I don't much like the burden of watching two dramas back to back, but that's how HBO got us interested in "Big Love," and now it's a weekly assignment. I could save one to watch on the rerun, but so far I haven't. Last week, I watched part of each show and bailed out on both. I thought I'd pick them up later in the week but never did. I just paid a lot of attention to the clips at the beginning of the show.
"The Sopranos" last week was devoted to two characters I never cared much about, AJ and Vito. (And let me just say that I think the whole Vito-is-gay story is an incredibly lame attempt to cook up a story for a character.) This week, however, was devoted to my favorite character, Christopher, and to one of the best secondary characters, Paulie. There was some tremendous drama (Tony and Christopher in the basement) and some fabulous comedy ("Where's the hat?"). And some perfect small doses of Janice and Carmela.
I'm a little ambivalent about "Big Love." I'm of two minds about this show about having three wives. The negative for me is that it's too much about financial problems, which I don't find entertaining. Roman is a great evil character, but he's operating mostly through financial methods, and then we have to watch Bill worry about financial problems. They try to make financial problems interesting by timing how characters find out they have financial problems and creating conflict between characters who find out about financial problems at different times. You knew and didn't tell me? At least, during one of the conflicts, Bill dug a big hole in the yard -- not a grave, a lobster pit -- and lit it into a blazing fire -- symbolizing Hell?
I did like the subplot with Margene: the squeaky clean nice neighbors, who think she's a widow, ask her to dinner and then spring a squeaky clean young man on her, and he promptly falls in love with her. She has to tell him she has "her eyes on someone else" and, as he retreats into the pouring rain, we think, no, someone else has his eyes on her. Escape Margene, escape!
UPDATE: Stephen Bainbridge has a long post all about the wine that Tony and Christopher stole, from the details on what it's worth (much more than Chrissie sold his for) to advice that storing the wine near a washing machine is a bad idea (vibrations!).
८ मे, २००६
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
२४ टिप्पण्या:
Let me just add that I think Christopher is going to be charged with murder for the shooting during the wine robbery. Wine is his downfall, and not just because he's an alcoholic. He sold his cases of wine, because he didn't want the temptation back into his addiction, but who bought it? All those distinctive bottles floating around out in the world, waiting to tie him back to the crime! But it was interesting, wasn't it, the way Tony and Christopher got off on being petty criminals together and then bonded over the memories? And now Chris's downfall could be this miserable petty crime.
Paulie going back to his nonmother was a nicely dramatized announcement of his doom.
I may be overthinking here but when Tony went over to Janice's daughter and playing, I thought it was because he was the only one who really understood what she wanted -- she wanted to be tossed around. She wanted back on the dangerous ride. Just like Tony was giddy after stealing the wine (that lost its pop after the thrill of the crime had past). Days later, he realizes he's bored.
I thought one theme last night was how people want to get back on their dangerous rides -- Christopher back on drugs and Tony enjoying the wine robbery. They know it's wrong, they know they should have loftier goals (a clean house for the kids) but they miss the thrill.
Irene: Excellent analysis.
Dave: "What struck me is the way Tony was with Janice's daughter toward the end..."
I thought Tony would keel over (sick, dizzy, bad ankle) and the kid would be killed in the fall. Well, I thought the kid would be killed as soon as Janice set her down and said look at her walk.
"As for Christopher and Tony bonding--when did it become "petty crime" to shoot someone (or, possibly, kill someone)?"
In the sense that it's not the Mafia, the crime the whole show has been about and that the FBI is concerned with. The local authorities would handle it.
"I just want these characters to get angry and show some f*cking emotion!"
Well, Bill was losing it. And Nicki got pretty emotional. I think we'll get to see them crack one by one. The major characters, that is. The lady across the street will never change. What's her name? Gladys Kravitz?
"I thought one theme last night was how people want to get back on their dangerous rides" Very, very good Irene.
I disagree about the Vito storyline. I appreciate it. I think it's part of an opposing theme of wanting to GET OFF of the dangerous ride. Tony decided not to have an adulterous affair. Tony really doesn't want his son to follow in his footsteps. Vito is discovering what it would be like to be part of a community of good people. He's seeing the other side of the coin of mob life... the victim's side.
