Did you read the creator's (Matthew someone) interview? I totally get WHY they didn't put same on there.
Jim Keats is, I think, a lesser demon. A tempter, a petty functionary. His rage was like going postal, demon style ;)
I really cried like a baby at Shazza's death.
I don't think Gene knew. I think in some way that his "job" is to help without knowing, so it's real. It's not based on a possible reward. Like reincarnation theories, where, in between, you know all your previous identities, but you have to come back w/ slate wiped clean so you can screw up AND do good with free will and no foreknowledge.
I haven't read the interview, but I'll look it up.
My morning after brain is absolutely churning with trying to put together what was or wasn't real in Sam & Alex's stories.
But I still wish we'd gotten a glimpse of Sam...maybe just a flash of a welcoming smile when Alex went into the Railway Arms? Something to tie the two stories together besides just being TOLD that this was happened to Sam, you know?
The article I'm referring to is here and here's the bit that makes good sense to me:
Did you think about getting Sam back?
“Yeah, we talked about bringing Sam back. Partly we were worried about being a hostage to John [Simm] saying yes or no… We might have got a whole storyline around it and then he might have got cold feet. We also thought that bringing Sam back might undermine Alex, might undermine the whole of Ashes To Ashes. And of course he’s dead. And our logic has said ‘He’s gone into The Railway Arms and he’s presumably moved on to Heaven.’ What are we saying? That he can come out again? How does that work?”
He could have just nipped out for a fag…
“Yeah, because it’s bound to be non-smoking up there! [laughs] So in the end we thought we’d use Nelson. Because we did always want Nelson to be a spirit guide, a guardian, a keeper of the knowledge. And so it felt right that Nelson stepped out of the pub.” So yeah, I totally get that :D
( ... )
In a way I'm grateful they screwed up the US version so much, only because I was worried that anyone would actually enjoy it and I'd spend my life trying to argue people away from it. Luckily the idiots in charge took are of that for me.
I've been reading discussions on the IMDB boards today. Consensus is definitely that Sam couldn't come back by the "logic" of the final answer. Which I understand and also, it really was Alex's story, although the POV undermined that somewhat. But my Simm-loving heart would still have liked to see a glimpse.
My only advice is = Watch it again. ASAP. It gets BETTER! The Glenisters' performance, especially on the hill and his grave; and in the Coronation house.... and at the end. Gene-Genie's performance made me weep.
I think I may actually want to do a full re-watch starting with LoM and see how much can be slotted into this "solution" without too much hand-waving.
Glenister is one of the great under-rated actors of all time. (Demons was just some weird aberration which I'm blaming on a crack in Amy Pond's wall for lack of a better excuse.)
How do you help people make the transition if you don't know that's what you're doing?
Actually, my read was that that's exactly the point - Gene doesn't help these people sort themselves out because of some divine knowledge, but because that's simply what comes naturally to him. After the way he died, I think it's unconsciously important to Gene to ensure that the coppers on his team are never made to feel alone - all that emphasis on 'his team', etc., and his task doesn't necessarily extend further than that. It's simply Gene's own task that he does for himself as much as the others.
Think you've been to my LJ already so you'll already know that I agree, fandom has if anything opened itself out rather than shut down. I see A2A as a resolution of sorts, but one with lots of hidey-holes of ambiguity to be had. :)
It's simply Gene's own task that he does for himself as much as the others.
That's making more sense to me in the cold light of day, although I'm still trying to decide how much control Gene has over the events that occur. I'm specifically thinking of the things that seemed to be happening TO Gene, which in retrospect occurred for the purpose of giving Sam and Alex more of an emotional investment in Gene. Both of them were put in positions of needing to "save" Gene, Alex in both series 2 & 3. So the question is did Gene in anyway consciously create those situations or is there a "higher power" controlling those situations.
And the bigger question: Am I ever going to get my brain back from trying to make sense of this shit?
