you say i only hear what i want to
So even though I was so tired I could barely see straight when I got home last night, I watched the two part finale of Kings and whoa. I am retroactively sad again about its cancellation, even though I don't really think Chris Egan had the acting chops to continue to play David as the rest of the story unfolded (I don't really think he had the acting chops to pull off what was asked of him here, but I also think the writing was at fault to some degree; I'm not sure if they wanted to play up his goodness at the expense of all his other traits [the lone good/honest man in Shiloh], or if they just couldn't figure out how to make him less naive but still willing to give people the benefit of the doubt even when he shouldn't have). But wow, Ian McShane. I mean, yes, of course, it's expected, but sometimes expectations are exceeded and wow, he really did in these two episodes.
Though I think Jed Bartlet's yelling at god in "Two Cathedrals" was more compelling than what Silas did at the end of this episode, even if we're meant to understand that god was actually answering Silas (as opposed to whether Jed's hallucinations of Mrs. Landingham were actually god answering Jed or just Jed's own mind talking himself back into running [and whether the latter is just god's way of working mysteriously]). I mean, Silas wouldn't be who he is if he'd just said, "Okay, god, if you say so," when god told him to pack it in and make David king. But the thing about dealing with a god who actually intervenes in your daily life is that you kind of have to take the commands you dislike along with the ones that you do. You can't say, "Yay, god said I should be king!" and then turn around and say, "Well, god says David should be king, but I don't care anymore, because god's a big wrong poopyhead." It's just the kind of contract you get when you make a deal with god, I think. And the more you do it, the more you prove god's point, so you can't really win. (Note: please don't bring any discussion of real world religion into this.)
Eamonn Walker, also. He was amazing. Plus, Brian Cox, playing games as the deposed former king. And Dylan Baker, getting his big moment: "I do not speak the backwards words of kings.... Now you've got me doing it!" Ha! I thought that was some really interesting meta commentary by the writers, given that, as I read through the AV Club recaps yesterday, people complained that his character felt out of place, too modern in even a modernized version of a biblical story. I think they figured people would have that response, but that 1. war profiteer is an old, old archetype even if he doesn't necessarily have a direct counterpart in the source (I can't recall if he has), and 2. they needed an outright villain, who was okay with his own villainy - i.e., Silas knows he's wrong, but his vanity and need to be king outweigh his good sense, and also, in some ways, he's still trying to do what he believes is good for the country (obv. he believes he is what's good for the country); Jack knows he's wrong but he also thinks that it's the only way he's ever going to make daddy happy become king, etc. William just wants to make money. Though I wondered if he was going to jump ship from Jack to David as his puppet king. (I don't think he ever seriously considered Andrew a contender; I'm sure he thought about it and backed away from the idea; he was money and power-hungry, not crazy, and I think he knew giving Andrew any kind of official power would end badly for everybody. I wish we'd gotten told what Andrew was exiled for; I'm thinking it had to do with inappropriate relations - or at least the attempt - with the queen; I find the idea that he's Rose and William's son interesting, but I don't see how it would be possible, given the circumstances.)
I wish that Jack and David had actually been friends, and that their relationship had been ... that there had been more to it. The seeds were there in the plague episode where Jack is like, "Enemies I know what to do with, but you..."
Oh, Jack. So twisted by his parents' expectations and disappointments. They made him into a schemer and then punished him for doing what they taught him to do. I really wanted to believe he was extending the hand of friendship to David after he thought he was going to be king, but given how nearly everything else he did was a lie, I think it probably needed more than that, though if he'd had a chance to actually be king, with David at his side, maybe that would have done it.
I really wanted him to escape into exile with David, like Hephaistion with Alexander, though I know that's not how the story goes. (I was hoping Thomasina was there to let him escape instead of twisting the knife deeper, but she wouldn't have been the amazingly loyal and competent assistant if she had.) I just have a huge fondness for that trope.
I suppose if there'd been a second season, we'd have seen Jack and David eventually reconcile and become close, perhaps making deposing Silas their common cause.
For the record, as if it would surprise anyone who knows me, I absolutely would not have minded any sort of incestuous Jack/David/Michelle threesome, whether it was a V with David as the fulcrum or if Jack and Michelle were also involved, emotionally if not physically. Sadly, the show was never going to go there, despite the presence of David and Jonathan's epic friendship in the source.
As I said under the cut-text, I wanted the epic BFF-ness. I have a weakness for the trope, as you can tell by my love of Achilles/Patroclus and Alexander/Hephaistion. (You know the day is coming when I write the post about Steve/Bucky as a modern variation on this, right? Especially in the movieverse. Just so we're all clear.)
Speaking of ancient and epic BFF relationships, I just finished reading The Buried Book over lunch. (Twenty pages left when the train pulled into Chambers St. this morning. So annoying!) I think I mentioned it earlier, but it's about the rediscovery of the clay tablets on which The Epic of Gilgamesh is written, and isn't Gilgamesh/Enkidu the ur-BFF-slash pairing? (pun intended, sorry.) The author isn't even coy about it, he's like, "I guess they could have just been friends, but...they were totes boyfriends."
I liked it, though I don't think it was great. Aside from the font bothering me (it detracted from the overall reading experience!), the epilogue was kind of ridiculous (yes, I get the point of it, but really, Saddam Hussein's novel? That is how you want to go with that?? Really?), and the author tends pile on stuff to hammer home points he's already made, so at points I was like, "I get it! Esarhaddon was anxious and paranoid, and Ashurbanipal loved to read and write! Can we move on now?"