I did wonder about the wine--on one hand, it shows that the mob has really gone upper middle class, all soft and bobo, but Christopher's $300 price reveals that he at least is not quite a yuppie yet. Well, that and the guzzling!
Judging from the previews, something is going to happen to Tony, and I think the Godfather-like scene with the niece presages his demise. Sopranos, like all opera, is about dissolution, not integration, so I think we're watching all the major characters blink hard as this narrow, fragile world falls apart.
Oh, and Big Love...
I do save that for later because to me it's just kind of empty. I know what Dave means, I think, about emotion. These are not characters so much as Issues, and they do not pull me in, except for Margene. I never get the feeling I'm watching polygamists, or weird or devout religionists, or anything except another domestic drama of a guy with a complicated life.
Oh... I forgot to mention that we started the series with that character who wanted to "retire" from the life and move to Florida... and that Chris wants to get into the movie business. That first character had to kill himself and Chris isn't doing to well getting into a more legitimate realm.
BTW... my favorite line of the episode "I believe that every day is a gift... they just don't all have to be a pair of socks".
Rick: I agree with your perception of the theme and that it's excellent, but I hate the form the theme takes in the Vito story. It's just preposterous. It's not cutting edge, but horribly stale to just make a masculine character gay, and all the stuff about him showing his sensitive side is just stupid. He's gay, so he's interested in interior decoration?
I liked the "every day is a gift" line too, and it was a little out of place coming from Tony, because he's not exactly a great wit, but James Gandolfini made it believable.
More importantly, why was Dr. Melfi wearing long pants? I thought half the point of Dr. Melfi was her nyloned legs.
let me just say that I think the whole Vito-is-gay story is an incredibly lame attempt to cook up a story for a character.
Well, but: the odds are overwhelming that such a thing has really happened, that someone on the writing staff has personal knowledge of it.
And: I laughed hard, athough with horror, at the goombahs' primitive and violent reactions to the news. That story has made possible some of the simultaneously most comical and most appalling portrayals of mob culture.
I do agree that David Chase is verging on the preachy with this story. Let us not forget that Vito himself would probably have been more than willing to murder to keep his secret. At the same time, it's a fair portrayal of the suffering of someone with a same-sex orientation in a culture where that's violently taboo. A lot of viewers apparently found it revolting when Vito lay down in a field with a man -- revealing the persistence of the very taboo the story's about. It would be possible to find it touching.
How to put this -- it's interesting that Tony's hybrid of harsh realism with "enlightened" new-age pabulim is in a strange way more attractive than either of its "parents."
Pabulum.
Amba: "At the same time, it's a fair portrayal of the suffering of someone with a same-sex orientation in a culture where that's violently taboo. A lot of viewers apparently found it revolting when Vito lay down in a field with a man -- revealing the persistence of the very taboo the story's about. It would be possible to find it touching."
Oh, please, it's Vito. Nothing about him is touching. No one wants to see him having sex with anybody, male or female. So he has sex with a male and we're disgusted and we're supposed to feel ashamed of ourselves for not accepting gay people? It's Vito. Why on earth would him getting in touch with his sexual feelings be touching -- or even interesting? We're being expected to suspend normal judgment to demonstrate respect for gay people. We're being had if we fall for that.
Well, if we're going with the Big Love nudity, am I the only one here mumbling on and on about wanting the next incident to be ... Margene?
Oh, please, it's Vito. Nothing about him is touching. No one wants to see him having sex with anybody, male or female. So he has sex with a male and we're disgusted and we're supposed to feel ashamed of ourselves for not accepting gay people? It's Vito. Why on earth would him getting in touch with his sexual feelings be touching -- or even interesting? We're being expected to suspend normal judgment to demonstrate respect for gay people. We're being had if we fall for that.
Lookism! That's what you are guilty of Professor.
Ugly people of the world UNITE!
