Links and a review

[selenak]

The rest of you might already have seen them, but in case you, like me, haven't: there are two shiny new promos for season two of The Sarah Connor Chronicles out there:
here and here. I'm so looking forward to it, and pleased that the promo puts such a strong focus on the female character (I liked Derek Reese as much as the next fangirl, but I

Comments

[lilacsigil]

I remember an article in The Age (Melbourne newspaper) when American Beauty came out, whining about how Lester was a terrible person and there shouldn't be a movie about him. The film pretty clearly made it clear that there were major problems with his behaviour - particularly in making a young girl his fantasy object - but no, he's the hero, therefore the movie must be condoning his actions. It was a very...simplistic point of view. Life on Mars certainly looks at both sides of Gene's actions, including his racism, sexism, violence and most particularly his enjoyment of bullying. I was really pleased and surprised by how carefully the show walked the line between worship and criticism. If nothing else, it made Gene a much deeper character.

[selenak]

The film pretty clearly made it clear that there were major problems with his behaviour - particularly in making a young girl his fantasy object - but no, he's the hero, therefore the movie must be condoning his actions.

Good lord. To name but many, the scene where Lester has his first actual conversation with the object of his fantasies and she clearly is an adolescent mess who needs if anything a father, not a lover, would be an example of the film making a difference between wanting the audience to find Lester sympathetic and the audience thinking Lester is right about everything.

I was really pleased and surprised by how carefully the show walked the line between worship and criticism. If nothing else, it made Gene a much deeper character.

Agreed. It's clear that we'er meant to like him, and that the writers love him, but they keep pointing out the cost of his behaviour, both on others and himself.

[londonkds]

Re fandom and Gene: there was a massive row a few months back over use of racist language in a Gene PoV Life On Mars fic. Which, OK, you can justify as in character, but it came out that the OP really had no idea what she was doing and was actually quite racist herself.

There was a bit of a dispute among the non-racist fans between some people who thought it was in character and justified and others who thought that the racist insults in question were so vile that they should not ever be written except in a story whose primary purpose was to confront racism, but the main argument revealed that yes, there are some people in LoM fandom who sympathise with Gene for all the wrong reasons.

[selenak]

Which, OK, you can justify as in character, but it came out that the OP really had no idea what she was doing and was actually quite racist herself.

*cringes* Ouch. Of course, this makes me ponder whether I've read fanfic - not pro fic, fanfic - where the pov character used racist language but it was clear that the story itself did not support it. Can you think of an example?

[kalypso_v]

I gave up on the row round about when it had broken fifty comments, but I hadn't seen evidence that the writer was racist at that time.

I felt very sorry for both her and the original complainant. For the writer, because the internet came crashing down on her head after she had Gene use the same word - "Paki" - that he used canonically in 2.6, and which anyone who lived through 1973 would know is exactly the word Gene and his like would have used, however nasty we find it now (and indeed did then).

And for the complainant, because she had convinced herself that Gene did not speak the word in canon - she said something like "I was so relieved that Gene didn't use it when Ray did, because he could not have been a hero if he did" - so, when it was pointed out that Gene said it twice to Ray's once, her illusions about her hero were presumably shattered.

So it seemed to me that she'd fallen into the opposite error from the media pundits you mention who think Life on Mars is about "wasn't it great back then before political

[liviapenn]

Maybe in some sort of period AU? But I think most people usually avoid that

[elisi]

Lots of chewy thoughts - esp like what you said about Snape, since he was always one of my favourites too, for the same reasons you mention. Loved the revelations of the last book.

Just skimmed over your Spike fic and remember reading it before - I'm thinking you might like my Spike/Dawn fic actually (unless the pairing squicks you, which of course it *should*), which is my only foray into writing unsouled Spike. [It's set in an AU where Buffy doesn't come back post-S5, and Dawn becomes Spike's moral compass. Or maybe he becomes hers - it's all very murky and disturbing.]

Anyway, I shall wander off now and be useful. Bother RL.

[artaxastra]

I have lots and lots to say about Masada! I saw the miniseries when it first aired, and then again a year later when it was rerun, and I fell absolutely, positively in love. Peter O'Toole and Anthony Quayle rock completely. Watching it with my father, it was clear to us that the Jews were The Good Guys(tm) but I found myself at 13 rooting for Silva all the way. The "we could have created something rational, something good, but you'd rather kill each other" speech really resonated with me. Silva struck me as a rational and reasonable person, and I could not see why it would be preferable to die than to deal with him. I remember thinking at the time that he was not a mad Julio-Claudian, and that this was the reign of Vespasian. Surely something reasonable could be worked out

[selenak]

Which is interesting, considering that I see all the reasons for suicide for Charmian, but regarded it as an unnecessary tragedy in Masada.

I thought about this as well when rewatching. I think the difference is in scale and individuality. Charmian, Iras and Cleopatra choose suicide for themselves, but no one else. They most certainly do not choose it for their children. Would you see Cleopatra in the same way if she had poisoned Caesarion, the twins and her youngest son (and maybe Antyllus as well) before killing herself? (Especially give that in such a scenario you would have no way of knowing what Octavian would have done with them.) And if she had insisted everyone in the palace kill themselves well? I think not.

No, I haven't read anything else by Gann yet. And I'll keep away from The Triumph!

[kalypso_v]

Absolutely. An individual's suicide through personal choice is completely different from mass suicide through, at best, peer pressure, at worst force.

[artaxastra]

I think it is the individual choice too. If Cleopatra had poisoned Selene, Helios and Philadelphos, no, I would not at all feel the same way. Not at all. It's one thing to choose your own time and manner of death, particularly in the face of torment, but another to take innocents with you. If Eleazar had only chosen it for himself, I would think well of it. But the kids? No.

The Triumph is almost funny it's so bad in places. I had no idea one could make such a muddle while being so well researched and generally up to his usual standard. It's the characters. And the ranting and raving Domitian is just.... Made me run for a good bodice ripping romance about Titus and Berenice, it did!

[wee_warrior]

SCC: I was far less concerned about it becoming the Derek Chronicles, mostly because he really doesn't register as a character with me at all, but rather that they would put more emphasis on John which is something at least the promo picture seems to suggest. Definitely thumbs up for Shirley Manson as the new villain, though

[selenak]

The promo picture would suggest that, but the promos themselves would not, so I hope they keep him at the level he was in s1; important, absolutely, but not central the way Sarah is, and without reduced screen time for Cameron. (Not that I seriously worry on that front; it's pretty clear they know what they have with Summer Glau.)

I have been keeping up with Mad Men articles, and they definitely emphasis the period look and nostalgia aspects, which is honestly disturbing me a little.

I know what you mean. I'll probably watch the second season at some point, but not now, and the media presentation compared with the reviews I see in lj is really bizarre. You'd think they're talking about a sexier Forrest Gump.

On the other hand, it might be the same kind of journalism that still calls Number Six a "sexy robot" after four seasons and a TV movie.

*headdesk*

Check out Masada, I think you'd like it. I originally saw it on Vox as I recall.