But it offered some interesting history about how the tablets were discovered and eventually translated, and seriously, Hollywood, get on making a movie about Hormuzd Rassam. He was kind of a badass.
***
This entry at DW: http://musesfool.dreamwidth.org/392917.html.
people have commented there.
Though I think Jed Bartlet's yelling at god in "Two Cathedrals" was more compelling than what Silas did at the end of this episode, even if we're meant to understand that god was actually answering Silas (as opposed to whether Jed's hallucinations of Mrs. Landingham were actually god answering Jed or just Jed's own mind talking himself back into running [and whether the latter is just god's way of working mysteriously]). I mean, Silas wouldn't be who he is if he'd just said, "Okay, god, if you say so," when god told him to pack it in and make David king. But the thing about dealing with a god who actually intervenes in your daily life is that you kind of have to take the commands you dislike along with the ones that you do. You can't say, "Yay, god said I should be king!" and then turn around and say, "Well, god says David should be king, but I don't care anymore, because god's a big wrong poopyhead." It's just the kind of contract you get when you make a deal with god, I think. And the more you do it, the more you prove god's point, so you can't really win. (Note: please don't bring any discussion of real world religion into this.)
Eamonn Walker, also. He was amazing. Plus, Brian Cox, playing games as the deposed former king. And Dylan Baker, getting his big moment: "I do not speak the backwards words of kings.... Now you've got me doing it!" Ha! I thought that was some really interesting meta commentary by the writers, given that, as I read through the AV Club recaps yesterday, people complained that his character felt out of place, too modern in even a modernized version of a biblical story. I think they figured people would have that response, but that 1. war profiteer is an old, old archetype even if he doesn't necessarily have a direct counterpart in the source (I can't recall if he has), and 2. they needed an outright villain, who was okay with his own villainy - i.e., Silas knows he's wrong, but his vanity and need to be king outweigh his good sense, and also, in some ways, he's still trying to do what he believes is good for the country (obv. he believes he is what's good for the country); Jack knows he's wrong but he also thinks that it's the only way he's ever going to make daddy happy become king, etc. William just wants to make money. Though I wondered if he was going to jump ship from Jack to David as his puppet king. (I don't think he ever seriously considered Andrew a contender; I'm sure he thought about it and backed away from the idea; he was money and power-hungry, not crazy, and I think he knew giving Andrew any kind of official power would end badly for everybody. I wish we'd gotten told what Andrew was exiled for; I'm thinking it had to do with inappropriate relations - or at least the attempt - with the queen; I find the idea that he's Rose and William's son interesting, but I don't see how it would be possible, given the circumstances.)
I wish that Jack and David had actually been friends, and that their relationship had been ... that there had been more to it. The seeds were there in the plague episode where Jack is like, "Enemies I know what to do with, but you..."
Oh, Jack. So twisted by his parents' expectations and disappointments. They made him into a schemer and then punished him for doing what they taught him to do. I really wanted to believe he was extending the hand of friendship to David after he thought he was going to be king, but given how nearly everything else he did was a lie, I think it probably needed more than that, though if he'd had a chance to actually be king, with David at his side, maybe that would have done it.
I really wanted him to escape into exile with David, like Hephaistion with Alexander, though I know that's not how the story goes. (I was hoping Thomasina was there to let him escape instead of twisting the knife deeper, but she wouldn't have been the amazingly loyal and competent assistant if she had.) I just have a huge fondness for that trope.
I suppose if there'd been a second season, we'd have seen Jack and David eventually reconcile and become close, perhaps making deposing Silas their common cause.
For the record, as if it would surprise anyone who knows me, I absolutely would not have minded any sort of incestuous Jack/David/Michelle threesome, whether it was a V with David as the fulcrum or if Jack and Michelle were also involved, emotionally if not physically. Sadly, the show was never going to go there, despite the presence of David and Jonathan's epic friendship in the source.
As I said under the cut-text, I wanted the epic BFF-ness. I have a weakness for the trope, as you can tell by my love of Achilles/Patroclus and Alexander/Hephaistion. (You know the day is coming when I write the post about Steve/Bucky as a modern variation on this, right? Especially in the movieverse. Just so we're all clear.)
Speaking of ancient and epic BFF relationships, I just finished reading The Buried Book over lunch. (Twenty pages left when the train pulled into Chambers St. this morning. So annoying!) I think I mentioned it earlier, but it's about the rediscovery of the clay tablets on which The Epic of Gilgamesh is written, and isn't Gilgamesh/Enkidu the ur-BFF-slash pairing? (pun intended, sorry.) The author isn't even coy about it, he's like, "I guess they could have just been friends, but...they were totes boyfriends."
I liked it, though I don't think it was great. Aside from the font bothering me (it detracted from the overall reading experience!), the epilogue was kind of ridiculous (yes, I get the point of it, but really, Saddam Hussein's novel? That is how you want to go with that?? Really?), and the author tends pile on stuff to hammer home points he's already made, so at points I was like, "I get it! Esarhaddon was anxious and paranoid, and Ashurbanipal loved to read and write! Can we move on now?"
But it offered some interesting history about how the tablets were discovered and eventually translated, and seriously, Hollywood, get on making a movie about Hormuzd Rassam. He was kind of a badass.
***
This entry at DW: http://musesfool.dreamwidth.org/392917.html.
people have commented there.