Can we talk about how awesome Fringe has been lately?

Well, it's always been a great show, but these past few episodes have been simply amazing. "Subject 13" was beautiful, rich, and heartbreaking. If we needed any more evidence that both John Noble and Orla Brady deserve Emmys (not that they'll get them), this episode should end any discussion. Amazing performances. And how about the casting of young Peter and young Olivia? Those kids must have done their homework, as they had the mannerisms of their characters nailed.

Jeff Jensen's got a good piece about the episode up over at EW.com. I am particularly drawn to his last comments, because I have been thinking something similar:

"I’m going out of my way to emphasize my love for the episode because I fear what I’m about to say may sound like a criticism. It’s not — it’s just an observation. As I saw it, “Subject 13″ effectively reduced the tricky, defining tensions of Fringe into one big horrible misunderstanding — one that has produced profound, destiny-shaping pain for many people that can’t be easily forgotten, but becomes easier to forgive once everyone knows what we know. Especially Peter and Walternate. If Peter knew that back in the day, Walter was doing all he could to give him back the life he was supposed to have — a life that he would have lost, anyway, if Walter hadn’t saved him — then I have to think Peter’s frosty regard for a man he refuses to call “Dad” would finally, permanently thaw."

I'm with Jensen: what we learned last week was quite unexpected and moving--Walter wanted to give Peter back, Elizabeth lied to save Peter, Walter gave up sending Peter back to help Olivia--but these revelations in some ways make Walter's (and Elizabeth's) actions much more noble and, in a way, less relate-able, less real. It's a bit of a risk for the writers to take...let's see where it goes next.

Also, Hurley on Fringe? Love it!

Finally, Jensen is so right about Fringe's promo people. They are phenomenal. 

Emmy Nominations

So I know I've been complaining about being busy, and yet, here I go writing a big old blog post about TV. Yeah, the irony isn't lost on me.

Anyway, I've been meaning to do a quick post about the Emmy nominations and could use a break from Hawthorne. Overall, I am super-excited about some of the nominations, especially Connie Britton and Kyle Chandler. It's about time! Connie Britton needs to win this one. She just does. Did you see Friday's episode? Amazing. Also, check out this interview. Don't you just want to be her friend? Other thoughts:

All the love for Modern Family, the best new show of the season (yeah, including Glee, which I do love, but more about that below). But no nomination for Ed O'Neil? He really is fantastic on that show--a wonderful combination of funny and sweet. You buy him as a dad, a grandfather, and as Gloria's husband. Makes you totally forget Al Bundy, a character I never liked.

Nominations for more of my favorites: my beloved NPH, Michael C. Hall, Kyra Sedgwick, Glenn Close, Terry O'Quinn, Michael Emerson, and Rose Byrnne .

The nods to Lost: Matthew Fox really was a lead actor/heart of that show, so an Emmy this year would be awesome (but maybe not at Kyle Chandler's expense?). And hell yeah, Elizabeth Mitchell! Good thing I'm not an Emmy voter, because I'd have a heck of a time deciding between O'Quinn and Emerson (but would probably end up voting Emerson.)

Love that Burn Notice gets a bit of notice with the fun nomination of Sharon Gless. This isn't a superb show, but it's a lot of fun and she's terrific on it. These summer shows (including The Closer) are changing the way we think about TV. I like that.

Very happy for Julia Louis Dreyfus. New Christine was a show that was too funny to be canceled. (Ausiello's got an post-nomination interview with JLD here.) Too bad Better Off Ted didn't get any love either. Man, that show was hilarious--like Arrested Development with less of a mean streak.

Glee...well, I've been thinking a lot about this, and I am not sure how I feel about all the Glee nominations. Don't get me wrong: I love, love, love the show, but part of me doesn't believe it's superior TV. I think that what I love so much is the music. The writing can be so sloppy and cliched, some of the acting is pretty bad, and lots of times, you can't tell if it is a big old satire or serious. Lea Michelle deserves her nomination, as does Jane Lynch (someone needs to put together a gift book of Sue Sylvester insults), and Matthew Morrison's nod doesn't bother me.

The Glee nomination that intrigues me is the nomination for Chris Colfer. No one saw that coming. I'm not sure if it was his performance that was Emmy-worthy or the writing of his storylines, especially with his dad, played Mike O'Malley (who totally deserved his nomination). That was excellent stuff. A friend and I have had conversations about the character of Kurt: she hates him because he's so obnoxious and bitchy, but I think that makes him more realistic. What that portrayal shows you is that it is hard to be a gay high school boy (duh, right?) but instead of making him a sweet, always-victim, he's a bit of a brat at times. He makes a play for Finn even though he knows Finn is totally straight. That seems real. I don't know...it works for me. The same is true for Artie's struggles as a disabled person.

But other storylines (Finn's sadness over his absent dad, Rachel and Finn's on-again/off-again status, Ken and Emma's relationship early in the season) confuse me about the show's tone. It's like the show can't make up its mind about what it wants to be. (Kind of like Nip/Tuck, also created by Ryan Murphy.) Watch an hour of Glee and then an hour of Chuck. Chuck hits all the notes (seems like an appropriate metaphor): acting, writing, production, and has a sort of central theme/heart. Glee puts on a good show in terms of music and some laughs, but minute for minute, it seems to me to be the weaker show. Anyway, if any of you, dear readers, watch Glee, I'd love to hear your thoughts on this show--especially the whole satire vs. serious question.

Some snubs that bug me: No best drama for Friday Night Lights? No love for Chuck? No nomination for FNL's Zach Gilford? Nothing for John Noble on Fringe? Each of these is an absolute crime. But here's the deal: this year, it seems, there are far fewer of these types of crimes, and that's progress.

Lost Links...

1) Very cool timeline of the show's events. You'll still be super-confused, but it's pretty neat.

2) The Lost exhibition. Yet another reason to get up to NY soon. Can you imagine owning some of these props? (Yes, the "you" in that last sentence are my imaginary, Lost-loving readers. And I am imagining said readers responding with, "That would be awesome!" Don't kill the fantasy.)

3) An epilogue on the Hurley/Ben era? Sounds sweet. Here's one possible idea.

4) Remember those 50 questions Lost needed to answer in it's finale? Well, according to this report card, they didn't do so well. But you know what, I don't care. It was still amazing. According to this column, I was tricked into liking the finale, and that might be true. But again, I don't care.

"The End"

So Lost ended about an hour ago and I gotta say, I think I really liked it. I am surprised at how many questions weren't answered (I knew there would be lots, though) and I'll need to watch it a few more times to even begin to be able to have extended coherent discussions about it, but again, I think it worked. And worked really well.

What a ride. Six amazing seasons. I never gave up on you, Lost, and I am so very glad about that. I never even really felt tempted to give up--not a bit. I just had some faith (John Locke would be proud!) and went with it.

Off to bed I go! My summer class starts tomorrow morning!

TV Heaven...

I am trying to think of a recent night that offered anything comparable to tonight's two amazing TV events:

1) The penultimate episode of Lost. (Hope it's better than last week's episode, but even a bad episode of Lost is better than 90% of everything else on TV.)

2) The Joss-Whedon-directed episode of Glee, featuring special guest star Neil Patrick Harris. (Check out an interview with Joss about the episode here.)

The dilemma, of course, is that they both air at 9:00. Lost wins out. Thanks to my DVR, I'll watch Glee right after. After all, Glee is a good way to come down from an intense hour of Lost.

TV, the biggest threat to tenure...

Some quick--and awesome--TV links...

1) Remember this post about the Joss Whedon-directed episode of Glee? Well, it only get's sweeter--Neil Patrick Harris (my love for him only grows stronger every day) might be guest-starring in that episode. It's like the people behind Glee are putting together an episode just for me! (Because the world works that way, right?)

2) Look, anyone who knows me knows that I am counting down the days until Lost's final season premieres. I am, I'll admit, a bit obsessed. But even I can appreciate how very funny this bit from The Onion is: "Final Season of 'Lost' Promises to Make Fans More Annoying Than Ever. "

3) And then there's this gem I just saw on Gawker: an adorable Italian family from Long Island recreates Lost in their living room (and basement). I want to hang out with this family.

LOST!

Tonight at 9:00. The highlight of my January. Seriously.*



*And yes, I know that is sad...

Dharma Wants You!

I've been meaning to link to this for a couple of weeks now: check out dharmawantsyou.com. Some background: during the freakin' fabulous LOST finale in May, I followed a link from one of those intriguing Dharma commercials and entered my email address. Every once in a while, I get cool emails from them, one of which contained this link. Even if you aren't a LOST fan, I think you'll enjoy the personality test on this site.

For the record, I passed the test (does anyone fail?) and am waiting to hear about the next step.

You can read more about the Dharma Initiative Recruiting Project here.

Suspense, Spoilers, Veronica Mars, and Lost...

Take a look at this really smart take on why people still enjoy suspenseful shows like Lost and Veronica Mars even when they know what's going to happen. A key section:

"...it seems that the elements that trigger suspense are found less in a narrative’s story, the series of events within the fictional world, but more in its telling (or what narratologists often call discourse), the expressive cues that elicit emotional reactions (such as music, camera angles, facial expressions, etc.). This is why a potentially suspenseful series of events can be narrated in a way that undermines suspense (as in most chase cartoons), and a seemingly non-suspenseful set of events can be told to create suspense (the red herring moments of many horror films) - such emotional reactions stem more from how a story is told, rather than what actually happens in the story. Both Viewer A and B experience the narrative discourse for the first time, even if Viewer B has confidence in what events will occur. Thus both spoiled and unspoiled viewers share the same uncertainty in how the events will be narrated and what cues will be presented, experiencing suspense from these cues in mostly similar ways."

Best "Lost" YouTube Ever...

While we're continuing the Lost love, here's one I meant to post weeks ago, showing a synchronized view of the events leading up to the crash, the crash itself, and its immediate aftermath. Whoever put this together is awesome.

Sawyer's Nicknames

A fun youtube clip of all (almost) the names Sawyer's used in the first three seasons of Lost. Excellent.

Lost: Season 3

I’ve been thinking about writing more substantial (translation: longer) entries on this blog, not because I am convinced there are scores of people out there dying to read my words, but because, as I’ve said from the beginning, I think blogging is a good way for me to work on my writing. For me, blogging is so interesting because it’s somewhere between private writing (journaling, etc.), letter writing, and academic writing (scholarly articles and books). This liminality (not quite the right word?) invites me, as a writer, to make important decisions about audience, topic, and even self-presentation. At the same time, I want to write about things that I enjoy—that are fun for me to think and write about and that I might not write about in more conventional genres.

So I thought I’d write just a few posts that are reviews/commentaries on some of my interests outside of work/school and family, beginning with TV, particularly the rewards of watching an exceptional show again on DVD. Specifically, I want to consider Season 3 of Lost, which I just finished re-watching over the weekend in anticipation of tomorrow’s Season 4 premiere.

There isn’t much I can say about Lost that hasn’t been said by other people before—and better than I could have said it myself. But I will say what a genuine pleasure it was to re-watch these episodes. Some shows that have complicated mythologies are a thrill to watch during their first runs, as we are on the edges of our seats waiting to see what happens next. Once you are done with them, though, you feel no compelling reason to re-watch particular episodes. I am reminded here of The X-Files, which I really did love, but whose mythology became just too complicated for me to keep up with over the years. Now when I watch re-runs of the show, I am drawn to the stand-alone episodes, as opposed to the mythology episodes.

With Lost, (like with my Buffy, Angel, or Veronica Mars DVDs), though, it was such a pleasure to re-visit each episode. Why? Well, for multiple reasons—the rewards of making connections between characters and storylines, an even deeper appreciation for how amazingly the characters’ plots interconnect, the same great feeling we get when we re-read a beloved book even when we know what’s going to happen.

In the end, for me, it’s about character, a point I’ve been trying to make in my ENG 102 classes. Character, in most cases, is what takes a work with a great plot and lifts it to another level. This isn’t any great revelation, of course, but it is such a treat to see it so well-executed on television. That’s what you get with the amazing writing and acting on Lost. For instance, re-watching Charlie’s arc in Season 3--knowing all along that he would end up sacrificing his life to get the others off the island--broke my heart all over again. No lie: I re-watched “Greatest Hits” and found myself tearing up in a way that I hadn’t the first time through.

Other episodes of note:

“Not in Portland”: The episode that gave us the back-story on Juliet, perhaps my favorite character on the show, if only because of Elizabeth Mitchell’s fantastic portrayal. Seriously, think back to last season and how she so perfectly she played the part—how her face could express so much but still leave us wondering if she really was one of the good guys. Plus, you gotta love when her ex gets hit by the bus!

“Flashes Before Your Eyes”: An episode that confused the heck out of me the first time around and only makes just a bit more sense now. As I went back through Season 3, I grew more interested in Desmond, whose love for Penny is so moving, and whose ultimate inability to save Charlie is so heartbreaking.

“Tricia Tanaka is Dead”: Just when we think Lost is nothing but serious and depressing, they give us this episode. When Hurley got that van running and he, Charlie, Jin, and Sawyer went joy-riding (complete with Dharma beer!), I couldn’t stop smiling. Plus, we meet “Roger Workman,” although we don’t find out who he is until much later.

“The Man From Tallahassee”: Holy crap! That’s how Locke got paralyzed? And his father’s on the island? Even on re-watching, it’s still very powerful.

“Expose”: I didn’t hate Nikki and Paulo the way lots of other folks did, but man was this an awesome way to get rid of them.

“The Man Behind the Curtain”: I mentioned that Juliet is one of my favorites, but I would be remiss not to mention Ben and the fabulous work Michael Emerson does in this role. From his first appearance in Season 2, you knew this guy was trouble. I am reminded of that scene in the end of “One of Them” (I think that’s the episode) where he can hear Jack, Locke and Sayid arguing over how to treat him and he gets this tiny grin on his face knowing that he’s breeding dissension among them—and letting us know that he was, in fact, a “bad” guy. Gave me chills!

“Through the Looking Glass”: What can I say about this one that hasn’t been said? I would like to state, though, that (like other viewers, I know) I saw Jack’s phone in those “flash-back” scenes and thought, “Hmmm...that looks like a pretty new phone. How could he have had that in 2004 (or earlier)?” No, I didn’t realize that they were, in fact, flash-forwards, but at least I was on my way, right? By the way, of all the episodes, this one took on the most poignancy when I re-watched it, knowing all along that you were seeing how miserable post-island Jack was, especially given how desperately he’s trying to get off the island.

I'll end by saying that I'm not the kind of fan who spends hours exploring all the Lost websites out there or reading every book that pops up in an episode. I don't pour over message boards discussing every hint or clue. I only say this because you don't need to do that to love the show, another testament to the quality of the writing. (But I did watch all twelve of the "Missing Pieces" segments on ABC.com, and thought they were great.)