs or ham-fisted telling-not-showing to illustrate what was going on inside her head. And the rest of the cast was equally stellar. Just the fact that I can’t imagine anyone else as Jack Bristow other than Victor Garber, or Ron Rifkin’s Arvin Sloane, or, well, the list goes on. The commitment of the actors brought the somewhat shoddy or over-the-top scripts up to a level that’s been hard to reach.
That’s also one of the reasons I was hesitant to watch the show. The devotion by its fans was somewhat of a turn-off. Especially since on the outside, it looked to me like a La Femme Nikita rip-off and that I couldn’t abide. Because for me, La Femme Nikita is the top of the heap when it comes to rating the spy shows. I’ve never seen anything like it before or since. The closest was 24, and that was like parts of LFN but not all of it. I was as devoted to the characters but more than that, I was thoroughly engrossed by the mythology. To me it was the complicated politics that sucked me in and held me captive, not the inter-personal relationships. Oh, they were there, but they were a secondary bonus. That’s why I’m one of the minority fans that loved the final season. I loved the reveals of moles and plants and secrets that had been there all along. Objectively I can see that it was somewhat retconning. But I loved the shock of it anyway.
This made me think on the old Farscape vs Babylon 5 divide. I’m not sure why I always cycle back to that. I thoroughly enjoyed Farsacpe. I appreciate the characters and their relationships and all the growth and development that they did as individuals. I loved that the actors were so invested in their characters and you could tell how much thought they put into playing them. It wasn’t just a job. But the show isn’t as much of an obsession for me as Babylon 5. Because I’m still more interested in the vast historical saga that was the tale of The One that was, The One that is, and The One who will be. And yes, I still bawl when Sheridan leaves Delenn for the last time. And yes, I adore every single moment of the epic G’Kar and Londo Molari, well, romance isn’t quite the right word but there must be something close that’s not just “bromance”. But again, the story arc trumps the characters for me and I find the characterizations are in service to the story, rather than the other way around.
And I guess I’m always going to be like that. Because no matter how many times I reread Harry Potter, dissect Harry Potter, daydream about the “deleted scenes” of Harry Potter, nitpick the Harry Potter movies, look for clues in early Harry Potter that show what is to come in later Harry Potter, and just plain love the shit out of the entire world, characters, and details of Harry Potter, I still like Lord of the Rings more.