(Vito is ugly in personality, as well, so you could claim that if he had a beautiful soul you could overlook his less than pretty container)
And as far as the nudity in Big Love subthread, if you really want to see Chloë Sevigny engage in explicit activity, rent Brown Bunny (and prepare to be bored stiff (and by stiff I mean in a bad way, not in the good way))
Also while we are musing about nudity in HBO dramas, would any laws be violated if the daughter and her friend are shown engaged in sexual activity with some nudity together? Both actresses are over 21 (Amanda Seyfried and Tina Majorino) so they are legal, but their characters aren't. The most recent legislation regarding depiction of sex with or between minors would suggest that adult actors portraying minors engaged in sex would still be illegal. I say, HBO should be truly daring and test this law by having those two fall in love before either character is supposed to be over 18.
Would that scene violate the Hatch-Leahy bill?
On Vito-
"and all the stuff about him showing his sensitive side is just stupid. He's gay, so he's interested in interior decoration?"
-definitely agree
having a gay mafioso is consistent with the broader old culture/new world theme.. its just not pulled off very well
Oh, please, it's Vito. Nothing about him is touching. No one wants to see him having sex with anybody, male or female. So he has sex with a male and we're disgusted and we're supposed to feel ashamed of ourselves for not accepting gay people? It's Vito. Why on earth would him getting in touch with his sexual feelings be touching -- or even interesting? We're being expected to suspend normal judgment to demonstrate respect for gay people.
Ann: I don't quite agree. The whole point about this show is that the same people can be repellent, disgusting, yet at times a little bit human and touching. Like Caliban.
Besides, how is Christopher LESS disgusting?!
He's gay, so he's interested in interior decoration?
No, silly, he's cruising antique shops because he knows that's where the boys are!
Another good line of Tony's: "This is 2006. There are pillow-biters in the Special Forces."
Amba: re my interest in Chris as opposed to Vito. Chris has been one of the most important characters on the show, second only to Tony. We have followed him for years, through many stories. We're interested in what happens to him. We're fascinated by the many awful things about him. We've never cared anything about Vito. He's never been an interesting character, and we have no built-in reason to care about a plot development about him. And the story itself is dumb.
And they did show him interested in interior decoration: when he went to the inn (and was alone in the room) and when he gazed at a vase.
It's true that Vito's sudden character development comes awfully late. And that the pitch for letting gay people -- even gay mobsters -- be themselves is uncharacteristically preachy. I'd still bet that there's a real-life story (more than one) something like this, without the NH angle.
This is from an interview on MSNBC.com with Joseph R. Gannascoli, who plays Vito. Apparently the plotline was his idea -- and his career move:
Now that the gay story line is heating up, Gannascoli is immensely pleased, in part because it was his idea to make Vito homosexual.
"I saw him as, like, a cross between Mike Tyson and Liberace," the 47-year-old Brooklyn-born actor told The Associated Press in an interview at his home. "I wanted to make him sort of in self-denial, self-loathing, a real gay hater."
Gannascoli's suggestion was inspired by the book "Murder Machine," about the Gambino family, which had an openly gay member also named Vito.
"They didn't bother him about it, because I guess he was good at what he did, which was chopping up bodies," Gannascoli said.
Gannascoli concedes that he had a self-serving motivation for making the suggestion: Breaking out of the pack.
"I thought that was a way of separating myself from the other actors, because I would have been in the background most of the time.
"You know, line here, line there, and nothing really substantial," said Gannascoli, whose character previously was best known for whacking Jackie Aprile Jr. "To really make an impact is all I can ask for."
He also thought it would create an interesting acting challenge. But even in a year that has seen "Brokeback Mountain" become a cultural phenomenon and Philip Seymour Hoffman win an Oscar playing Truman Capote, Gannascoli knows the reaction to Vito won't be all positive.
"I'm a Brooklyn guy. I was just in Brooklyn last night. And, you know, I had some real wise guys that look at me and they give me dirty looks. I've had guys, like, come after me in clubs," he said.
He just hopes the "cerebral people" will appreciate his performance.
Gannascoli said "The Sopranos" has changed his life "in so many ways."
"Recognition, I'd say, the most. It allowed me to get married."
It's also allowed Gannascoli to buy his house ("which coming from a rent-controlled apartment all my life was a huge step up"), get his novel published ("A Meal to Die For," loosely based on his life in the restaurant business) and develop a signature line of food (olive oil, tomato sauce, barbecue sauce, salsa and wine).
You more than get the picture.
msn.com, rather. But the link is good.
The church, the setting for the festival? I was married in that church.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा