Themes and Things in Kiss Kiss Bang Bang

[crabby_lioness]

Here's a few more thoughts on KKBB:

1)The theme of Kiss Kiss Bang Bang revolves around coming home but does not address homecoming in a straightforward manner.  Jack is back "home" at Torchwood Cardiff.  But what does "home" mean?

"Home is where you hang your hat."  Jack's hat is on his hatstand in his office.

"Home is where they have to welcome you

Comments

[kerryblaze]

Hero of the Year 5094"

Did you mean "Rear of the Year 5094?" That was the line that John said.

And duikermeisie's summary was spot on. I think that's my favorite moment within the Office Scene. Especially when Jack gives that little nod that says, 'that's all,' after telling Ianto the truth.

[crabby_lioness]

I heard "Hero". Of course I couldn't make it out at all the first couple of times, so I may be wrong.

[kerryblaze]

I had to watch with subtitles to catch a few things. It was 'rear.' And if it's not all of the iconmakers are going to be very upset. :D

[crabby_lioness]

I stand corrected. :D

[finksgirl]

wow...what was said about this was to the t, perfect.
It really makes me feel a lot more confident that Jack and Ianto's relationship really will blossom into more than just office shags.

[crabby_lioness]

It's going to be fun to watch them both grow. They were so constricted last series, Ianto by grief and Jack by depression.

[prongsy]

Brilliantly thought out and worded. I agree fully!

Do you have a degree in Lit? You should... this is what we do day in and day out (analyze everything) and you’d be terribly good at it.

It’s funny, though, that I better understand my own feelings on Austen and the Brontes from this (I love Wuthering Heights but not so much for the romance… while Austen I just love. Period.). And Austen herself used these types in her heroine and “villain” schemas (though more often a man played chief villain… but the dichotomy works well there, too. Darcy vs. Wickham is just as poignant as Fanny vs. Mary; the former is the more reserved, proper, gentle one while the latter is more boisterous, more outwardly passionate and free spirited. In Austen, the latter always proves to be a dubious match, no matter how tempting they were at first, for our hero/heroine).

The best representation of Austen’s views on the “gothic” (and I mean the actual gothic movement in Literature, which is rather different from the Brontes) is in Northanger Abbey. She takes

[prongsy]

That said (and I have no idea why I’m saying it, as it’s only furthering/agreeing with your own point, lol), I find it funny that a large majority of our romantic comedies come from the Austen school of romance. We always want the guy/girl to wake up and see the perfect person is right there beside them, giving them quiet strength and not the popular person, whose wildness or individualism tempts them so. The only time they get the popular one is when the popular learns humility and genuineness or if the popular one becomes a lesson in appreciating what you already have. No one settles down with the wild, free spirit (unless that spirit is tempered). Look at Heathcliffe and Cathy...

[crabby_lioness]

Bronte appeals to a much smaller base than Austen for some reason. My babysitter had to read Wuthering Heights, her English teacher's favorite book. The whole class was going, "WTH? These people got no sense!" by 20 pages in. When I told her about Mansfield Park she groaned and asked, "Why couldn't we read that book instead?"

[crabby_lioness]

I'm 6 hours from a degree in English and Social Sciences. I left school because of personal problems and I got tired the unecessary hassle involved. Plus my interest was on the Classics and the department was focused on Modern Lit. IMO there's not a lot of 20th Century Art and Literature that's going to survive "the test of time". But after trying to find something useful to say about William Carlos Williams this is brain candy.

If I knew where to do it, I'd send in my Torchwood pieces for some credits in Pop Lit, but I'm not sure where to send them.

On love interests

[duikermeisie]

I agree with you characterization of Ianto as a Jane Austen-type up to a point. He is reserved, intellectual, and proper, yes. He is also, however, an extraordinarily passionate man. Whenever he is placed into a situation where he must deal with something that strikes him deep, he reacts with very strong emotions BUT not necessarily in a strongly emotional manner. He is complex and nuanced and subtle, and trying to fit him into Austen's mould just doesn't quite work. If he resembles any Austen character it is Elinor Dashwood from Sense and Sensibility, but even that doesn't really cover the breadth or depth of emotion that he shows on a fairly regular basis. I see him much more readily as Leonore from Beethoven's opera Fidelio (wikipedia article here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidelio). Leonore goes into hiding, works a wretched job, fends off the boss's daughter, and willingly volunteering to sacrifice herself to save her husband. Sound familiar? It's

Re: On love interests

[crabby_lioness]

Oh, I would never, ever call Ianto dispassionate! His feelings run strong and deep, but he doesn't let them control him, except when worn out by fatigue and care.

Re: On love interests

[duikermeisie]

I agree! I wasn't trying to imply that you thought Ianto was dispassionate--just that Austen's characters have always felt rather two-dimensional to me, and Ianto is anything but two-dimensional. There is so much that SHOULD be there, but at the end of the day they kind of fall flat. Tosh is the real Jane Austen love interest here, and Tosh and Owen is straight out of Pride and Prejudice. Especially in KKBB.

I can't think of any single author who makes a habit of the Leonore type...typically you only get one chance to do that right. But Ianto is definitely the Leonore type.

Re: On love interests

[estarcollector]

You know, after reading your comparison (and this entire meta discussion), all I can think is that Gwen and Ianto are nicely reversed mirror images of each other.

[vipersweb]

Love your analysis here and it's provided a lot of food of thought for me.

Regarding your last comment about the US v. UK reaction, I think there are some major factors that explain those differences and has nothing to do with bitching. Unlike Dr. Who, which is shown on both BBC America and Scifi, Torchwood is only shown on BBC America. Whereas Skiffy is available to any who subscribe to satellite or cable tv, BBC America is usually extra and part of a different package. I know, for instance, that I get it with DishTV but my boyfr. who has digital cable + HBO doesn't. This means the available audience is much more limited. Too, it's difficult to get the papers interested in science fiction shows, even as they grow more popular. Shows that are on cable channels get less press than those not. It's hard enough to get any press for a show like BSG, never mind a sci fi show that is foreign to the US.

[crabby_lioness]

It's hard enough to get any press for a show like BSG, never mind a sci fi show that is foreign to the US.Not exactly. In the past three days, Torchwood has had raving writeups in the LA Times http://www.calendarlive.com/tv/cl-ca-tvbigthing20jan20,0,5919917.story?coll=cl-tv-features and the New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/20/arts/20weekahead.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin I've been keeping track of the US press reviews on OG http://www.doctorwhoforum.com/showthread.php?t=147343 I haven't updated the tally since New Years Eve, but at that time it was

[frakkingrackles]

TV Guide has a two page interview with james Marsters that features a large photo of him as Capt. John and focuses on Torchwood mostly. They usually highlight Torchwood in the extended show descriptions and reviews of up coming shows.