I'm still trying to decide how much control Gene has over the events that occur.Again, I think that's another one of those opportunities for viewers to make a subjective choice, as there's no definitive answer. For my part, I favour the idea that Gene doesn't have any particular "control" over the unfolding of events, only the added force of personality and willpower to take matters into his own hands. Of the many things resonating back to me from LoM, Gene telling Sam in 1.07 that 'We can't change this world, Sam. Only learn how to survive in it' is pretty high up there, for both Gene's acceptance of the world as something bigger than him mingled with the tiniest hint of unconscious awareness. But I think I prefer any read that doesn't try to simplify Gene as a god or even angel figure - far more easier for me to accept him exactly as what he is and what he does
( ... )
Comments 9
Jim Keats is, I think, a lesser demon. A tempter, a petty functionary. His rage was like going postal, demon style ;)
I really cried like a baby at Shazza's death.
I don't think Gene knew. I think in some way that his "job" is to help without knowing, so it's real. It's not based on a possible reward. Like reincarnation theories, where, in between, you know all your previous identities, but you have to come back w/ slate wiped clean so you can screw up AND do good with free will and no foreknowledge.
I just adored this show. Both shows.
Reply
My morning after brain is absolutely churning with trying to put together what was or wasn't real in Sam & Alex's stories.
But I still wish we'd gotten a glimpse of Sam...maybe just a flash of a welcoming smile when Alex went into the Railway Arms? Something to tie the two stories together besides just being TOLD that this was happened to Sam, you know?
Reply
Did you think about getting Sam back?
“Yeah, we talked about bringing Sam back. Partly we were worried about being a hostage to John [Simm] saying yes or no… We might have got a whole storyline around it and then he might have got cold feet. We also thought that bringing Sam back might undermine Alex, might undermine the whole of Ashes To Ashes. And of course he’s dead. And our logic has said ‘He’s gone into The Railway Arms and he’s presumably moved on to Heaven.’ What are we saying? That he can come out again? How does that work?”
He could have just nipped out for a fag…
“Yeah, because it’s bound to be non-smoking up there! [laughs] So in the end we thought we’d use Nelson. Because we did always want Nelson to be a spirit guide, a guardian, a keeper of the knowledge. And so it felt right that Nelson stepped out of the pub.”
So yeah, I totally get that :D ( ... )
Reply
I've been reading discussions on the IMDB boards today. Consensus is definitely that Sam couldn't come back by the "logic" of the final answer. Which I understand and also, it really was Alex's story, although the POV undermined that somewhat. But my Simm-loving heart would still have liked to see a glimpse.
Reply
The Glenisters' performance, especially on the hill and his grave; and in the Coronation house.... and at the end. Gene-Genie's performance made me weep.
Bafta worthy, in my opinion.
Reply
Glenister is one of the great under-rated actors of all time. (Demons was just some weird aberration which I'm blaming on a crack in Amy Pond's wall for lack of a better excuse.)
Reply
Actually, my read was that that's exactly the point - Gene doesn't help these people sort themselves out because of some divine knowledge, but because that's simply what comes naturally to him. After the way he died, I think it's unconsciously important to Gene to ensure that the coppers on his team are never made to feel alone - all that emphasis on 'his team', etc., and his task doesn't necessarily extend further than that. It's simply Gene's own task that he does for himself as much as the others.
Think you've been to my LJ already so you'll already know that I agree, fandom has if anything opened itself out rather than shut down. I see A2A as a resolution of sorts, but one with lots of hidey-holes of ambiguity to be had. :)
Reply
That's making more sense to me in the cold light of day, although I'm still trying to decide how much control Gene has over the events that occur. I'm specifically thinking of the things that seemed to be happening TO Gene, which in retrospect occurred for the purpose of giving Sam and Alex more of an emotional investment in Gene. Both of them were put in positions of needing to "save" Gene, Alex in both series 2 & 3. So the question is did Gene in anyway consciously create those situations or is there a "higher power" controlling those situations.
And the bigger question: Am I ever going to get my brain back from trying to make sense of this shit?
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment